New Zealand Immigration Officer Making Wild Claims

[svmariane]

No follow up from the OP yet? Hmmmm

Anyway... If the Captain is convinced the vessel is sea worth then why not sail to another port and deal with other officials for checkout clearance? If - and only if - this is a matter of one overzealous official then why do this: ?

Getting permission to change ports / cruise the coastline shouldn't be a problem, now would it? Tauranga in the Bay of Plenty comes to mind... A bit out of the way from his current location, sure, but a whole different set of officials.

[nimblemotors]

Originally Posted by svmariane

No follow up from the OP yet? Hmmmm

Does NZ have internet access in their jails? What would happen if he just sailed away?

[Knowazark]

Sailing away to anywhere at the moment isn't the smartest thing to do ..... there's some serious weather lurking about just at the moment. In fact, that may have been the root of the hold up in the first place.

Personally I'm torn between the whole "freedom of the sea" idea and the thought that sometimes people need to be saved from their own dumb ideas. Its up to each individual skipper to decide when and if its safe to go to sea, but sometimes people attempt to do some really, really crazy stuff.

It just sounds to me like either the original poster hasn't given us the full story or hasn't understood what's been said. There are a few things that just don't fit with the story.

[Factor]

Originally Posted by jeremiason

This came straight off the New Zealand Maritime Page:

"Inspection of foreign ships by Maritime New Zealand is provided under Section 54 of the Maritime Transport Act 1994. If a ship is substandard, Maritime New Zealand inspectors have the power, under Sections 55/397 of the Act, to detain it until it is brought up to standard, or to impose conditions upon its operation"

Go here for more information

That Act also includes section 21 -

21Pleasure craft departing for overseas
(1)No master of a pleasure craft shall permit that pleasure craft to depart from any port in New Zealand for any place outside New Zealand unless—
(a)the Director has been notified in writing of the proposed voyage and the full name of the person who is in command of the pleasure craft; and
(b)the Director is satisfied that the pleasure craft and its safety equipment are adequate for the voyage; and
(c)the Director is satisfied that the pleasure craft is adequately crewed for the voyage; and
(d)the pleasure craft and the master comply with any relevant maritime rules.
(2)No pleasure craft shall be entitled to a certificate of clearance to depart from any port in New Zealand under the Customs and Excise Act 1996 unless subsection (1) has been satisfied.

That section is the section that was the subject of the Appeals court challenge and as such there is a binding judicial decision that that section in so far as para 1(b) is concerned is limited to New Zealand Registered Ships.

The principles of statutory interpretation in our part of the world would suggest when there is a specific provision (sect 21) and a General provision (sect 55 regarding the power to detain for safety) that the specific provision is the one that will apply.

But all of this is moot in my experience - my Kiwi official friends have been nothing but courteous and efficient and friendly when I have been coming and going from unzud. And if they were acting as described on this occasion then I suspect they had the best interests of the sailor at heart.

Oh and on the slightly patronising comments about the NZ SAR system being a bloke in a dinghy on Wednesdays, honestly not only is that rude and insulting but it is incorrect and demonstrably so. You have a problem in the Southern Hemisphere you have a better than even chance you will be in Australia/NZ SAR system. Indeed the international Maritime SAR system is a credit to nations that form its backbone.

[boatman61]

[QUOTE=Knowazark;1265914]
Personally I'm torn between the whole "freedom of the sea" idea and the thought that sometimes people need to be saved from their own dumb ideas. Its up to each individual skipper to decide when and if its safe to go to sea, but sometimes people attempt to do some really, really crazy stuff.QUOTE]

Some folk do need to be saved from themselves... in the UK there was a guy nicknamed 'Captain Calamity' (another one of many)..
He kept trying to sail to distant shores in a variety of small craft.. and kept getting rescued by the RNLI... eventually they had to ban him from owning a boat... he was a danger to himself which was fine.. but the risks he posed for the volunteers who went out to bring him back when he got in trouble got to much..

This guys got there from the States so I doubt he's incompetent.. but if that's what his boat looks like today I don't rate his chances in the S. Ocean in winter very high...
I would not take it out... and I'm considered nutz by many... tho' I'm not sure that's entirely down to what, where and how I sail...

[lateral]

Originally Posted by Factor

That Act also includes section 21 -


But all of this is moot in my experience - my Kiwi official friends have been nothing but courteous and efficient and friendly when I have been coming and going from unzud. And if they were acting as described on this occasion then I suspect they had the best interests of the sailor at heart.

Oh and on the slightly patronising comments about the NZ SAR system being a bloke in a dinghy on Wednesdays, honestly not only is that rude and insulting but it is incorrect and demonstrably so. You have a problem in the Southern Hemisphere you have a better than even chance you will be in Australia/NZ SAR system. Indeed the international Maritime SAR system is a credit to nations that form its backbone.

+1
Tell that to a friend of mine who for many years flew Orions on SARS missions, winds gusting to 120knts @500' all hours.
eg

Surviving the Storm Massive Waves Rescue - YouTube

Queens Birthday Storm 1994 - HMNZS MONOWAI

Hats off to these people.

[Jim Cate]

In re the "terrific expense of SAR missions"...

I asked a Kiwi SAR pilot about this once. His reply was that to keep their tickets current they had to fly a significant number of hours each month. If there were no real missions, they flew simulated training exercises. At that time, the SAR missions had no effect upon their expenses. I suppose that if there were enough SARs it would impact the budget, but this didn't seem to be a likely factor.

And IME the Kiwi folks are top notch in the SAR business. Most long range missions are carried out by their Navy personnel and equipment, and they do a very good job of it. Furthermore, unlike the USCG they will offer help in way of saving the vessel as well as the crew. Back in ~ 1991 friends of ours were delivering a Valiant 40 from NZ to the states and were caught in severe weather. Whilst hove to they were rolled 180 degrees by a "rogue wave", and in the process the Admiral was severely injured and the boat was dismasted, after which it did the other 180 and righted itself. A frigate was dispatched to the scene (a couple of hundred miles out) and they not only took the lady aboard for immediate facial surgery but sent a diver over to help the skipper clear the tangle of rigging around the keel and skeg. When that was complete they sent extra diesel and a volunteer crewman over to help the skipper return the boat under power to NZ. Don't think that the USCG would have done that (but do provide excellent SAR services for life protection).

Finally, the OP's story about the Immigration officer saying that stainless bolts were not suitable for attaching chainplates is hard to believe as I said earlier. I too think that there is more to this story than has been revealed... wonder where he went?

Cheers,

Jim

[Piglet]

The USCG values the lives of their personnel over property (boats). I don't blame them.

[Weyalan]

Those of you who appear to be eschewing visiting Australia and New Zealand based on the evidence presented in this thread.... well, don't let the door hit you on the ass! More room at the anchorages for me!

[Boatguy30]

As a former resident of NZ (voted in last election) one reason I came back to the states were all the free loader types that seemed to be taking advantage of the place. I was working and paying taxes, but also living in an area with a ton of backpackers. Lots of people around sleeping in cars and shitting in bags and putting it in the city rubbish, bathing on the foreshore, etc. After a certain point, I just couldn't deal with seeing them all around town.

Hopefully this guy is able to get on his way. Hard to understand how he even got a visa for 18 months as you have to be able to prove a certain amount of assets/ income to extend a tourist visa. I almost wonder if this isn't a case of the immigration doing the guy a "favor" and extending him essentially atleast another 9 months by requiring him to compete repairs before departure?

Anyhow, great country. Wish it hadn't changed so much since when I was first there in 1993.

[SunDevil]

Originally Posted by Boatguy30

As a former resident of NZ (voted in last election) one reason I came back to the states were all the free loader types that seemed to be taking advantage of the place. I was working and paying taxes, but also living in an area with a ton of backpackers. Lots of people around sleeping in cars and shitting in bags and putting it in the city rubbish, bathing on the foreshore, etc. After a certain point, I just couldn't deal with seeing them all around town.

Hopefully this guy is able to get on his way. Hard to understand how he even got a visa for 18 months as you have to be able to prove a certain amount of assets/ income to extend a tourist visa. I almost wonder if this isn't a case of the immigration doing the guy a "favor" and extending him essentially atleast another 9 months by requiring him to compete repairs before departure?

Anyhow, great country. Wish it hadn't changed so much since when I was first there in 1993.

What kind of area were you in? I was a backpacker down in NZ, but didn't do that kind of stuff. I've seen a lot worse in the US to be honest.

And it is news to me that stainless steel bolts fail, I wouldn't have guessed it. The ocean is a very harsh environment it looks like. Stainless steel vs galvanized

Although I do think it would be nice to spend a few more weeks in NZ. I will say that getting in through customs was interesting and I still don't think it is right for them to charge you $25 (in 2009) to leave the country. Entering, sure, but leaving seems backwards.

[downunder]

Originally Posted by SunDevil

What kind of area were you in? I was a backpacker down in NZ, but didn't do that kind of stuff. I've seen a lot worse in the US to be honest.

And it is news to me that stainless steel bolts fail, I wouldn't have guessed it. The ocean is a very harsh environment it looks like. Stainless steel vs galvanized

Although I do think it would be nice to spend a few more weeks in NZ. I will say that getting in through customs was interesting and I still don't think it is right for them to charge you $25 (in 2009) to leave the country. Entering, sure, but leaving seems backwards.

The officer must have considered the chainplates as a possible candidate for crevice corrosion. Looking at pictures of the vessel that is a distinct possibility.

[charliehows]

well i didnt mention this before cos its a bit irrelevant to the core of the thread but...a couple of weeks ago i was sailing on jib and mizzen when i got caught off guard by a particularly strong gust - almost a knockdown, jib and mizzen only IN the harbour! a couple of days later i was doing some work on the side and noticed one of the mizzen chainplates was standing away from the side by a couple of millimetres. I twirled the top bolt and it spun - obviously loose, the middle bolt was tight but when i tried twirling the bottom bolt the head came off between my fingers. So yeah ss bolts can be suspect in a chainplate - but ss corrosion is a risk on all fittings, and i dont know what is more suitable than ss on chainplates - more a case of - better check them now and then.

[crazyhorse]

The Marritime Safety Authority is the ONLY statutory authority that can detain a foreign registered vessel that has LEGALLY entered NZ. That is not to say a District Court Judge can not do the same (plus DOC under the Wildlife Act.. etc). In fact, ANY ship or aircraft not being a foreign millitary or diplomatic vessel that is to CARRY PASSENGERS OR CREW can be liable to a "routine" safety inspection prior to departure. If the said vessel is deemed unsafe to those aboard, the MSA can advise Customs to withhold clearence pending either a marine survey or repair order be completed. Actually quite a few countries have such laws but mostly they pertain to commercial traffic (hire and reward).
My suggestion is this: Are you sailing ALONE? If so, extend the 2nd finger from your thumb with the others closed and operate it in a rapid vertical manner at the officer concerned because the only life in danger is your own. If you have others on board (human) then get a licensed surveyor to look over your boat, fold the report into airplane form and fire it at the buggers! Basically NZ is a "nanny state" out trying to protect everyone from themselves whilst allowing others to get away with it!
Best of luck but you will find that once they have their teeth into you, it will take lots of paper with lots of fancy stamps and signatures for them to loosen their grip. Hit them with your own survey!!!

[crazyhorse]

Originally Posted by nimblemotors

Does NZ have internet access in their jails? What would happen if he just sailed away?

No and... depending on where he went, failing to produce a clearance certificate from the last port along with no exit visa in a valid passport would probably involve seizure of the vessel and confinement pending extradition treaty obligations with the last country the ship visited. If NZ wanted to prosecute.. he would be on a plane here accompanied by two humorless rugby first 15 type policemen (and no drinks form the stewardess).
He could claim asylum by way of unlawful detention in NZ. Then he would probably spend many months entertaining rats and cockroaches in the host countries cells awaiting some Methodist golf playing magistrate to finally give in waiting for a bribe from the prisoner to send the poor fellow to NZ anyway as it will make John Key not cringe when the National Government justifies all the aid they spend on said host country in the first place. Especially so if the magistrates cousin, the Commissioner of Police loves sailing... and just happens to be in need of a boat!