Visit our Popular Forums

leftbrainstuff · 21-01-2017, 20:55

Sue the captain. Heard him say you were right to the girl who said the bridge has stopped. Negligent or incompetent. You chose.

Situational awareness is the job of the crew and owners. It's the key to being safe.

It seems that creating youtube videos is more important than building competency.

I hope they can fix their boat through insurance. Maybe they can also focus on building their skills and not rely on morons.

jeepbluetj · 21-01-2017, 22:34

So, this is indeed an interesting case. It's in the U.S., so local laws apply.

IANAL, but I'd guess the 'captain' could be sued for the costs of the repair - i.e. it was completely his negligence that caused the impact. Same as if the guy at the oil change place totaled your car - the oil change place is gonna get a bill or a summons.

Of course, does the captain have any assets to forfeit would be the question. And is there a waiver of liability that the owners signed? Even if they did, there's plenty of case law that even a signed wavier of liability doesn't protect against gross negligence - thus a suit would be valid even if the owners waived liability.

All that says: In the US, a paid captain should either be pretty much penniless or carry insurance. This 'captain' is gonna get sued, and is gonna lose. Only reason not to file a suit is that he's absolutely destitute.

On a different point, I wouldn't slag the owners. They thought that hiring experience was the right way to go. They got burned.

**boatman61** · 22-01-2017, 05:51

Quote:

Originally Posted by Kenomac

Maybe if some of the freelance yacht delivery persons would purchase some personal liability insurance, their business would be a little more successful? It certainly wouldn't hurt. IMHO

There ya go again.. spew out the caustic snide then accuse folk of trolling when they respond.. oh so righteous..

Maybe if you read posts through, or put your brain in gear.. you'd realise I'm not a business.. but hell.. wave that wooden spoon around all you want little man.. and I'll keep giving you the finger..

CarlF · 22-01-2017, 08:12

Even if the captain had liability insurance (almost none do), it is not at all clear the insurance company would pay. The owner was aboard and may have been in command. The insurance company would point to the evidence that an owner is heard giving orders on the video. The couple say that their next video will be about insurance - it will be interesting if a "lesson learned" is not to post a video on the internet that may make things worse for you.

They were fortunate that the "captain" was not hurt. The US is most definitely "different" than the rest of the world in the area of injuries to paid crew (and a hired captain is paid crew). A couple of hundred year old laws (Longshoreman's Act and Jone's Act) make the ship owner broadly liable for injuries to crew. The owner is even liable for the injuries to your crew in a bar fight ashore. Damages include future lost wages - possibly for the rest of their working life. There are lots of attorneys who specialize in Jones Act cases. The vessel owner doesn't stand a chance. This is why it's very important to call your insurance company before hiring any crew. They will put a Jones Act rider on the policy. It's not expensive.

The insurance company will also want to know who will be the "master". If it is the hired crew, they usually need to approve him/her or you may not have insurance coverage at all.

Group9 · 22-01-2017, 10:40

These kids will learn. Hopefully all lessons won't be as painful as this one.

When I bought my first sailboat, a Cape Dory 25D, I was reluctant to take it out based on my experience (I had only sailed small open boats). I found an experienced sailor I knew to help me take it out the first time. Leaving the marina, he hit the first day marker we came to.

At that point, I decided I could hit day markers without any assistance at all and took it out myself, by myself, to learn how to sail it from that point on. That was 1985 and I haven't hit anything since!

Mistakes come from bad judgement and lack of experience.

Experience comes from bad judgement and making mistakes.

I always give bridges a lot of room while waiting for them to open. I've had arguments with bridge tenders who say they will open it when I get closer and I've replied I'm not getting any closer until you open it.

A lot of them are strangely unaware of the currents flowing under the bridges they operate and the (non)capabilities of low powered vessels to negotiate those currents at will.

Suijin · 22-01-2017, 11:04

Quote:

Originally Posted by Stumble

No rigs are typically far stronger for-aft than they are side to side, but you don't want strength here, because no rig isn't stronger than the bridge it is going to hit, if you are relying on strength alone you need your rig to break the bridge, before it breaks and I just don't see that ever happening.

What you want is the ability to disparate energy, or flex off, or just move out of the way, so a side strike while on the masts 'weak' axis is more likely to survive because a monohull, or even a cat can heel to dissipate some of the force.

Frankly I think 999/1000 if you hit a bridge you are going to buy a new mast anyway so I don't think it I should a distinction with a difference, but technically it might help.

I used to keep my boat at a marina in Annapolis that was home to one of the Bay's largest collections of charter boats. In the charter agreement, and in the pre-charter checklist, it said in all caps, bold type "CHARTERS ARE PROHIBITED FROM TRANSITING THROUGH KNAPPS NARROWS". There's a bascule bridge there. It's a popular route because it's a significant shortcut into the Choptank River and on to the back of St. Michaels, Oxford, Cambridge, etc.

Invariably, every summer, there would be a good number of boats coming back with mast and rigging damage from trying to sneak through and blowing it. The current can be decent there, it's very narrow and usually crowded with boats in season. Never did see a full on broken mast though. The rigging shop at the marina joked that those bridge bangers were putting their kids through college.

RTB · 22-01-2017, 12:25

Quote:

Originally Posted by a64pilot

Because at their obvious level stating they are off on a Circumnavigation is foolish, it is like a 16 yr old coming out of the DMV with their new license in hand and saying, "I'm off for the Indy 500 now"

You do remember the Bumfuzzle's, right?
Intro & The Start - Bumfuzzle

Cabo Jim- We miss you here at BLM. I hope "Patty Jean" is behaving herself! "She's a pretty boat!" to quote Captain Jack Sparrow....

Ralph

sailorboy1 · 23-01-2017, 11:10

Stop blaming the "kids" on the boat, they basically did everything right.

meatservo · 24-01-2017, 00:05

Quote:

Originally Posted by CarlF

Even if the captain had liability insurance (almost none do), it is not at all clear the insurance company would pay. The owner was aboard and may have been in command. The insurance company would point to the evidence that an owner is heard giving orders on the video. The couple say that their next video will be about insurance - it will be interesting if a "lesson learned" is not to post a video on the internet that may make things worse for you.

They were fortunate that the "captain" was not hurt. The US is most definitely "different" than the rest of the world in the area of injuries to paid crew (and a hired captain is paid crew). A couple of hundred year old laws (Longshoreman's Act and Jone's Act) make the ship owner broadly liable for injuries to crew. The owner is even liable for the injuries to your crew in a bar fight ashore. Damages include future lost wages - possibly for the rest of their working life. There are lots of attorneys who specialize in Jones Act cases. The vessel owner doesn't stand a chance. This is why it's very important to call your insurance company before hiring any crew. They will put a Jones Act rider on the policy. It's not expensive.

The insurance company will also want to know who will be the "master". If it is the hired crew, they usually need to approve him/her or you may not have insurance coverage at all.

That is what I call quality advise, did not know that...

meatservo

Cadence · 24-01-2017, 08:43

Quote:

Originally Posted by CarlF

Even if the captain had liability insurance (almost none do), it is not at all clear the insurance company would pay. The owner was aboard and may have been in command. The insurance company would point to the evidence that an owner is heard giving orders on the video. The couple say that their next video will be about insurance - it will be interesting if a "lesson learned" is not to post a video on the internet that may make things worse for you.

They were fortunate that the "captain" was not hurt. The US is most definitely "different" than the rest of the world in the area of injuries to paid crew (and a hired captain is paid crew). A couple of hundred year old laws (Longshoreman's Act and Jone's Act) make the ship owner broadly liable for injuries to crew. The owner is even liable for the injuries to your crew in a bar fight ashore. Damages include future lost wages - possibly for the rest of their working life. There are lots of attorneys who specialize in Jones Act cases. The vessel owner doesn't stand a chance. This is why it's very important to call your insurance company before hiring any crew. They will put a Jones Act rider on the policy. It's not expensive.

The insurance company will also want to know who will be the "master". If it is the hired crew, they usually need to approve him/her or you may not have insurance coverage at all.

Are we sure the cited acts apply the pleasure craft today? I believe they were targeting commercial vessels and commercial fisherman of the period?

Just asking? I suppose a sharp lawyer can make most anything work.

pete33458 · 24-01-2017, 09:50

Just caught up to this post and one thing I would add to the OP's lessons to be learned, a hard lesson I learned some years ago but that has kept me out of a lot of trouble since, is to always look at the turbulence around pilings and other stationary objects in the water to get an idea of what effect the current will have on you. Cause it's easy to overlook but very significant.

Oh, and one more lesson, Jupiter Inlet is no joke! I live there and would only take a sailboat in under perfect conditions (and even then I would be irreversibly puckered).

Pete

Group9 · 24-01-2017, 14:20

Quote:

Originally Posted by sailorboy1

Stop blaming the "kids" on the boat, they basically did everything right.

Yep. If they had tried to bring it down themselves and hit the bridge, the advisors here would all be saying they should have hired a captain.

At least they are out there, doing it.

dfelsent · 24-01-2017, 14:33

Quote:

Originally Posted by Cadence

Are we sure the cited acts apply the pleasure craft today? I believe they were targeting commercial vessels and commercial fisherman of the period?

Just asking? I suppose a sharp lawyer can make most anything work.

Pretty sure the Jones Act applies. I have coverage. It was included in my policy.