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

[toad_oftoadhall]

It's actually a hit and run. Similar to a car in a parking lot.

It's not covered by the Road Traffic Act, if that's what you mean. Are you suggesting there's a duty to report a collision in a Squib? What law requires this? MSA? Please cite.

The boat owner is liable.

Why?

Pity son could get criminal record.for 400.

What crime do you think the Son has committed?

It's not theft cos there was no "intention of permanently depriving".
It's not criminal damage because there was no intent.
It's not failure to stop/reoprt because that's in the RTA.

What do you have in mind?

 

[FishyInverness]

Toad's completely right. Unfortunately Uricane, the legislation you'd be expecting the police to act on doesn't apply in this case. Take this to the police and the response will be "This is a civil matter", and it is, there was no proveable criminal intent. You can't apply the principles of the Road Traffic Act.

However, the "lien" approach intrigues me, is this really possible and legislated for? That, upon knowing a vessel has damaged yours, you can secure it and refuse it to leave without permission? Seems scarily archaic....

 

[prv]

However, the "lien" approach intrigues me, is this really possible and legislated for? That, upon knowing a vessel has damaged yours, you can secure it and refuse it to leave without permission? Seems scarily archaic....

I believe so. I read an article by a maritime law firm a while back, which was about unpaid marina fees, but I think some of the principles may be similar. It mentioned padlocking the offending boat to the berth, as a thing of special legal significance rather than a practical step. The owner could trivially cut the padlock, but he'd then be in deep poo with the Admiralty Courts.

Pete

 

[macd]

What crime do you think the Son has committed?

It's not criminal damage because there was no intent.

FWIW you don't need intent to establish a case of criminal damage. Recklessness will suffice (not that that would necessarily be easy to establish). But in every other respect, you're spot-on.

 

[Mariner69]

However, the "lien" approach intrigues me, is this really possible and legislated for? That, upon knowing a vessel has damaged yours, you can secure it and refuse it to leave without permission? Seems scarily archaic....

If I recall correctly the Merchant Shipping Act 1894 and subsequent law has quite a bit on this subject. Ideal bed time reading.

 

[Uricanejack]

It's not covered by the Road Traffic Act, if that's what you mean. Are you suggesting there's a duty to report a collision in a Squib? What law requires this? MSA? Please cite.



Why?



What crime do you think the Son has committed?

It's not theft cos there was no "intention of permanently depriving".
It's not criminal damage because there was no intent.
It's not failure to stop/reoprt because that's in the RTA.

What do you have in mind?

Note. I said simmilar to not the same as a car in a parking lot.
The road trafic acts laws ecetera have no relevance.

A later post mentions the 1894 merchantc shipping act.
The Merchant shipping act has been updated many times since 1894 the moat recent incarnation I am not familliar with..

I have no idea what a squb is other than a non magical carecter in harry potter.

If a Squib is capabale of being used for transportation on water it is a vessel. If it is a vessel the Master and Owner are liable.
this goes back to emglish common law.
precedemts set in court.
and by statute in the various incarnations of the merchant shipping act.

Quite simple the master of any vessel involved in a colision. is obliged to contact the other vessel, and after ensuring the safty of his own vessel. enquire if asistance is required. offer asistance, exchange information regarding name registery ownership insurance.
failure to do so is a criminal offence.
the fact the other vessel was tied to a dock and nobody was on board does not relieve the master of this requirment..
Taking a vesel without permision is also an offence. again this goes back to common law its just a nicer way of saying stole.
to be the Master of a vessel one does not require the 4 gold bars of a naval officer or any certification.

The "Master" is the person in charge of the vessel. if there is doubt as to who is in charge.
One mearly has to be ocupying the seat by the wheel in the case of a small vessel.

 

[Ariadne]

You know, for a boating forum an awful lot of you guys still think that Criminal law, civil law and maritime law are the same thing.! they are not, anything that deals with boats in harbors, at anchor, tied to a dock, making passage is covered by maritime law. Going to yourlocal copper may help but they aint really equipped or have the knowledge to deal with it.

You should always seek legal advice from law firm specializing in Maritime law.

Yes chaining a boat to the dock is draconian, but it is legal and happens more often than you'd think. Most shipping owners, operators, companies have their morals set around 1600 AD; if they have any moral at all!

 

[toad_oftoadhall]

FWIW you don't need intent to establish a case of criminal damage. Recklessness will suffice

Thanks for pointing that out, just had a look to check and it's spot on.

 

[toad_oftoadhall]

It's not covered by the Road Traffic Act, if that's what you mean. Are you suggesting there's a duty to report a collision in a Squib? What law requires this? MSA? Please cite.

Why?

What crime do you think the Son has committed?

It's not theft cos there was no "intention of permanently depriving".
It's not criminal damage because there was no intent.
It's not failure to stop/reoprt because that's in the RTA.

What do you have in mind?

A later post mentions the 1894 merchantc shipping act.
The Merchant shipping act has been updated many times since 1894 the moat recent incarnation I am not familliar with..

I have no idea what a squb is other than a non magical carecter in harry potter.

If a Squib is capabale of being used for transportation on water it is a vessel. If it is a vessel the Master and Owner are liable.
this goes back to emglish common law.
precedemts set in court.
and by statute in the various incarnations of the merchant shipping act.

Quite simple the master of any vessel involved in a colision. is obliged to contact the other vessel, and after ensuring the safty of his own vessel. enquire if asistance is required. offer asistance, exchange information regarding name registery ownership insurance.
failure to do so is a criminal offence.
the fact the other vessel was tied to a dock and nobody was on board does not relieve the master of this requirment..
Taking a vesel without permision is also an offence. again this goes back to common law its just a nicer way of saying stole.
to be the Master of a vessel one does not require the 4 gold bars of a naval officer or any certification.

The "Master" is the person in charge of the vessel. if there is doubt as to who is in charge.
One mearly has to be ocupying the seat by the wheel in the case of a small vessel.

You haven't answered either of my questions.

1) Why is the owner liable?
2) What crime are you saying the Son has committed?

 

[FishyInverness]

You know, for a boating forum an awful lot of you guys still think that Criminal law, civil law and maritime law are the same thing.! they are not, anything that deals with boats in harbors, at anchor, tied to a dock, making passage is covered by maritime law. Going to yourlocal copper may help but they aint really equipped or have the knowledge to deal with it.

Spot on...

 

[Daedelus]

Marinas are nuts about this: I accidentally did some small damage to the next door boat and wanted the owners details to apologise and pay for the repair. The marina refused point blank to pass it on and eventually agreed to pass on the message.

In spite of repeated attempts I heard nothing from the owner and the marina refused to let me have any details. I still feel embarrassed about it but the original owner has since sold the boat and it has gone.


PS I am not around 21 and the boat is not a squib - thoughht I ought to make that clear!

 

[DAKA]

Good advice.
Boat owner is indeed a HPYC member.
Found owners name on the HPYC 2013 Squib Races result table.
Any HPYC member willing to help me obtain the address?

You're half way there now.
Once you have his address issue small claims court proceedings against the owner.

Let's see if he is prepared to state in court his son took the boat without consent.

The 1968 theft act was amended to make it easier to prosecute joy riders , significantly widened to include ANY CONVEYANCE ( JCB, dumper , BOAT etc)

 

[toad_oftoadhall]

The 1968 theft act was amended to make it easier to prosecute joy riders , significantly widened to include ANY CONVEYANCE ( JCB, dumper , BOAT etc)

Well spotted, but it also says:

"A person does not commit an offence under this section by anything done in the belief that he has lawful authority to do it or that he would have the owner’s consent if the owner knew of his doing it and the circumstances of it."

Hard to imagine the father saying anything other than "I would have allowed this had I known.".

So deffo not theft.

 

[doris]

Fascinating

This is the most interesting thread we have had for ages. Am enjoying it hugely but sadly have little to contribute, not that such an impediment stops some chaps.
Please do not let it fade away without a conclusion. The media always do this, tittilate with the opening story and never give us the conclusion.
OP! Please keep us informed.

 

[Seajet]

This is the most interesting thread we have had for ages. Am enjoying it hugely but sadly have little to contribute, not that such an impediment stops some chaps.
Please do not let it fade away without a conclusion. The media always do this, tittilate with the opening story and never give us the conclusion.
OP! Please keep us informed.

Breaking news;

Squib owner believed destroyed in Tomahawk missile attack ordered by President Obama B.

Boat is safe.

 

[doris]

Breaking news;

Squib owner believed destroyed in Tomahawk missile attack ordered by President Obama B.

Boat is safe.

Always thought these fancy boat paints were chemical weapons in disguise. Then maybe an Andeson 22 is really a WMD

 

[doris]

If the scoundrel's address has been established can we all buy tickets for when you pop round with some heavies. I am sure some of the more traditional forumites have a few surplus belaying pins.

 

[Koeketiene]

Final outcome

Shortly after I started this thread the other party made contact after having been made aware of the thread.
Details were exchanged and contact with the insurance made.
Boat spent the last 10 days in the boatyard and she's been restored to her former glory.

All's well that ends well.

 

[Leighb]

Glad to hear of a happy outcome, well done.