Liability of Adrift Vessel

[Snore]

After reading another thread about a missing boat my mind went to the single-handed sailor or large vessel that may encounter the vessel at night. As well all know when the next cold front comes the Gulf Stream will stand-up and make sighting the vessel even more difficult.

Who would be liable for damage?

Even keeping a good watch us predicated on the other vessel having appropriate running lights. If a commercial vessel knew they hit another boat, logically they would begin a SAR procedure.

Maybe I am cranky, but not properly securing the vessel was like leaving a loaded gun around ---- regardless of ones net worth!

So who would be liable??


Sent from my iPhone- please forgive autocorrect errors.

[barnakiel]

Do not be silly.

You hit anything in open water, you take damage, you pay for your repairs. No liability.

In local waters, some liability, depending on local laws. E.g. in some jurisdictions when an abandoned craft ends up on the reef or in a nav channel, the local govt will have the right to request clean-up. Similarly, a private operator may request damages but only when the 'guilty' craft got abandoned for no good reason. This will be next to impossible to prove there was no good reason. Unless you have huge a law firm behind your claim.

That's why you should be keeping watch at all times. To protect your own boat from hitting anything and getting sunk or badly damaged.

b.

[Snore]

b

I will defer to your experience on this.

Seemed like a case for Dewey, Cheatem and Howe


Sent from my iPhone- please forgive autocorrect errors.

[Lizzy Belle]

Originally Posted by Snore

Who would be liable for damage?

Nobody. Hit something out there on the big blue, and it's pretty much your problem.

Which is why I don't understand why people who abandon ship get to watch their ships float away instead of them being sunk.

Saying Gil left a loaded gun is being silly - not just because the chances of actually sailing into an abandoned / adrift boat are close to 0 and there are bigger risks to worry about, but also because this wasn't something he did on purpose. Bet he wants that boat found and back a lot more then you do

[gamayun]

Agree. Sh*t happens. Plus, if anything were to happen outside of the EEZ, which is the high seas for most of this planet, then you really have no country to complain to....though you can try.

[StuM]

With regard to liability and damages:

We refer you to the reply given in the case of Arkell v. Pressdram.

[dannc]

Originally Posted by StuM

With regard to liability and damages:

We refer you to the reply given in the case of Arkell v. Pressdram.

Later,
Dan

[Pelagic]

From a COLREGS point of view, a drifting vessel with no one on board....is by definition... 'Not Under Command'!,
So the liability remains with the manned vessel to stay clear.

[jackdale]

Originally Posted by Pelagic

From a COLREGS point of view, a drifting vessel with no one on board....is by definition... 'Not Under Command'!,
So the liability remains with the manned vessel to stay clear.

If it shows two blacks balls during the day and two red lights at night.

[Training Wheels]

^ +1


Sent from my iPad using Cruisers Sailing Forum

[Wotname]

Originally Posted by jackdale

If it shows two blacks balls during the day and two red lights at night.

I reckon it might be considered NUC without the balls of lights

[Pelagic]

If it is adrift and unmanned....who is turning the 2 red lights on and off?

The intent of maintaining a proper lookout is to avoid unlit obstacles or otherwise hit at your own peril and responsibility.

[jackdale]

On A 2012 delivery from Maui we has a radio net with some other boats in which we were reporting tsunami debris. Two boats reported seeing overturn hulls. I doubt if the owners would have had any liability.

[valhalla360]

You have two considerations:
- Legal
- Practical

Legally, it's going to depend what the circumstances are and what is reasonable including the circumstances of the watch for the boat that hits the drifter. Assuming a reasonable case could be made that the boat should have been sunk or otherwise made safe, liability could be assessed.

Practically, finding the owner, proving they had time and ability to sink the boat and then they have enough money to make it worthwhile...pretty slim odds.

[Pelagic]

I see your point if purposely abandoned (especially in territorial waters)......but in Gil's case where the yacht inadvertently drifted into open waters, the onus is on the watchkeeper to have spotted by all and any means, including radar.

Otherwise the tens of thousands of containers lost overboard with maybe 10% floating, would keep the salvage operators and lawyer very busy.

Not to mention that whales would now need to carry liability insurance....