Drink Driving Boats & the RYA

T

TheBoatman

Well-Known Member
Joined
12 Nov 2002
Messages
3,168
Location
Kent
Visit site
Got the RYA mag today and read with some interest the article on DD boats.

I'm fundamentally against anyone being in charge of a boat whilst under the influence but the RYA made some very good points which given this governments record would be a concern to me if the "law" was enforced to the letter.

I may have misunderstood but I was always lead to believe that the vessel had to be "underway" or "navigating" for the laws to apply - it now appears that those laws maybe back doored by the EU!

The RYA's position seems to be that they fear that HMG will try test cases out to see how far they can go to establish the boundaries. I.E "helping to navigate the boat could be someone that has been asked to grind a winch or sit on the weather rail because this aids "navigation".

Over the past 10-11 years I have always held my hand up to drive my clubs trot boat on an open cruiser racing event - these are boats that start from another club and race in the Thames Estuary for 50+ Nm's, then arrive with us. By midnight most of the racing crews have had the odd libation (or 6) over the limit, I then take them back to their boats - if I ask some of them to move to the other side of the boat to trim it or if one of them picks up a line ready to make fast when we come alongside - as skipper of the boat could I be prosecuted under the DD laws, even though I haven't had a drop?

The implications for sailing in general and racing especially are enormous.

Peter.
 
Laws are only of any good, or bad, if there is someone there to enforce them. There was a hooha on the Beeb about the town with no traffic wardens, so people parked where they liked without getting prosecuted (until the cameras turned up). In practice you'd only be up before the beak if there was an accident that involved the police. And then only if they breathalysed your passengers. The implications are, IMHO, more molehill sized and if I were you, I'd carry on as normal.
 
Just a thought. Given that lifeboat cox's can be called out any time day or night, will they all have to take the pledge if and when the new regulations happen ?
 
[ QUOTE ]
Laws are only of any good, or bad, if there is someone there to enforce them

[/ QUOTE ] sorry - going to disagree.

Their (laws) very existence influences behaviour; for every idiot parking in that town on the TV many wouldn't break 'the law'.

As such it is important that laws reflect the practical world and that 'dammed if you do, dammed if you don't' situations are not created by legislation.
 
Here's a wonderfully balanced carefully thought out opinion.

There are way way way too many laws and too many idiots who want more laws. Bloody crying shame :-)

There you go. Impulse post, and I don't believe I'm wrong. Though I suppose I should argue all my reasons now shouldn't I :-). Had too few hours kip this week, day off and feeling like well, posting crap like this I guess.
 
[ QUOTE ]
Their (laws) very existence influences behaviour; for every idiot parking in that town on the TV many wouldn't break 'the law'.

[/ QUOTE ]

Well I agree up to a point, but only because people knew the situation couldn't last. I used to live in the country up in West Sussex where there were yellow lines outside the local shop, and never ever were they enforced. There were always cars parked on them, even though they were put there for safety reasons. If a law is sensible and enforced, at least partially, then a lot of people will obey it but if it is neither -and I'm sure we can all think of a few - then it will be universally ignored.
 
[ QUOTE ]
If a law is sensible and enforced, at least partially, then a lot of people will obey it but if it is neither -and I'm sure we can all think of a few - then it will be universally ignored.


[/ QUOTE ] can we agree that both a laws sensibility and it's enforcement have influence on an individuals response to it?

It is nearly Christmas after all............. /forums/images/graemlins/laugh.gif
 
Bill
I presume that is why they have asst cox'ns at all stations.

To quote just one small piece from the article

[ QUOTE ]

At one stage the government was considering taking the person off a vessel at sea, by helicopter if necessary, in order to breathalyse them ashore when the police arrived. The consequences for the crew left on board were not even considered.
[end quote]

Can you imagine the implications that would have should it "come to pass"!!!!

Husbands/wives could suddenly find themselves single-handed, inexperienced crews could find themselves without any experienced person on board to either run or safely navigate the boat. The scenario's are endless but all doom ridden.

I agree that trying to enforce the laws would be difficult "in the beginning" but once the authorities learn that there's big money to be made from the hefty fines that can be imposed - We may well see a different attitude or approach by the authorities on the subject.

Peter.
 
They'd never do that.....

Just ask them to sign a piece of paper before they lifted you confirming that they understood that they were leaving a boat afloat at sea without a 'competent navigator' or helm aboard, and that they accepted responsibility for any subsequent loss of life or assets, and they'd back down faster than a welsh sheep......
 
Neil
I hope you're right and I would assume you are.

BUT

How many people would have guessed, say 5 years ago, that picking up a piece of paper and placing it in a bin could earn you a criminal record and a fine?

Peter.
 
I think I must have missed something. Are people suggesting thats its ok if the skipper and only person able to navigate/ sail the boat is impaired by alcohol because otherwise everybody would be in trouble if he was nicked???

I'll try that after few xmas drinks with the kids in the car on the M1. Sorry officer I can't leave them here and must drive them home?

I don't agree with the skipper drinking and sailing, especially if responsible for other people's lives. If you want more than a beer don't skipper the boat or expect to be responsible for the people on it.

Out of interest a sobering thought. I took a straw pole around the office on drunk crew. As a PI lawyer I think we agree that if a skipper let a member of crew get so drunk he then was injured/drowned we would probably have a viable claim (I'm not saying morally) against the skipper. You probably wouldn't be insured if you were over the drink limit yourself. We would probably go for your boat and house as your main assets.
 
[ QUOTE ]
Are people suggesting thats its ok if the skipper and only person able to navigate/ sail the boat is impaired by alcohol because otherwise everybody would be in trouble if he was nicked???


[/ QUOTE ]

no - read it all again
 
[ QUOTE ]
As a PI lawyer I think we agree that if a skipper let a member of crew get so drunk he then was injured/drowned we would probably have a viable claim (I'm not saying morally) against the skipper

[/ QUOTE ] presumably you are making a fortune against bar staff and licenced premisies who are not only 'permitting it' but 'actively encouraging it' by serving alchol at all and 'not preventing it' by not taking adaquate steps to ensure it is not happening on thier premises - the incidence of licensed premises having any active steps to monitor and prevent this is incredibly small outwith major city centre premises.

I think the phrase drunk 'crew' is also inapproapriate - 'crew' implies someone with a task or responsibility (even if not a legally defined one).

Extending this logically any skipper taking any person onboard without insisting on a lifejacket, remaining in the cockpit, etc etc is potentially open to you sueing............great..................
 
[ QUOTE ]
Just a thought. Given that lifeboat cox's can be called out any time day or night, will they all have to take the pledge if and when the new regulations happen ?

[/ QUOTE ]
I'm a coastguard, and the duty man on the rota can't be drinking anyway as he/she will have to drive the CG truck, and quite possibly drive to the station first. When they want the whole team out, if an individual has had one too many, then they will put up their hand and say 'sorry, can't turn out'. Normal procedure. It's going to be the same on the lifeboat, I'm sure.
 
Well yes, the first bit and the bit you quote was in reference to Theboatmans quote out of the magazine article and the second bit referred to comments about drunk crew helping out on deck. My point was that even if a journalist and some posters thinks its is crazy to prosecute a skipper for letting someone be on the rail/grinding a winch after 6 pints, my opinion is that if they fall over the side or are brained by the mainsheet block you or your insurers will be putting their hand in their pocket.
 
Well you might be astounded, shocked, outraged even to know, that you can be prosecuted for serving alcohol to someone who is obviously drunk. I think this law has been around since the 1800's.

This quote came from The Publican Top tips
"Don’t assume the customer had had too much to drink and this was the reason for their accident as you could find yourself having to answer for the offence of serving alcohol to someone who was or appeared to be drunk"

The main difference between a skipper and a barman is that you as skipper are responsible for the vessel and the safety of everybody on it.

If a crew member on your boat, drank your booze and suffered a spinal injury/brain injury after falling over-board or being brained by the boom when you told him sit on the lea rail, grind a winch, then yes I would have no problem suing you to pay for his 24 hour care, support his wife & kids.

IMHO, without trying to be mercenary about it if you don't trust the people you take out, or can't control what they are putting away then you shouldn't be taking them out in the first place.
 
not at all surprised re the barman - only about prosecutions..........?

[ QUOTE ]
The main difference between a skipper and a barman is that you as skipper are responsible for the vessel and the safety of everybody on it.


[/ QUOTE ]

yes but where do 'knowingly' and 'refusal/failure to comply with (reasonable) instructions come into it and where, if at all, does the law differentiate between the duty of care of a comercial or professional and the leisure environment..................
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

Other threads that may be of interest

W
Downsizing to your boat.
2
Replies
28
Views
743
Wansworth
W

Share this page

Top