Dream yacht charters should accept libility.

[mjcoon]

Please feel free to move anchorage.

I think you missed the point entirely! Never mind...

 

[RupertW]

I not read the link , but a few things .
First it depend how much damage there is and how much excess you have , it may not be worth trying to claim from your insurance .

We been hit a few times by charter boats and we learned it not worth the stress trying to get money out of the charter company , they will try every thing not to pay ,
even tho they probably withholding the charter deposit to cover the damage to their bist.

The only time we did get a payment was from a UK charter company in Greece they where issued with a thread of court action which I was happy to carry it out from my solicitor,
they paid up.

Lastly
sorry diver 14u if you didn't have insurance I have no sympathy,
everyone should have insurance ! If you can afford a boat no matter the valve you can afford insurance and there no excuse.

I’m afraid I feel the same way. The menaces out there are boats without insurance.

 

[JumbleDuck]

@JumbleDuck you raise some valid points, but it is near impossible for a single-hander to get cover of any description. And if you can, it will have impractical limitations.

I have cover for single handed passages of up to 18 hours. My excess doubles to £400 if these are at night.

 

[Deleted member 478]

I think you missed the point entirely! Never mind...

Like wise. Would be happy to dissect this over a beer or ten.

 

[sailaboutvic]

I have cover for single handed passages of up to 18 hours. My excess doubles to £400 if these are at night.

My covers me for upto 250 nm off any European coast .
Although for the last 10 years the only solo sail I done is the odd week why my partner goes off to visit family .

 

[Dutch01527]

I thought that foam core water damage was a slow creeping process. Having a sale pending at the time of the accident which was lost because of the core damage seems strange. Maybe I am wrong.

Based on the facts shared I would say that the the OP is highly unlikely to get the repairs paid for because of lack of insurance / cost of legal proceedings. He is however likely to get sued for damages resulting from some of the statements being made in a public forum.

 

[sailaboutvic]

to get sued for damages resulting from some of the statements being made in a public forum.

i not troll around to other places he may had posted on the internet but as far as I can see there nothing written he that he could get sued for .
Charter company don't give a toss who they charter too as long as they got the charters credit card detail to cover damage to their own boat , that's all they care about .

 

[sailaboutvic]

If the charter boat dragged and happen to damage a CG boat I very much doubt the company be saying sue us to the CG , our lawyers with make mince meat out of your case .

 

[Sandy]

Yes, but try doing a passage longer than 36 hours.

I have unlimited single handed hours. It is from one of the major players. I suspect they will not do this for new business though.

 

[jordanbasset]

I thought that foam core water damage was a slow creeping process. Having a sale pending at the time of the accident which was lost because of the core damage seems strange. Maybe I am wrong.

Would be interesting to know the answer to this. If you do damage the hull, how long would it take for water ingress to do serious damage the foam core?

 

[Dutch01527]

i not troll around to other places he may had posted on the internet but as far as I can see there nothing written he that he could get sued for .
Charter company don't give a toss who they charter too as long as they got the charters credit card detail to cover damage to their own boat , that's all they care about .

I am not a legal expert and will happily defer to someone with greater knowledge but statements like “safety standards leave much to be desired” seems at risk of being libel to me. Not hard to argue that would create damage to a charter business if posted on a yachting forum.

 

[sailaboutvic]

I am not a legal expert and will happily defer to someone with greater knowledge but statements like “safety standards leave much to be desired” seems at risk of being libel to me. Not hard to argue that would create damage to a charter business if posted on a yachting forum.

It's the guy option, what's happen to free speech,
It also depend the out come of the boat that got caught fire .
The experience of the charters , if they had little or in some case none then there a big safety issues .
If the ground tackle wasn't man enough anchor safety issues .
Only the OP has the full facts .
And I doubt after what's happen DYCwill want this to go to court scary tackiest, we bigger then you ,
It don't alway work as one British charter company found when it was tried on us , although we did have plenty of witnesses and video shot supply by other cruisers and ours too was a anchor drag situation too .
No not our anchor .
Who dare some time wins .

All I say to the OP if you have witness and prove the other charter was libel, I would push it a bit more , for getting internet suport it won't mean a thing to DYC but a show that your willing to take it to court does .
On the other hand if it's only your word against the charter , pay for the work and get on with your life.

Plus please get insurance it's not fair on other cruisers that your not cover if you happen hit them .

 

[JumbleDuck]

My covers me for upto 250 nm off any European coast .
Although for the last 10 years the only solo sail I done is the odd week why my partner goes off to visit family .

Mine is just UK and Irish coastal, which I had extended - by asking, and at no extra cost - to cover the whole of the Irish Sea, including Manx waters.

 

[laika]

Yes, but try doing a passage longer than 36 hours.

Pantaenius may not be the cheapest but their policy is impressively no-BS. I have no particular desire to sail my boat long distances on my own but there's no mention of single-handing restrictions in the policy and the FAQ on their website says this:

Single handed sailing is not excluded as standard under the policy terms and conditions. However, for ocean passages you will need to contact us to discuss your crewing arrangements. Underwriters will need to approve these, for cover to remain in place for your passage.

 

[siwhi]

I have some sympathy for the OP. Charter boats are often under-specced on the anchor, and the scope. Some charter boats have just 30 metres of scope. This, combined with some howlers with inexperienced crew anchoring frequently lead to incidents. Having no insurance does not mean it's open season to cause damage without any responsibility. Proving fault is challenging, but talking to the legal team in HQ may be a better bet than the operations manager whose job is to obfuscate.

 

[Skellum]

I am not a legal expert and will happily defer to someone with greater knowledge but statements like “safety standards leave much to be desired” seems at risk of being libel to me. Not hard to argue that would create damage to a charter business if posted on a yachting forum.

The charter company is obliged to ensure that the. Boats that they operate comply with all local safety regulations or they are breaking the law. They need to Maintain it between charters and to ensure that charterers are properly briefed to operate the boat. Their insurers will also insist that the charterer has an apropriate skippers license . If these requirements have been fulfilled I can't see how the OP can justify a claim that the charter company's safety standards are lacking.

On the basis that the OP is stating that the boat was "his home" I am staggered that he didn't have it properly insured.

Sorry to be so blunt.

 

[sailaboutvic]

I like to ask the OP why didn't you just ask the charter company for their insurance detail or did you and they wouldn't pass them over ?

When we had our problem like the OP first the charters company was very nice about it and in our first telephone conversation they just said to get a estimate for what needs to be then ,
Then next conversation was the charters return and said it wasn't their fault and they wasnt libel even tho we had witnesses and two video what had happened, to top that the charter told the company in front of us on the phone that they where at fault.
Only after my solicitor got involved did they offer their insurance details .
Next thing we knew they offered to pay for all the damages .

The problem here that I see the OP didn't have insurance , if he did he could had just pass it over to his insurance and let them deal with it , I guess the charter company must had known this why they dug their heels in .

I don't except that the charter company isn't libel or at the very less their charter client ,
if some one hit you up the back side in a hire car , some one libel.

 

[grandpaboat]

But YM of "November 2020" page 20 asserts that maritime law holds that the first vessel to anchor in an anchorage "sets a precedent". I don't say I agree; it might be a bad precedent that it would be reprehensible to follow...

Haven't got around to reading mine yet.

 

[mjcoon]

I like to ask the OP why didn't you just ask the charter company for their insurance detail or did you and they wouldn't pass them over ?

When we had our problem like the OP first the charters company was very nice about it and in our first telephone conversation they just said to get a estimate for what needs to be then ,
Then next conversation was the charters return and said it wasn't their fault and they wasnt libel even tho we had witnesses and two video what had happened, to top that the charter told the company in front of us on the phone that they where at fault.
Only after my solicitor got involved did they offer their insurance details .
Next thing we knew they offered to pay for all the damages .

The problem here that I see the OP didn't have insurance , if he did he could had just pass it over to his insurance and let them deal with it , I guess the charter company must had known this why they dug their heels in .

I don't except that the charter company isn't libel or at the very less their charter client ,
if some one hit you up the back side in a hire car , some one libel.

Unfortunately the comment by Dutch01527 that you replied to was using the word "libel" to mean "libel", not "liable". That must be the problem with writing so much when dyslexic...

 

[johnalison]

I like to ask the OP why didn't you just ask the charter company for their insurance detail or did you and they wouldn't pass them over ?

When we had our problem like the OP first the charters company was very nice about it and in our first telephone conversation they just said to get a estimate for what needs to be then ,
Then next conversation was the charters return and said it wasn't their fault and they wasnt libel even tho we had witnesses and two video what had happened, to top that the charter told the company in front of us on the phone that they where at fault.
Only after my solicitor got involved did they offer their insurance details .
Next thing we knew they offered to pay for all the damages .

The problem here that I see the OP didn't have insurance , if he did he could had just pass it over to his insurance and let them deal with it , I guess the charter company must had known this why they dug their heels in .

I don't except that the charter company isn't libel or at the very less their charter client ,
if some one hit you up the back side in a hire car , some one libel.

My totally non-legal view is that the company is unlikely to be liable, although it could be if either the boat had known defects in equipment or if it were chartered to someone who was known to be either incompetent or with insufficient experience for the boat or cruising area. I wouldn't rule out the first, but it would be very hard to prove, which leaves the OP with only the options of indulging in the possibly ruinous expense of taking legal action or licking his wounds and contemplating the folly of not insuring something that it was not within his means to cover himself. If he means that he was sailing without third party insurance, then what little sympathy I may have shown disappears and I hope never to sail in the same waters.