Eleonora sunk in harbour
- Thread starter Robih
- Start date
Aardee
Well-known member
I can't see the supply ship's insurer having much of an argument
Wansworth
Well-known member
Polish out?………was tied to a quay in Antwerpen when a small coaster came in full tilt gave no sign of slowing till it left a nice “V”in the coaster I was on
dunedin
Well-known member
Scary - glad nobody on board was killed In the accident
LittleSister
Well-known member
Ouch!
capnsensible
Well-known member
Don't you believe it. They will wriggle for years. Its what they do.
Daydream believer
Well-known member
Was the Elenora given permission to be there & if so who gave it? They might be deemed at fault for putting a yacht in a position where damage might occur.
Or the yachts owners at fault if they had been forewarned of the rescue ship about to undertake a difficult manouver & failed to be ready to move if needs be.
I would put the blame partially on the port authority, or the yacht owner if I could. Was there any liability on the port Authority to have emergency tug services available. If so did they work?
Then, of course the yacht is not new, so it needs to be valued. One also has to consider if the crew took reasonable action to save the vessel. Did the vessel have adequate pumps for emergency pumping, in the event of collision, thus being unsafe to start with? Were watertight doors closed , if they existed.
Grounds for an insurance co to wriggle out of part of the cost, certainly delay things, I suspect.
Or the yachts owners at fault if they had been forewarned of the rescue ship about to undertake a difficult manouver & failed to be ready to move if needs be.
I would put the blame partially on the port authority, or the yacht owner if I could. Was there any liability on the port Authority to have emergency tug services available. If so did they work?
Then, of course the yacht is not new, so it needs to be valued. One also has to consider if the crew took reasonable action to save the vessel. Did the vessel have adequate pumps for emergency pumping, in the event of collision, thus being unsafe to start with? Were watertight doors closed , if they existed.
Grounds for an insurance co to wriggle out of part of the cost, certainly delay things, I suspect.
Last edited:
Wansworth
Well-known member
You old cynic?
Frogmogman
Well-known member
Whatever the rights and wrongs, it’s heartbreaking to see such images of a truly beautiful vessel.
dankilb
Well-known member
Wow. Strange times we live in!
PeterV
Active member
i really hope you’re not serious!
Daydream believer
Well-known member
Insurance Co.s get to write the terms. I was just suggesting ideas for starters. I am sure that some smart a..se lawyer will have a look before anyone signs a cheque. It is what they are paid for & how they earn their reputations, which allows them to charge sky high fees. Over the years people have made all sorts of spurious claims & got away with them.
bedouin
Well-known member
Doesn't that rather depend on why the boat had problems with her engines and whether that could reasonably have been foreseen.
Bajansailor
Well-known member
More info about Eleonora on her webpage -
Yacht Eleonora - THE YACHT
And more photos on her Marinetraffic page -
Ship ELEONORA E (Yacht) Registered in United Kingdom - Vessel details, Current position and Voyage information - IMO 8732984, MMSI 235008680, Call Sign MEDD4
Re the legal aspects of such a collision, @Kukri is very knowledgeable on matters like these, and I hope that he will add a comment or two.
Be aware that it is quite possible that the supply vessel that clobbered Eleonora probably has relatively limited insurance - simply because they are allowed to do so.
Eleonora's owners will have to claim off their Insurers, who might get only a small proportion back from the Insurers of the commercial vessel.
But Kukri can explain this better.
It is fortunate that Eleonora has a steel hull - I am thinking that if it was timber, the odds are that the supply vessel would have made a determined effort to slice her in half.
@Daydream believer you cannot apportion any blame on the crew of Eleonora - they are not obligated to keep watertight doors closed while safely moored at a dock, and I very much doubt that they would have parked illegally there - they would have received specific instructions from the Port.
And they were probably also required to take a pilot on board when they came into the harbour, and the pilot would have advised them where to moor.
Changing tack, I was involved (re surveys on the cats that were clobbered) in the incident shown in this Facebook video (link below) - it happened here in Barbados in January, and shows an inter-island ferry barrelling (at about 8 knots) into a group of local day charter cats double berthed on the quay.
https://m.facebook.com/story.php?story_fbid=10159903124555148&id=741305147
One cat was a definite write off, one is (in theory) economically repairable, and the other two received lesser damages.
However the ferry only had limited third party coverage - apparently only EC$ 1million (which is about US$ 350,000), and the total claim probably came to at least US$ 2 million.
It is probable that the supply vessel that sank Eleonora only has limited third party insurance coverage - yet I am sure that she is worth a lot more.
This advert for her near sistership Elena has her listed for sale in 2010 for 9 million Euros.
Classic 1910 Schooner Elena for Sale on James - (Yachts)
While Eleonora is currently being advertised for sale for 6.9 million Euros.
Eleonora Yacht for Sale | Eleonora Yacht
Yacht Eleonora - THE YACHT
And more photos on her Marinetraffic page -
Ship ELEONORA E (Yacht) Registered in United Kingdom - Vessel details, Current position and Voyage information - IMO 8732984, MMSI 235008680, Call Sign MEDD4
Re the legal aspects of such a collision, @Kukri is very knowledgeable on matters like these, and I hope that he will add a comment or two.
Be aware that it is quite possible that the supply vessel that clobbered Eleonora probably has relatively limited insurance - simply because they are allowed to do so.
Eleonora's owners will have to claim off their Insurers, who might get only a small proportion back from the Insurers of the commercial vessel.
But Kukri can explain this better.
It is fortunate that Eleonora has a steel hull - I am thinking that if it was timber, the odds are that the supply vessel would have made a determined effort to slice her in half.
@Daydream believer you cannot apportion any blame on the crew of Eleonora - they are not obligated to keep watertight doors closed while safely moored at a dock, and I very much doubt that they would have parked illegally there - they would have received specific instructions from the Port.
And they were probably also required to take a pilot on board when they came into the harbour, and the pilot would have advised them where to moor.
Changing tack, I was involved (re surveys on the cats that were clobbered) in the incident shown in this Facebook video (link below) - it happened here in Barbados in January, and shows an inter-island ferry barrelling (at about 8 knots) into a group of local day charter cats double berthed on the quay.
https://m.facebook.com/story.php?story_fbid=10159903124555148&id=741305147
One cat was a definite write off, one is (in theory) economically repairable, and the other two received lesser damages.
However the ferry only had limited third party coverage - apparently only EC$ 1million (which is about US$ 350,000), and the total claim probably came to at least US$ 2 million.
It is probable that the supply vessel that sank Eleonora only has limited third party insurance coverage - yet I am sure that she is worth a lot more.
This advert for her near sistership Elena has her listed for sale in 2010 for 9 million Euros.
Classic 1910 Schooner Elena for Sale on James - (Yachts)
While Eleonora is currently being advertised for sale for 6.9 million Euros.
Eleonora Yacht for Sale | Eleonora Yacht
Last edited:
Daydream believer
Well-known member
A poster suggested that an insurance co might try to wriggle out of paying. Another suggested it was more of an open & shut case ( not in those words though).
I just made up some of the ideas someone may have come up with.
The bit about water tight doors being that the crew should be expected to reduce the risk of sinking after the collision & would be expected to take all emergency procedures. ie close watertight doors, start the pumps. The question might be asked. I do believe that in damage situations insurers do expect crews to take all precautions to limit that damage where possible. It can have an effect on the final outcome of the claim. That was what I was suggesting. Just letting a boat sink might put a liability on the crew, even though they never actually started the chain of events.
Can you see my point? Someone could do some checking as to why they were there. You have now thrown the pilot into the equation. Did he know about the rescue boat leaving? Was the crew of Elenora given prior notice & the opportunity to move along the dock prior to the departure. It only takes an admin person to say " Well we did suggest to the skipper that he could move to a safer spot for a while, during the rescue vessel's departure, but he declined" & a whole can of worms opens up. . Anything to reduce liability of the insurance Co.
I was only making suggestions. I was trying to point out that things are not always as simple as they may seem.
Last edited:
Stemar
Well-known member
Surely, the approach for Eleonora's owners would be to sue the owners of the supply vessel, as they are the ones who are liable. What happens between them and their insurers isn't Eleonora's problem. Hard to argue that they aren't liable. Sure, they may have recourse against the mechanics who didn't tighten up the bolts on the gear controls, or whatever, but, again, not Eleonora's problem.
Surely it's up to the captain of the supply vessel to ensure he can carry out whatever he's planning in a safe manner. If E is in the way, he should tell the harbour authorities to get her moved. The speed he hit E, if she hadn't been there, he would have hit the wall anyway.
Daydream believer
Well-known member
"Surely" is the operative word. As I said . I was only demonstrating the options for getting out of a claim. I just came up with some spurious ideas. I do not intend to argue the merits of each one, only demonstrate the options that come to mind.The experts in these matters will find many; I am sure.It only takes one.
Last edited:
SaltIre
Well-known member
If they'd had fenders out it might have reduced the damage.
Frogmogman
Well-known member
…..and I thought I was cynical about insurance companies !!!
Daydream believer
Well-known member
Was E a French registered boat. If so the use of fenders is strictly forbidden..
French cruising boats usually carry standard accessories, including:- radios, noisy, over active kids & dogs. But not fenders. ?
French cruising boats usually carry standard accessories, including:- radios, noisy, over active kids & dogs. But not fenders. ?
