Supreme Court: Home Isn't a Boat

[JoePa]

Originally Posted by Cormorant

Federal law defines a vessel as including “every description of watercraft or other artificial contrivance used, or capable of being used, as a means of transportation on water.”

I think the "transportation" part of that makes barges vessels.

Mr. Lozman's floating house, while it holds him afloat, apparently is not meant to take him anywhere. . . .

You're exactly right .
That was exactly the grounds on which the case was judged. The coast guard will have to expand their SOP's to incorporate a determination of an intended boarding site as a "vessel" to cover their six now.

Lozman meanwhile will put more lawyers to work in his expected effort to reclaim the cost/value of the loss of his "home" since it was demolished.

[TeddyDiver]

Originally Posted by zeehag

btw--uscg is part of homeless insecurity now-

Best of the week!

[Auspicious]

Originally Posted by Don Lucas

Not really any application to us boaters.

Let's see -

Yet another FL municipality has overstepped its bounds and been corrected.

FL state and local authorities have de facto recognized that federal maritime law supersedes local ordinances.

If a floating home is not a vessel and a floating home is not subject to admiralty law than presumably a a vessel capable of navigation IS subject to admiralty law and the attempts to restrict anchoring with state and local regulation may be weakened by the overt deference to federal law.

I think this is good for boaters in general and cruisers in particular.

[ElGatoGordo]

Hmmmmmm...I have a question. All Marinas require liability insurance to rent. I'm quite certain no insurance company offered this guy "home owners", leaving, I assume, boat insurance. If so, he had to call it a "vessel" when he got that insurance, so wouldn't that make his argument moot? Does anyone know how else a "non-vessel" floating home would be insured?

I can see this ruling being abused fairly easily by all sides, leaving lower courts kicking many cases up. But a Marina can easily protect themselves by having a simple statement in the contract that only vessels can moor there.

We have one of these very floating homes in our Marina. While it seems fine to me, many hate it, calling it ugly and out of place (the color is ugly actually). I wonder if it could be evicted based on this ruling, since a Marina is for boats, not homes?

[SURV69]

people with floating homes who want maritime laws to apply will add a transom and motor.

people on boats who want to NOT be subject to maritime laws will remove all methods of propulsion.

I wonder how I can make maney in all this?

[Cheechako]

Originally Posted by zeehag

uscg can and will board anything that is a floating thing in usa waters. they are not limited to what they can and cannot board . they need no notice to do their deeds .. good luck

btw--uscg is part of homeless insecurity now--along with us customs

and if it's a US Documented vessel, they can board anywhere in the world!

[Andrew Troup]

Has the rule of law morphed into the rule of lawyers?

Did we let it?

Can we reverse it?

[Snore]

Okay I believe an important fact is being missed here!

If a boat can be a home, then it would appear that the boat could be "homesteaded" under Florida law. The appraised value of Homesteaded property is significantly discounted. So any attempt for a taxing authority to tax it would be thwarted or reduced. Also I believe that homesteaded property is exempted in certain law suits where the owner is a defendant.

I am sure some barrister, much smarter than this non-attorney, is already pondering an angle.

Could get interesting...

Bill

[Rhapsody-NS27]

Originally Posted by Blue Crab

No worries. The government will protect us.

And here's someone with a sense of humor

Originally Posted by Andrew Troup

Can we reverse it?

doubtful

[DeepFrz]

The lawyers make the laws. The politicians just sign off on them.

[Therapy]

He won!

WASHINGTON: South Florida man wins houseboat case in Supreme Court - Florida - MiamiHerald.com

[Crimea Cruiser]

Originally Posted by mcarling

This seems to open the previously settled question of whether a de-masted sailboat without a propeller or oars is or is not a vessel.

I guess that depends if it is adrift or not, as in underway, and in what waters under what laws.

[ElGatoGordo]

It's destroyed Sooooooo I'm wondering how they will settle this? Sounds like it was more of a personal squabble.

[Captain Bill]

Originally Posted by Snore

Okay I believe an important fact is being missed here!

If a boat can be a home, then it would appear that the boat could be "homesteaded" under Florida law. The appraised value of Homesteaded property is significantly discounted. So any attempt for a taxing authority to tax it would be thwarted or reduced. Also I believe that homesteaded property is exempted in certain law suits where the owner is a defendant.

I am sure some barrister, much smarter than this non-attorney, is already pondering an angle.

Could get interesting...

Bill

In Florida boats are not subject to property tax so the homestead exemption would not apply. If you live in a Mobile home (which pretty much fits the description of this guy's home) you must have a license plate and pay a state registration fee, which is much less than property tax. There are some twists to this depending on if you own the land that it sits on and how permanently it is placed, i.e. did you build a brick foundation that precludes it ever being moved again. I would suspect that the state will quickly figure out that they can treat it like a mobile home and still get some revenue from it. It probably does create a bit of a problem for the marinas, but I don't think it changes much for cruisers or other liveaboards.