New Zealand Immigration Officer Making Wild Claims

[NoTies]

If anybody bothered to read the NZ cat 1 regs (which would probably be broadly applied in this instance) they would come across the word "discretion" a lot and it is widely used by experienced surveyors. Ask anyone who has been through the process.

[noelex 77]

Originally Posted by goboatingnow

I mean imagine of he left on a demand from immigration on a manifestly unsafe yacht , that then sank and he drowned , I suspect the next of kin would have a nice lawsuit against the authorities.

Dave

This is part of the problem.
A country introduces laws that defines what is safe for offshore sailing.
When lives are lost the family feels they have right to sue, because manifestly the vessel was not safe.
The country introduces new laws to prevent another tragedy (and law suit)

Following the next fatality we are all traveling on the QE2, permanently wearing our life jackets and crash helmets.

[seandepagnier]

I am going to try my best to stop posting political views and instead just report facts as I experience so that others may benefit and understand the situation in new zealand especially bay of islands. The main thing to be noted, is if you break any law, (including overstaying visa for a few months even if you are denied an extension for storm season as I was) then all the other rules become defenestrated and they can do whatever they want with you and/or your boat.

The official surveyor (the other guy I spoke of before was unofficial I didn't know at the time) turned out to have circumnavigated on an engine free 30ft wooden boat.

He said I have to drop my rudder, and check it for any problems, and fix them, then install an adequate tricolor on top of the mast then I'm free to go. All services tools materials and costs are free. This includes even wiring for the light as well as the light itself. Also included I have been given 4 liters of bottom paint to complete 2 coats.

As far as I can see it, 80-90% of the people here would like to see me sail away safely which is about the same as posting on this thread. There are it seems a few officials who would rather see me lose the boat (and pay to fly away at no cost to them), but in the end they are outnumbered.

I lose a perfect weather window to go and my freedom to do what I like here, but at least my boat will be better, at no cost, and I can visit nz again whenever I like.

[Steve Pope]

Sounds like a perfect solution, Good Luck!

[Delfin]

Originally Posted by noelex 77

I did give amore detailed answer in post 491, but yes I think the laws pertaining to offshore sailors are "bad" laws.
New Zealand marine accident statistics here:
http://www.watersafety.org.nz/assets...-2007-2011.pdf

These show there has been a 50% reduction in general drowing deaths over the last 6 years, but they also show that there has only been one drowning death attributed to "offshore sailing" In The period 2007-2011 (I could not find any more recent information)

I see that now, thank you. You believe that NZ requiring that vessels meet safety standards before departing is a bad thing. Fair enough. Should they also ignore calls for help or SAR for vessels not meeting that standard?

[goboatingnow]

Originally Posted by noelex 77

This is part of the problem.
A country introduces laws that defines what is safe for offshore sailing.
When lives are lost the family feels they have right to sue, because manifestly the vessel was not safe.
The country introduces new laws to prevent another tragedy (and law suit)

Following the next fatality we are all traveling on the QE2, permanently wearing our life jackets and crash helmets.

No its a function of making government responsible, ie we sue them. So now the authorities don't want to " make you do something" without having an ass covering exercise, ie a survey.

The official isn't enduring the boat is to a particular standard, merely that an accepted expert verifies its seaworthy and hey presto the official can ask him to leave.

NZ only applies safety laws to domestic vessels., even then it doesn't say the vessel is safe , merely that it conforms to the safety requirements no more then a buildings fire cert doesn't prevent it from burning down

Dave .

[NoTies]

Originally Posted by boat_alexandra

I am going to try my best to stop posting political views and instead just report facts as I experience so that others may benefit and understand the situation in new zealand especially bay of islands. The main thing to be noted, is if you break any law, (including overstaying visa for a few months even if you are denied an extension for storm season as I was) then all the other rules become defenestrated and they can do whatever they want with you and/or your boat.

The official surveyor (the other guy I spoke of before was unofficial I didn't know at the time) turned out to have circumnavigated on an engine free 30ft wooden boat.

He said I have to drop my rudder, and check it for any problems, and fix them, then install an adequate tricolor on top of the mast then I'm free to go. All services tools materials and costs are free. This includes even wiring for the light as well as the light itself. Also included I have been given 4 liters of bottom paint to complete 2 coats.

As far as I can see it, 80-90% of the people here would like to see me sail away safely which is about the same as posting on this thread. There are it seems a few officials who would rather see me lose the boat (and pay to fly away at no cost to them), but in the end they are outnumbered.

I lose a perfect weather window to go and my freedom to do what I like here, but at least my boat will be better, at no cost, and I can visit nz again whenever I like.

So, you broke the law but somehow it's not your fault. Did nobody tell you that freedom also comes with responsibilities (including telling the whole truth to those you seek sympathy from)

[seandepagnier]

Originally Posted by nimblemotors

The speculation that the OP has used his boat condition to stay would be 100% opposite from what he has said. Surely some of you in NZ can call the officials
and get their side of the story.

Correct.

I want to make it very clear I _never_ said my boat was unseaworthy, this is their claim. I was waiting out cyclone season, stupidly missed the first really good weather window, and then got stuck with bad weather the next 3 weeks waiting until now.. and I now miss this window too because they stuck my boat on the hard. I asked if I could please sail away right then (yesterday) as I was ready to go when threatened to be arrested and deported if I didn't bring the boat into the yard, and this request was denied.

[jeanathon]

Originally Posted by NoTies

So, you broke the law but somehow it's not your fault. Did nobody tell you that freedom also comes with responsibilities (including telling the whole truth to those you seek sympathy from)

Reread his post again he implied nothing mal. Axe to grind?
Thanks for the update Alexandra. Fair winds.

[noelex 77]

Originally Posted by Delfin

I see that now, thank you. You believe that NZ requiring that vessels meet safety standards before departing is a bad thing. Fair enough. Should they also ignore calls for help or SAR for vessels not meeting that standard?

What is "that" standard? Do you mean NZ cat 1 requirments? (Like NZ tried to introduce for foreign yachts) Or something else?
I am not being difficult, but you must have a standard in mind if you want people to conform to it.

BTW here is a report from NoTies on the NZ cat 1 requirments. Do you want to go through this? What about the next country you visit?


http://www.cruisersforum.com/forums/...nce-14182.html

Originally Posted by NoTies

If you get cat 1 and believe you are safe then you are a fool..

Originally Posted by NoTies

we had spent a huge amount of money getting prepared.

Originally Posted by NoTies

The rules were orientated for racers and have never really been adapted for cruisers so a lot is total BS.

Originally Posted by NoTies

The advice extended to choosing the right inspector and in this respect we were very lucky..

[NoTies]

Originally Posted by jeanathon

Reread his post again he implied nothing mal. Axe to grind?
Thanks for the update Alexandra. Fair winds.

I did re read it and he still admits to breaking the law in the first paragraph. No real axe to grind, just fed up with people with no sense of self responsibility making it worse for those who follow in their wake. Make no mistake, this clown's antics will have an adverse impact on other cruisers later.

[NoTies]

Originally Posted by noelex 77

What is "that" standard? Do you mean NZ cat 1 requirments? (Like NZ tried to introduce for foreign yachts) Or something else?
I am not being difficult, but you must have a standard in mind if you want people to conform to it.

BTW here is a report from NoTies on the NZ cat 1 requirments. Do you want to go through this? What about the next country you visit?

http://www.cruisersforum.com/forums/...nce-14182.html

Cat one regs have subsequently been revised to reflective reality of cruising yachts .

[Delfin]

Originally Posted by noelex 77

What is "that" standard? Do you mean NZ cat 1 requirments? (Like NZ tried to introduce for foreign yachts) Or something else?
I am not being difficult, but you must have a standard in mind if you want people to conform to it.

BTW here is a report from NoTies on the NZ cat 1 requirments. Do you want to go through this? What about the next country you visit?
NoTies does seem particuarly impressed with the positive effect on safety on my reading. Spending."huge amounts of money" does not sound good especially when "a lot is total BS"

http://www.cruisersforum.com/forums/...nce-14182.html

For someone who seems genuinely committed to freedom you should have more faith in free markets. Thousands of vessels visit and leave NZ each year without complaint. Some might even welcome the Kiwis commitment to safety since they are the beneficiaries. If their rules were as draconian as some suggest who would visit there? Not so good for the yacht service industry, I should think. When people draw lines in the sand in the face of common sense, they are ignored as crackpots, and rightly so.

My advice is that if you feel the idea of vessel inspection before setting across the Tasman in the winter is a violation of fundamental human rights don't go to New Zealand. I doubt they'll miss you.

[nimblemotors]

Originally Posted by boat_alexandra

I am going to try my best to stop posting political views and instead just report facts as I experience so that others may benefit and understand the situation in new zealand especially bay of islands. The main thing to be noted, is if you break any law, (including overstaying visa for a few months even if you are denied an extension for storm season as I was) then all the other rules become defenestrated and they can do whatever they want with you and/or your boat.

The official surveyor (the other guy I spoke of before was unofficial I didn't know at the time) turned out to have circumnavigated on an engine free 30ft wooden boat.

He said I have to drop my rudder, and check it for any problems, and fix them, then install an adequate tricolor on top of the mast then I'm free to go. All services tools materials and costs are free. This includes even wiring for the light as well as the light itself. Also included I have been given 4 liters of bottom paint to complete 2 coats.

As far as I can see it, 80-90% of the people here would like to see me sail away safely which is about the same as posting on this thread. There are it seems a few officials who would rather see me lose the boat (and pay to fly away at no cost to them), but in the end they are outnumbered.

I lose a perfect weather window to go and my freedom to do what I like here, but at least my boat will be better, at no cost, and I can visit nz again whenever I like.

Great news, thanks for the update. You are correct that violating visa rules is something countries are unquestionably within their rights to enforce. It is a separate issue from the seaworthy determination of foreign vessels before departing. This the major issue many are concerned about, and while they still were able to force this upon you, at least your results are positive.

Can you tell us your next destination?

[hellosailor]

Perhaps I missed it and some kind soul can point me back to it:

Where does anything show that the OP overstayed his visa and then came to the attention of authorities, as opposed to his initial presentation saying that authorities forced hinm to remain in NZ, after which visa questions arose?

I'm not seeing it. Message numbers?