Rebel Heart Crew Suing.....

[chris95040]

I can't believe the sat phone provider isn't more widely recognized as a villain here. I'm not sure exactly what liability they should have in all this, but someone even suggested "all of us sat phone users will have to pay the price if they get a settlement"

As RH explained it in This American Life, these schmucks MAILED new cards to their SATELLITE PHONE CUSTOMERS, then cut off the service to the old ones regardless of the fact that their account was current. This is a terrible, broken process. Would you rather the provider come off with zero financial impact just to keep your premiums low? Good luck with that strategy. Maybe I'll grab my nieces Fred Flintstone's phone and write SATPHONE on it, sell it to some cruiser on the cheap. Just remember our deal, I'm not liable for anything.

I for one hope the provider suffers financial impact from their negligence to the extent where the profitability of future sat phone enterprises is predicated on their sane and non negligent practices. In other words, I want sat phones to work.

[socaldmax]

Originally Posted by letsgetsailing3

Shouldn't it be the government who is suing, then?

Yes, theoretically, but I don't know of any situation where the USCG charged or sued anyone for a rescue. I was surprised to hear that in the video, it may simply be a ploy by the attorney to get a bigger settlement(bigger paycheck for himself), the theoretical costs of the rescue far exceed the value of the boat.

[psneeld]

I'm having a hard time thinking anyone believes a "business" has any obligation past it's contracts and even then we all know there are plenty of situations when contracts are non-enforceable.

Good business operations seem to care..but are under no obligation too...it's just beyond my comprehension someone would put their faith in a phone...the EPIRB did what it was supposed to do....but a phone????

Based on track records...if I wanted reliable satcomms...the dish systems seem to have had the upper hand by a longshot...but I will admit not much experience with either...just what I have heard.

The world is full of dreamers I guess.....

[Spleen]

Originally Posted by chris95040

I can't believe the sat phone provider isn't more widely recognized as a villain here. I'm not sure exactly what liability they should have in all this, but someone even suggested "all of us sat phone users will have to pay the price if they get a settlement"

As RH explained it in This American Life, these schmucks MAILED new cards to their SATELLITE PHONE CUSTOMERS, then cut off the service to the old ones regardless of the fact that their account was current. This is a terrible, broken process. Would you rather the provider come off with zero financial impact just to keep your premiums low? Good luck with that strategy. Maybe I'll grab my nieces Fred Flintstone's phone and write SATPHONE on it, sell it to some cruiser on the cheap. Just remember our deal, I'm not liable for anything.

I for one hope the provider suffers financial impact from their negligence to the extent where the profitability of future sat phone enterprises is predicated on their sane and non negligent practices. In other words, I want sat phones to work.

Do you remember the "big tobacco" lawsuits?

"Barbara Aucoin, a former president of the FORCES Massachusetts chapter, said Big Tobacco isn't suffering from the settlement, smokers are.

"Smokers are paying 100 percent of the Master Settlement Agreement through higher cigarette prices," she said. "Manufacturers haven't lost a penny, so of course, they stay profitable." Print

Phillip Morris owned Kraft (and then morphed into Altria group). After the big tobacco lawsuit, when did you see Kraft macaroni and cheese 6 for 1.00?

[socaldmax]

Originally Posted by Dauntlessny

I am conflicted over this one. I like Eric but I am not in favor is suing when one's self-chosen plans don't work out.

Well said. thoughts that I have tried to put in words under many circumstances.

Thanks.

What ever happened to being proud for being self sufficient?

That went out of style in Nov., 2008.

[Ex-Calif]

A few blog posts - because it seems some will just make an opinion and others may want to actually read some stuff beofre forming that opinion.

May 13 - "Lyra - we are tempted to say that Lyra is almost better. Still awaiting the results of two more tests to show as negative. Her symptoms are almost gone and she is thriving, so cross your fingers that those tests are negative."

Two months after the voyage and this child is still getting better. Thanks goodness they are in San Diego in a world class medical environment.

March 11 (the day before planned departure)

I recently went in for an annual check up and full blood work up. The results were surprising. They said I tested very high for a particular type of salmonella. I found this hard to believe as I've always associated salmonella with super fun things like stomach problems, diarrhea, etc. I haven't exhibited any of those symptoms.

So we went and got a second blood test. And I was still positive for it.

Hmmm.

We paid a visit to a travel medical doctor, and he suggested we get both girls' blood work done as well. Both girls had been sick for about a week. What ensued was a multi-day blood testing fiesta. Lyra tested positive for the same strand of salmonella I had, and Cora, although negative for the salmonella (Eric tested negative as well), tested positive for something called Proteus? I don't know. It was stressful to say the least. Cora had to go back and get tested for dengue because of the symptoms she was exhibiting.

March 11 (the day before planned departure)

Cora: la princesa (as she calls herself) is currently taking three types of antibiotics, and a cough suppressant, to battle a bacterial upper respiratory infection.

Lyra: my little engineer (as I call her) is currently taking three types of antibiotics and a steroid, to battle bronchitis and a bacterial upper respiratory infection.

We're all taking probiotics, eating well, resting, and getting plenty of fluids. We're under a great doctor's care, we're all on the mend, and we're in good spirits.

Mar 11 (the day before planned departure)

Because of all this health fun, we missed the Monday weather window for departure. No worries, there will be more windows. We're eyeing Friday as a day to leave (and yes, I know that is a superstitious day for some sailors; they don't like to leave on Fridays. I view Fridays as a wonderful day to do anything at all.)

The boat is loaded, it's time to go. We have a weather window. We will go...

They left on Mar 20.

I certainly did not realize (until now) how proximate the illnesses were to the departure.

Also I don't know how one gets a "clean bill of health" when one is taking a cocktail of antibiotics and other meds. Did they do post treatment blood tests?

Did the "travel doctor" understand they were going to sea for weeks and not boarding Aeromex for a 1 hour flight to San Diego?

Would a second opinion have been prudent?

[Dsanduril]

Originally Posted by chris95040

As RH explained it in This American Life, ... then cut off the service to the old ones regardless of the fact that their account was current.

you only have one side of the story, RH's. According to the statement by Whenever Communications LLC it was a billing issue (and so maybe the account wasn't current). Until you have both sides of the story fully exposed we shouldn't take anything said by either side as fact.

[roverhi]

The Kaufmans contacted medical help and were in the process of trying to treat their daughter's illness via the SatPhone. They had a very well stocked medicine chest and I believe Eric is a ParaMedic. They were quite qualified to handle the situation with the the help of medical specialists via the phone. Unfortunately, in the middle of this, the phone company shut off the phone service and they were no longer able to access professional medical advice. The Kaufmans set off the Epirb which normally leads to forced abandonment of the boat if I can believe other reports. Still unclear what, if anything, was wrong with the boat. and whether Eric had the option of sailing the boat to the nearest port.

Only a trial or threat of it will see if there is any redress from the Satelite phone provider. Sounds like a hell of a lot better case than many that have gotten 7 figure remuneration in our crazy tort law system.

[tomfl]

Originally Posted by maj75

I am a retired maritime attorney and could tell you who this will end, but I'd rather watch amateur lawyers debate this indefinitely.

SeaTow thread anyone

Standard advice for lawyers is to edit all briefs at least ten times before you submit them.

Your comment 'could tell you WHO this will end' does not really make sense to me. I suspect you were trying to post 'could tell you HOW this will end'.

In any case I can find nothing to suggest RH's lawyer has any maritime training, seems more like a straight up personal injury ambulance chaser.

Most lawyers I know also advise never trust what a jury will do.

If the sat phone company can prove in court they sent the SIM to RH twelve days before he sailed my best guess is it gets tossed in pre trial hearings. But the only thing riskier than predicting what a jury will do is predicting what a judge will do.

[Ex-Calif]

Originally Posted by chris95040

I can't believe the sat phone provider isn't more widely recognized as a villain here. I'm not sure exactly what liability they should have in all this, but someone even suggested "all of us sat phone users will have to pay the price if they get a settlement"

That woulda been me. And it's true.

- McDonalds is still in business -I don't know what temp they brew their coffee at now - but the lid says, "This sh@t is hot. Don't pour it on yourself"
- Philip Morris is still in business - Cigarette labels say that cigarettes will kill you
- Iridium will still be in business but the label will say - Don't take sick kids to sea

Originally Posted by chris95040

As RH explained it in This American Life, these schmucks MAILED new cards to their SATELLITE PHONE CUSTOMERS, then cut off the service to the old ones regardless of the fact that their account was current.

Eric mentioned billing issues, the unidentified agent just stated a billing issue. I hope Eric is clean on the billing stuff.

In regards to mailing the SIM card. Did Eric have an "unmonitored" mail box or was someone collecting and reading his mail? Was the SIM card in his mailbox and he was on notice that the service was about to be cut-over? how many other subscribers got new sim cards - Thousands? Hundreds of thousands?

Presumably Eric gave them the address which they could reasonably interpret as, "If you're going to mail me a new sim card, mail it here..."

Were they responsible to air drop him the card at sea?

The serivce was not "cut-off" or "denied" as far as I know. It was in Eric's mailbox that no one checked.

Originally Posted by chris95040

I for one hope the provider suffers financial impact from their negligence to the extent where the profitability of future sat phone enterprises is predicated on their sane and non negligent practices. In other words, I want sat phones to work.

If you think they will suffer, they might. Or rightly their shareholders might and their customers will.

If you think their suffering will make going to sea safer you are mistaken.

[longbordz]

<<<]The Kaufmans contacted medical help and were in the process of trying to treat their daughter's illness via the SatPhone.>>>

I had not heard or read that Kaufman called a doctor on satphone. After weeks of satphone blogging, Kaufman said he called USCG, the phone stopped working and then he turned on the EPIRB.

The EPIRB response was prompt and resulted in a positive medical response. If the advice was all they needed - as Kaufman said on Good Morning America- they got it. So...why abandon the boat?

<<< The Kaufmans set off the Epirb which normally leads to forced abandonment of the boat if I can believe other reports.>>>

You cannot believe those reports. Eric could not be commanded to leave his boat. He could have summoned assistance for his boat; a tow boat from San Diego.
Eric had options.

I have a hunch the insurance company that represents the defendant will offer a settlement in the high 5 figure range because that is cheaper than going through discovery and trial. Kaufmans atty will make a $25 or $30 thousand for minimal work, and get some publicity for himself.

Cruisers will get a black eye for a while.

There is nothing in this for the military.

[Spleen]

Based on my experience as a defendant with an insurance company who had a duty to defend me, I expect the insurance company will AGGRESSIVELY defend their company from this action by the Kaufmans. I'm not sure the kaufmans will get anything but grief, stress and a prolonged reliving of tramautic events from their lives. They may also be a little embarrassed at the items from their lives that will become talking points (though they seem to have no shame, so they may not even care)...

[sardinebreath]

Originally Posted by Spleen

Do you remember the "big tobacco" lawsuits?

"Barbara Aucoin, a former president of the FORCES Massachusetts chapter, said Big Tobacco isn't suffering from the settlement, smokers are.

"Smokers are paying 100 percent of the Master Settlement Agreement through higher cigarette prices," she said. "Manufacturers haven't lost a penny, so of course, they stay profitable." Print

Phillip Morris owned Kraft (and then morphed into Altria group). After the big tobacco lawsuit, when did you see Kraft macaroni and cheese 6 for 1.00?

Product pricing is always predicated on maximizing profit. If it was 6 for $1, it was because it was deemed optimum pricing under those market conditions. A company that raises prices because they lost money in a lawsuit, won't compete with companies that didn't lose lawsuits and didn't raise prices. In fact, companies generally have to eat costs like that with reduced profits. You think that GM is going to pay for all its recalls by raising prices? It would soon go out of business in the competitive automotive marketplace.

[Spleen]

Yeah, but RJ Reynolds owns Nabisco (they were also involved in the settlement). Subsidiaries are common in this type of environment. The car industry is different.

I admit I don't know about satellite corporations; I'm simply doubting the company will actually eat any settlement and then move on.

[nimblemotors]

So are the Kaufman's going to repay the government for SAR costs after they lose this case? You can't have it both ways.