Boat damaged in the marina - what to do (legal advice)

[guernseyman]

Not sure if anyone above has suggested this - if so then excuse me for repeating it.

In my experience there is no substitute for popping into your insurers and discussing the issues. Most of these guys have a boring life behind their desk and really welcome the chance to meet a live customer and give them the benefit of their years of experience. It will cost you nothing, except time, and how much of that have spent already?

Don't write them, email them or telephone them (except perhaps to make an appointment), face-to-face will be much more productive.

 

[Seajet]

I take it you haven't travelled to somewhere like Canary Wharf to pop in to see insurers then ?!

This is an annoying but relatively small matter, best sorted out between owners ( I bet the police would give a really thorough and helpful response to a £ 400 claim, ie barely looking up from the desk saying ' here's your crime number ' ) - if no luck, name and shame the Squib owner.

 

[Leighb]

My experiences with 3rd party damage suggest that to save the OP endless grief he should advise his own insurers and put in a claim, they will pay the bill less his excess, and then it is their problem to pursue the 3rd party to recover their costs.

Navigators have done this for me a couple of times, and in the end repaid my excess once they got their money.

In my opinion that is part of the reason we insure, to save ourselves all the aggravation of chasing a 3rd - in this case unwilling - party for the costs.

 

[Ariadne]

If you are really going to go to town on this read no further than post #19, this is maritime law not land based law, it's a completely different animal. You have to put a lien on the boat, as it is the boat (it's owner(s) of the boat who are responsible) not the person in charge. This is why the Greeks always had multiple dead owners, people locked up, and other such dubious owners - the boat could still work and earn but no come backs on the owners.

Nail/tape a writ to the mast, the boat cannot then be moved without your permission, and (if I remember correctly) all debts are cleared. Forget the father, forget the son, you have to get the boat it is the only way; and quite an often used practice. A phone call to a marine law practice would probably put you right in no time for little or no fee, and even this fee is part of your costs.

 

[guernseyman]

I take it you haven't travelled to somewhere like Canary Wharf to pop in to see insurers then ?!

This is an annoying but relatively small matter, best sorted out between owners ( I bet the police would give a really thorough and helpful response to a £ 400 claim, ie barely looking up from the desk saying ' here's your crime number ' ) - if no luck, name and shame the Squib owner.

Why would I have anything to do with Canary Wharf?

I think the OP has been trying to explain repeatedly and at some length that he is having no success at sorting it out 'between owners', however desirable that would certainly be.

 

[sailorman]

If you are really going to go to town on this read no further than post #19, this is maritime law not land based law, it's a completely different animal. You have to put a lien on the boat, as it is the boat (it's owner(s) of the boat who are responsible) not the person in charge. This is why the Greeks always had multiple dead owners, people locked up, and other such dubious owners - the boat could still work and earn but no come backs on the owners.

Nail/tape a writ to the mast, the boat cannot then be moved without your permission, and (if I remember correctly) all debts are cleared. Forget the father, forget the son, you have to get the boat it is the only way; and quite an often used practice. A phone call to a marine law practice would probably put you right in no time for little or no fee, and even this fee is part of your costs.

Post 2 2nd line

 

[cliff]

Shi* happens.
From what you say, it's a small ding. Fill it with gelcoat and enjoy the rest of the season.
Get it fine-filled and polished out at the end of season.
The cost of pursuing it far outweighs the cost of fixing it.

Sorry about your boat and all that, and yes, it is annoying, but the main thing is to get it fixed and move on.

No way. Hang the little shitehawk out to dry if for no other reason to teach him he cannot go round damaging other people's property and get away with it. Next time it could be£000's rather than £00's of damage.

 

[photodog]

Post 2 2nd line

And post 19!

 

[lw395]

The hull was Awlgriped 3 yrs ago

That does not change much.
Just adds a coat or two of paint to the process.
Is this the only blemish on the hull after 3 years?

 

[lw395]

No way. Hang the little shitehawk out to dry if for no other reason to teach him he cannot go round damaging other people's property and get away with it. Next time it could be£000's rather than £00's of damage.

It would be nice to do that, but what have got?
An allegation from a third party?
How many hours is it going to take you to get a result, then you have more agro arranging a pro repair than doing it yourself.
It's not the culprit's boat, so it won't be his insurance that goes up.

 

[JSYmartini]

That does not change much.
Just adds a coat or two of paint to the process.
Is this the only blemish on the hull after 3 years?

It's extremely difficult if not impossible to touch in Awlgrip without it being noticeable according to my yard

 

[sailorman]

It's extremely difficult if not impossible to touch in Awlgrip without it being noticeable according to my yard

It can be done by a good operative

 

[lw395]

It's extremely difficult if not impossible to touch in Awlgrip without it being noticeable according to my yard

It is difficult, but that's not really the issue here. The other party's insurance are not going to pay for a complete repaint as a result of 2 square inches of damage.
In some people's view, 3 year old awlgrip is well into it's lifetime.
Is it really the only blemish on the boat?
It is a case of repairing it to an adequate standard, which may not be quite as good as on a new superyacht.
Very annoying, but pursuing some oik for £400 won't change much I suspect.
In boat insurance there is always a fair chance that you are insured with the same firm and they don't much care to put many hours of office time into a small claim.

Good luck if you can make it happen easily, but I'm just balancing the POV's on here.

 

[sailorman]

It is difficult, but that's not really the issue here. The other party's insurance are not going to pay for a complete repaint as a result of 2 square inches of damage.
In some people's view, 3 year old awlgrip is well into it's lifetime.
Is it really the only blemish on the boat?
It is a case of repairing it to an adequate standard, which may not be quite as good as on a new superyacht.
Very annoying, but pursuing some oik for £400 won't change much I suspect.
In boat insurance there is always a fair chance that you are insured with the same firm and they don't much care to put many hours of office time into a small claim.

Good luck if you can make it happen easily, but I'm just balancing the POV's on here.

You dont seem to have much knowledge of the life of Awlgrip G-Line

 

[lw395]

It's extremely difficult if not impossible to touch in Awlgrip without it being noticeable according to my yard

A quick look on their website shows they sell touch up kits.
So it's hardly impossible....

 

[Koeketiene]

Is it really the only blemish on the boat?

Yes, it is.
And even if it wasn't, that is not the issue.
More than the money, it has become a matter of principle to me. You are responsible for the consequences of your actions. This is what I've been thought and what I teach my kids. Sticking your fingers in your ears and hoping the other party goes away is not an option.
How would you feel if it was your boat and the damage was more substantial?

As for the marina not disclosing the contact details of the other party: I'm amazed - this lets anyone of the hook. What other options do I have, short of seizing the other party's boat?

Anyway, as a result of this thread I now have the name and e-mail address of the other party. I have contacted them in a final attempt to settle this amicably. Failing a satisfactory outcome I will name and shame and pursue this matter by any/all means possible.

 

[BrianH]

Yes, it is.
And even if it wasn't, that is not the issue.
More than the money, it has become a matter of principle to me. You are responsible for the consequences of your actions. This is what I've been thought and what I teach my kids. Sticking your fingers in your ears and hoping the other party goes away is not an option.

Completely agree, hang in there and keep us informed. Good luck.

 

[toad_oftoadhall]

I have contacted them in a final attempt to settle this amicably. Failing a satisfactory outcome I will name and shame and pursue this matter by any/all means possible.

FWIW I think this is the right course of action. Hope it all proceeds with minimum hassle.

 

[LionsDen]

Good luck and I hope you get paid out soon - on another matter if it is convenient for you I would take my business elsewhere when my berth is due for renewal

 

[macd]

I suspect the poster some way above who suggested that personal data may be disclosed (in this case by the marina) was mistaken in deriving that from data law exclusion provisions concerning crime and tax matters. But there is another class of exclusion (against the non-release of information):

Personal data is exempt from the non-disclosure provisions where the disclosure of the data is necessary:
for or in connection with any legal proceedings (including prospective legal proceedings);
for obtaining legal advice; or
for establishing, exercising or defending legal rights.

I'm no lawyer, but this would seem as though it might cover the OP's needs.
(see http://www.ico.org.uk/for_organisations/data_protection/the_guide/exemptions?

That being so, surely there are two reasons why an organisation might decline to furnish such information:
1. Ignorance of the detail of the law, and thus the application of a simplistic blanket 'non-disclosure' policy.
2. Whether though ignorance or not, sheer can't-be-botheredness with a dash of we're-in-charge.

This is clearly an issue potentially far bigger than the OP's modest claim, much though I sympathise with him. Marinas should have a policy which realistically addresses the needs of their customers whilst at the same time staying within the law. If they don't, surely it's incumbent upon those customers to press for one.