Rebel Heart Crew Suing.....

[NoTies]

I'm no wannabe cruiser and have done the miles. If Rebel Heart needed an operational phone link to land to fulfill his cruising dreams he should not have been out there, simple!!! The fact that it has now entered into litigation makes me sad for the future of the cruising lifestyle. Shame.

[SV Windrush II]

I am one to always try to find the good in a story, but this one just got uglier. Every time I cast off, especially any offshore voyage. Whatever happens is my responsibility, and if I get any help from anyone, that is a blessing and should be thankful. Seams that there is an element in the American culture that thinks they can go to the law whenever they want to avoid responsibility for their own actions. What a shame.

[Scottuk]

I think a ruling in a lawsuit could be to the benefit of all users of a sat. phone in determining the benefits of them as a tool in the safety kit. The US legal system is set up to make these types of determinations through the court hence the need to litigate to define the laws.

A rational Mr RH stated for the lawsuit is so it does not happen to other people. This is only likely to happen if there is a ruling and not a settlement. If a settlement were to occur it would likely contradict the motivation of this stated goal.

It’s too bad that there were other potential mitigating factors. I think the defence could reasonably call into question the preparation of the boat, the experience of the crew and the suspect health of the child, so a ruling in this instance might not be all that definitive.

[Oliver L.]

In Germany we still have something called the "risk of life". Basically, it means that if you get up in the morning you will face risks that could be detrimental to your health or even your life, simply because living entails doing things which might go wrong. And the courts act accordingly: If you have an accident on the Autobahn and you were going faster than 130 km/h, you automatically bear some of the responsibility regardless of who was at fault simply because you ought to know that driving fast is dangerous.

Rebel Heart went out there, and I enjoyed the posts of both of them, and he made the right decision in my mind to put his child's health above all other concerns. And yes, it cost him a boat, but from following the story I got the impression that saving the boat was iffy at best.

And now they found an attorney who will sue the hell out of everybody involved for whatever reason he can conjure up. Or - let me guess - the attorney found them? And of whatever he can squeeze out of anyone, he will take most of it?

What a sad end to an adventure.

Oliver

[atoll]

so let me get this right?

they are now saying that.

#1 there was nothing wrong with their vessel.
#2 there was no gravely ill child,meerly listlass.
#3 the rescue was unneccesary.
#4 the issue could have been resolved by further communication with their doctor if the sat phone had worked..................

[SimonV]

I have never had a sat phone for private use while cruising. That being said I did look into it for my Pacific crossing. Just too expensive at the time. I do remember the speels and advertising relating to ocean communication and they both pushed the emergency coms for distress and disaster at sea. I would have been to say the least disappointed had I spent the big bucks only to have someone decide to cancel my sim while hundreds of miles from civilization. If you payed for a service described by the provider and they failed to fulfill their end of the agreement I would think they would be liable.

Sent from my GT-N7105T using Cruisers Sailing Forum mobile app

[Factor]

The lawyer jokes need to start about now:

Q- why has there never been a recorded shark attack on a lawyer

A - Professional Courtesy.

Seriously though. I would like to say "only in America", but the world over more people want to blame others for their mistakes.

[Fog Bank]

Originally Posted by Factor

The lawyer jokes need to start about now:

Q- why has there never been a recorded shark attack on a lawyer

A - Professional Courtesy.

Seriously though. I would like to say "only in America", but the world over more people want to blame others for their mistakes.

Apparently the lawyer representing Rebel Heart is also the same man who sued Disney for racism at Disneyland. A further bit of digging turned up an unconfirmed claim that he was also removed from his position as a little league coach due to bullying. Interesting....

[NoTies]

If you're going to rely on a telephone working anywhere in the world to get yourself out of difficulty then you have no right to call yourself a bluewater cruiser or whine to the courts when it goes pear shaped. If you want the luxuries of life then stay at home. If you want to test yourself, explore what life has to offer and not be a burden on your fellow man then yes, go cruising.

[Sandero]

Originally Posted by NoTies

If you're going to rely on a telephone working anywhere in the world to get yourself out of difficulty then you have no right to call yourself a bluewater cruiser or whine to the courts when it goes pear shaped. If you want the luxuries of life then stay at home. If you want to test yourself, explore what life has to offer and not be a burden on your fellow man then yes, go cruising.

Pete's comment raises the issue of depending on the reliability of any and all equipment we have which can be called the complex system of a yacht (off shore). We assume certain serviceability and we are aware that entropy being what it is and how the sea seems to make matters worse we face a constant battle of maintenance.

New comm systems and high tech seem to add a measure of safety to what we do... but the complexity and dependance of the designers and service providers renders us in a position to not be able (in most cases) to deal with breakdowns and failures. Unfortunately more and more things become like black boxes which we can deal with. People now heavily rely on GPS and plotters when years ago it was basic DR and paper charts. When these complex systems fail for any reason we are sh*t out of luck and our decision to do rely on them is a risk we assume... along with the benefits they normally provide.

Cancelling a SIM contract or whatever without notice is not a good thing... but relying on a sat phone is not a good thing either.

[Ex-Calif]

First let me again say that I have never second guessed any decisions RH made on the boat. He was the skipper and he made the decisions he needed to make.

But this is a completely different subject. Clearly Eric is going to try and hold the provider liable for his loss.

It is going to be difficult based on things he has said in the past.

http://www.cruisersforum.com/forums/...ml#post1537953

He had repeated "service issues" with the phone prior to departure and stated that he would not have even had one (unnecessary) except for needing it to do his work remotely. he did not (at the time) indicate that it was a piece of "safety" equipment.

Honestly if I could connect the dots on "My sat phone provider sunk my boat." I would be all over the PayPal button donating to the RH legal offense fund. I just can't get there.

Look at "another" potential outcome - They get through to the doc. The doc say "up the doses" (or whatever) and they limp along in a damaged boat. 3 days later the kid dies from dehydration.

Getting off the boat was the right call - the sat phone had nothing to do with it.

[sailorboy1]

Far as I'm concerned the failure of the phone and the failure of the boat have nothing to do with each other. Even if you decide to go to the extreme view of applying the "stupid" label to the whole event, it still doesn't change the apparent facts of the phone issue.

People buy a Sat phone for emergency communication. If you have an emergency only to find it doesn't work, well that is an issue.

[gabilo]

My autopilot broke, I had to hand steer. Looking for a lawyer to sue Raymarine for my aching shoulders and emotional distress.

[monte]

I'll donate to the Raymarine class action!

[chubby]

Originally Posted by sailorboy1

Far as I'm concerned the failure of the phone and the failure of the boat have nothing to do with each other. Even if you decide to go to the extreme view of applying the "stupid" label to the whole event, it still doesn't change the apparent facts of the phone issue.

People buy a Sat phone for emergency communication. If you have an emergency only to find it doesn't work, well that is an issue.

this^^

the issues with boat and failure of the sat service are separate events..
...and i think we can be reasonably certain that their sat phone provider was fully expecting this lawsuit.

/and i don't really think this is a subject (an emergency device provider/device failing during show time) they would really want in the public eyes...there is a the very real potential to completely sink a business if handled poorly.

//current media visibility= potential for a very quick settlement offer

///i could be wrong..but werent there other boats that had their sim card unilaterally swapped while at sea?