Rebel Heart Crew Suing.....

[deckofficer]

Originally Posted by atoll

not much good when he only had 20 gallons of fuel, left to run it ,and no spare power.

He had solar, just lost the charge controller. atoll, you have the MacGyver skills and would just bypass the controller, using a VOM to check voltage. I think Eric would also MacGyver a solution.

[goboatingnow]

We really need to stop eric and Charlotte getting more and more " airtime " by not continuing these threads.

All we are doing is aiding a fraud in my opinion

Dave

[h20man]

Originally Posted by savoir

Got a link to confirm this job ?

Very good point. On another forum where he was known as faceman, many posts and whole threads have vanished. By his own hand.

He specifically stated he was in software for a financial services company. He also stated that he spent 30k on the boat and another 20k fitting it out. This was in response to someone asking how he can afford it.



Sent from my iPhone using Cruisers Sailing Forum

[atoll]

Originally Posted by deckofficer

He had solar, just lost the charge controller. atoll, you have the MacGyver skills and would just bypass the controller, using a VOM to check voltage. I think Eric would also MacGyver a solution.

he did find a quick solution............at great expense to the us taxpayer

[h20man]

Originally Posted by atoll

not much good when he only had 20 gallons of fuel, left to run it ,and no spare power.

Also, their boat was dead in the water when National Guard pararescuers arrived. The Rebel Heart only had 10 to 11 hours of diesel fuel left and took on water when the engine engaged, according to a 129th Air Rescue Wing guardsman.http://m.utsandiego.com/news/2014/Ap...d-navy-rescue/

[Gadagirl]

Originally Posted by savoir

Got a link to confirm this job ?

No. But feel free to search his own posts. Or clipped quotes, re-posted here or on other forums. If he hasn't already deleted them. Any one that was following them knows he was working remotely from the boat.

[deckofficer]

Originally Posted by atoll

he did find a quick solution............at great expense to the us taxpayer

And that brings us full circle. Had he still had sat comms, would he have pushed the button?

[atoll]

Originally Posted by deckofficer

And that brings us full circle. Had he still had sat comms, would he have pushed the button?

after charlotte went nuts,it was probably inevitable regardless

[h20man]

Originally Posted by atoll

he did find a quick solution............at great expense to the us taxpayer

To be fair. There was no real expense other then rib chutes and some minor stuff. The rest is counted as training costs that would have been spent.

[QUOTE]
“You can’t make exercises like this up,” said Lt. Col. Thomas Keegan. “That’s what I think is lost in this.”

[\QUOTE]


Again. I do not have a USCG 100 ton ticket like Eric has. ( other posts had it as 50 ton)

I don't even have a 6pack license.

What this incident h

[tomfl]

Originally Posted by deckofficer

He had solar, just lost the charge controller. atoll, you have the MacGyver skills and would just bypass the controller, using a VOM to check voltage. I think Eric would also MacGyver a solution.

Maybe so but the batteries may have been compromised.

His Macgyver skills did not seem to do a lot of good in dealing with the rot on the deck. The standing rigging was compromised from the chain plates being stressed to the extent that enough water leaked in to damage the electronics to the point of not working. I have not seen any update on the status of the water maker but it might have been compromised as well.

RH was faced with provision shortages on a compromised boat that would have to travel slower with major system outages and unreliable communications and health issues.

Quite frankly I would not leave port if I was taking antibiotics to treat salmonella, especially with a sick crew, no matter how good my Macgyver skills were.

[h20man]

[QUOTE=h20man;1582482]To be fair. There was no real expense other then rib chutes and some minor stuff. The rest is counted as training costs that would have been spent.

“You can’t make exercises like this up,” said Lt. Col. Thomas Keegan. “That’s what I think is lost in this.”

[\QUOTE]


Again. I do not have a USCG 100 ton ticket like Eric has. ( other posts had it as 50 ton)

I don't even have a 6pack license.

What this incident h

Arg. So much for using an app to reply.

What I wanted to add is that this incident has frightened my non sailing friends, saying.... "If he with his captain's Licence has these issues what about you?

Unfortunately, I feel that his boat was not prepared, and he was not prepared. And that is the issue. I thought a USCG ticket was indicative of some skill.

Blame shifting, deleting posts,

Those are actions unworthy of a responsible adult.

It confuses the issue and makes sailors look bad and sailing a 'lifestyle' of the fringe. ( not a positive fringe)

[maj75]

Originally Posted by Dockhead

Waivers of liability in services agreements are rarely enforceable in U.S. courts. Besides that, what happened here might very well be gross negligence.

The fact that a contract is governed by Florida law doesn't mean that disputes under it necessarily have to be heard in the courts of that state. Forum selection clauses were traditionally unenforceable. That's no longer necessarily true, but they are still very often not enforced - the law presumes that the plaintiff has the right to choose any court with subject matter and personal jurisdiction. And in any case, this is a tort, not a contract dispute.

So it is a big mistake to jump to conclusions like this. It's not nearly so simple.

I'm sure I have dealt with this issue more than you have given your statements above.

This isn't a waiver of liability. It allows suit when the provider is grossly negligent. That's a huge difference and routinely enforced in US Courts.

The contract specifically controls any claim brought against the service provider. This will be enforced. These folks did not have to chose this sat provider. If they didn't like the terms, they could have selected a different provider. If you took the time to read the contract, you might have seen that the forum selection clause specifically requires an action in Florida, using Florida law. I have enforced similar contract provisions dozens of times. Often, this resulted in the injured party getting nothing because they failed to follow the contract terms. Contract claim or tort claim makes no difference, the agreement controls. I would have PMed you but I see others picking up the information you posted.

I'm actually surprised that the agreement allows a lawsuit. There has been a trend towards binding arbitration in many service agreements/contracts.

[tomfl]

[QUOTE=h20man;1582487]

Originally Posted by h20man

SNIP

I thought a USCG ticket was indicative of some skill.

SNIP

What about the skill needed to set up a blog that produces a cash flow of ~$US400/month, or the skill needed to get an IT job (I am assuming that is true).

Not sure what the requirements are for a USCG ticket but I have been told that simply living on my boat while at anchor counts toward the number of hours needed for some kinda USCG ticket and that I should start keeping records and apply for one.

I do know what is required for a ticket for lawyers in FL, and suspect it is similar in CA. Yet look at what RH's lawyer is doing. Does not say much for having a ticket.

[tomfl]

Originally Posted by maj75

SNIP

I'm actually surprised that the agreement allows a lawsuit. There has been a trend towards binding arbitration in many service agreements/contracts.

Point taken, but no contract can prevent nuisance law suits, even if they are thrown out at pre trial. Whenever Comm obviously does not have deep pockets and my guess is what ever happens the company will not survive.

Simply filing in CA, even if the case is tossed, will create massive bad PR for the company. Yahoo is reporting not that a suit has been filed, but that RH plans to sue.

RH's real motive may not be to get relief from the courts, or even to go to court; but to simply get more headlines.

[chubby]

Originally Posted by colemj

Not quite. Archiving sites can only archive what their spider bots can access. Many sites use bot blockers to prevent this. That other site where he is supposedly deleting posts is one of those blocked sites.

Mark

unfortunately, at least for the privacy for the posters of that website... xerq.io is not part of the "deep web".
..it is actually indexed by google..
a quickie 1 min search pulls up cached versions of practically single image and posting made by "faceman" there.
if something was deleted just click on that 'triangle' next to the UrL for the original/cached page.