Adetheheat
Member
What is the drink drive limit on a boat in the uk? I think i read it's lower than a car?
Drink drive limit on boats in uk
- Thread starter Adetheheat
- Start date
Tranona
Well-known member
There isn't one. There is no formal offence of drunk in charge of a boat in the same way as a car. It does not mean you cannot be prosecuted while being drunk in charge, but it is brought under either maritime law or by local authorities such as harbour boards.
You cannot be stopped and breathalysed, although in the event of committing another offence having excess alcohol may be taken into account.
Making it a statutory offence was considered a number of times but rejected on the basis of lack of evidence that it was an issue that required discrete legislation plus the difficulties of defining those to which it would apply plus how and by whom it be enforced.
You cannot be stopped and breathalysed, although in the event of committing another offence having excess alcohol may be taken into account.
Making it a statutory offence was considered a number of times but rejected on the basis of lack of evidence that it was an issue that required discrete legislation plus the difficulties of defining those to which it would apply plus how and by whom it be enforced.
awol
Well-known member
3.1.2 The prescribed limits under the Railways and Safety Act 2003 for mariners are:
Breath - 25 microgrammes of alcohol in 100 millilitres of breath
Blood - 50 milligrammes of alcohol in 100 millilitres of blood
Urine – 67 milligrammes of alcohol in 100 millilitres of urine.
Only applicable to professional seafarers (at the moment) but could be extended by a signature from the relevant Secretary of State.
Breath - 25 microgrammes of alcohol in 100 millilitres of breath
Blood - 50 milligrammes of alcohol in 100 millilitres of blood
Urine – 67 milligrammes of alcohol in 100 millilitres of urine.
Only applicable to professional seafarers (at the moment) but could be extended by a signature from the relevant Secretary of State.
Bobc
Well-known member
There is one on the Thames isn't there?
Baggywrinkle
Well-known member
I think this plays into the difficulty of enforcement on a private pleasure craft with a mixture of sailors and passengers on board.
Professional seafarers, regardless of position on the ship are either on or off duty .... and this info is logged AFAIK ... so anyone on duty and over the limit can be tested and prosecuted.
On your average weekend cruise you have a mix of sailors, kids and passengers ... there is no formal record of who is in charge, there is nothing to stop a 16 year old steering, and even that would be difficult to prove if the boat had more than one helm position - even worse if it was on autopilot. Very difficult to prove who is actually in charge so who do you breathalyse and prosecute?
"Shorry ossifer, I'm not in charge, I'm juss enjoying the view, my shun, Kevin's in charge today ..... heesh on the flybridge".
Kevin ... on the flybridge ...
... wot??
Refueler
Well-known member
Its a situation that was solved many years ago - but the wannabees always want something specific to their cause. If they got their way and specific Boating / Drink laws were enacted - they'd probably then want to classify the boats for limits !!
For many years you could be prosecuted for drunk in charge of Horse / Bicycle / Boat / Lawn Mower in fact literally anything - if it was shown that you were a hazard or caused / cause for concern.
The problem is / was - determining the law to prosecute by ... HM's have had the possibility for many decades to call in suitable Law Officers to lead to prosecution. But the practicality of it outweighs the means to action. Unless person is blind uncontrallably drunk - its a difficult matter.
Before I left UK - I can remember long discussions RYA and others about it ... and the consensus was to apply road Vehicle or the R&SA ... even before the 2003 act. Again the practicality of it.
I am sure someone will argue with the above ... but I was on a Committee back in early 90's on this ....
Over here in Latvia - we do have specific Legislation with same limit as driving a car ... basically one small light beer or small glass of wine. The Border Guards along with Police cover this and carry requisite Breath Kits.
For many years you could be prosecuted for drunk in charge of Horse / Bicycle / Boat / Lawn Mower in fact literally anything - if it was shown that you were a hazard or caused / cause for concern.
The problem is / was - determining the law to prosecute by ... HM's have had the possibility for many decades to call in suitable Law Officers to lead to prosecution. But the practicality of it outweighs the means to action. Unless person is blind uncontrallably drunk - its a difficult matter.
Before I left UK - I can remember long discussions RYA and others about it ... and the consensus was to apply road Vehicle or the R&SA ... even before the 2003 act. Again the practicality of it.
I am sure someone will argue with the above ... but I was on a Committee back in early 90's on this ....
Over here in Latvia - we do have specific Legislation with same limit as driving a car ... basically one small light beer or small glass of wine. The Border Guards along with Police cover this and carry requisite Breath Kits.
Refueler
Well-known member
That scenario is what had me in and out court over here fighting a wrongful conviction for DIC of my boat. My nephew was actually in charge at the time ... but Latvian police ignored that and prosecuted me as Owner ...
They refused to let us continue until I made a breath test.
The test was made but they withheld the test copy. Only one test made.
We were made to moor the boat - which my nephew did in front of them in their RIB.
I called my contact in the Border Guards - (2nd in Command of the region) - he came on the BG Cutter to try reason with Police - who refused.
Once moored I was bundled into back of Police Van and carted of to Hospital for blood test which I refused. BG pal explained that if I agreed to Test - then that would be me agreeing Police were right.
I was given a 40 Lat bill - which I gave to the Police ! Even though no test made.
Off to Police station and questioned without interpreter - this is against not only EU rules but Latvian as well.
Evidence Sheet (Protocol) was written by Police Sargeant - which was translated to me by my BG pal ... (he cannot be official translator) - Protocol was complete fabrication.
I refused to sign.
Protocol was taken away and a second one was made. This time my Nephew was mentioned ... but still not correct overall. I refused to sign. BOTH protocols disappeared ...
By now - I've been there all night.
I'm released and go home.
That day - my Nephew is interviewed by Police - he's a minor and should be with adult present - which they failed to do. But he supports that he was in control of the boat ...
This statement NEVER makes it to Court.
1 week later called to Chief of Police for summary of conviction. Because I refused Hospital Test - I am automatically guilty. 400 Lat fine .. Latvian Licence suspended 3 years. I of course refuse. I have option for Court - which I choose.
I'm expecting all docs .. protocols - statements etc to be made available .. Ha !! Nothing !!
1st court - 5 minutes - Police Decision upheld.
2nd Courst - 15 minutes - Police Decision upheld.
3rd Court - (i'm starting to get used to the system !!) ... we actually have a proper session.
I have Lawyer - useless !! All he wants to do is fight based on lack of translator. We'd tried that in 2 prev courts. I tell him to sit and let me deal.
Witnesses are there from the boat detailing the whole affair. Down even to the Police action on the RIB.
Then its Police Rep turn ... he stands up and says he has a video of me driving the boat. Judge asks if I know about this - obviously I don't - so I ask if such video will be shown in court. I ask that it be shown - 1. to ascertain when it was recorded .. 2. where it was recorded ... as legally the time and place of offence dictates validity. Court agreed and asked Police to produce.
The reply was unbelievable .... Police Rep stated clearly that they could not find the video !
I replied to court that in that case how can they accept as evidence - particularly that I know the river to extent of having charted it for use on GPS plotters .. that the time and place of alleged offence would need a farm tractor to get to bank to make any video ... that no video was made by Police in the RIB ...
That in fact the two Police persons in the RIB were not even licenced to man the RIB according to Latvian Law - that the official operator stayed at home !
2 weeks later I receive verdict in the mail ... Guilty as charged. My witnesses are stated as 'biased to support' .. Police Video has not been found but believed to exist.
I refuse the verdict and wait. Nothing.
Later I go to complete annual Technical Inspection on the car ... inspection refused unless I clear a debt showing on official records : 400 Lats Fine from the boat !!
They got me in the end ...
If you think my story is bad enough ... you should look up the story of the International Powerboat Championship in Riga a few years ago - where the Champion was arrested and beaten up in jail ... all he was doing was sitting in the wall looking out at the river after the celebration party at finish of the Championship races.
oldgit
Well-known member
Baggywrinkle
Well-known member
Looks like the Latvian authorities don't apply the same standards of proof or legal scrutiny as some other EU countries. Seems like an awful lot of wasted time for a €600 fine.
jamie N
Well-known member
I think I saw the argument here of, "What if, you've had a hard days sailing, and you tie-up on a pontoon/anchor, and you crack open a few grogs to unwind. The situation then changes for whatever reason, so that you feel that there's a situation which requires you moving your boat, or your anchor's dragging; but you've had a hard evening of relaxation.....?". Move and be prosecuted, or stay and drag into danger, requiring rescue yourself?
ylop
Well-known member
Well, that scenario presents itself to the professional mariner who does face limits. To a lesser extent it also presents itself to the rest of us who depending on how many “grogs” may also be affected in our judgement or abilities if we do have to move the boat. We could still fall foul of the Merchant Shipping Act if your grogs make you do something dangerous. I’m not an advocate for “no drinking” but if you are the skipper it carries some responsibilities and you need to work out how to balance them.
fisherman
Well-known member
In boats all my life, last one 26 years in the same port. I would tie up for an hour waiting for tide to go inside, and have a pint. Real problems handling the boat, heaven knows what it would be like if I was pissed.
Adetheheat
Member
Searching on the web says there are limits for professional mariners as mentioned earlier.
Tranona
Well-known member
The last time the Secretary of State tried to introduce the regulations necessary to extend to non professionals it fizzled out for the reasons I mentioned. I remember him having difficulty in presenting any reliable data to show that it was a "problem" but the main reasons for it going nowhere was the difficulty in writing clear regulations and a means of enforcing them.
johnalison
Well-known member
All that we wish for is that the waters should as as safe as we can reasonably hope for. On the roads, a driver over the limit has a chance of being pulled in and tested, not a large chance perhaps, but one that a pub drinker takes into account. This makes a set limit fairly effective and has certainly changed many people's habits. On the water, there is no system now or likely to happen for such checks, and a new law would be pretty pointless. All that is necessary is more or less what currently happens, in that in the event of a serious accident the alcohol consumed is taken into account. It may be that more weight should be put on this, but I don't see that an ineffective law that might penalise the innocent or by its excessive demands spoil harmless behaviour would contribute to our safety.
wonkywinch
Well-known member
I retired from the aviation industry where there are stricter rules, random testing, peer pressure/support etc.
My view re leisure boating is that if anything should happen and you were breathalysed/tested then even that half of shandy three hours ago could be portrayed in court as "under the influence". The fact you were half/quarter or any fraction of a published limit would not matter in the hands of an aggressive prosecutor.
ylop
Well-known member
Half a shandy three hours ago is likely a zero reading (certainly by the time someone gets to you and you get breathalysed with an evidential quality machine!) but ignoring that I’m pretty confident that no prosecutor would raise that because the defence would call expert witness evidence that makes clear it would have naff all effect. Moreover, if for some reason you’ve come to a prosecutor’s attention for your boating actions, there’s already some actual evidence of a real problem.
William_H
Well-known member
Here in West Oz there are definite moves towards drink driving on water. https://www.transport.wa.gov.au/imarine/drugsandalcohol.asp
This after several deaths from obvious dangerous driving of small mobo with alcohol a factor. (Collisions) I don't know how they will determine who is in charge. Obvious for a small mobo (person at the wheel) but the requirement for a Recreational Skipper's Ticket means only those with RST can be in charge. (if not the owner)
In reality it would be hard to say if owner is on board, he is not in charge. ol'will
This after several deaths from obvious dangerous driving of small mobo with alcohol a factor. (Collisions) I don't know how they will determine who is in charge. Obvious for a small mobo (person at the wheel) but the requirement for a Recreational Skipper's Ticket means only those with RST can be in charge. (if not the owner)
In reality it would be hard to say if owner is on board, he is not in charge. ol'will
ylop
Well-known member
All the cases that spring to mind in the U.K. were for me were high powered boats, or people in tenders.
It’s not a unique problem to boats. Determining the controlling mind is something courts do regularly.
I think it would need to be broad enough to consider a competent person (who is intoxicated) supervising an unqualified or inexperienced one who is sober.
I agree, but many boats are owned by couples etc. and is the owner still in charge of he’s inexperienced but brought his vastly more experienced friend along to guide him? A matter for the court to determine - but in the U.K. virtually irrelevant (even if we had a law) as except in some specific hot spots you are very unlikely to ever see a civilian cop on a boat.
