Expensive mistake

[Major Catastrophe]

[ QUOTE ]
There have been a couple of cases if I remember correctly one where a motor boat entered Dover or Folksstone and did not respond to repeated radio calls (His radio was probably not switched on) y he was fined about £10k as well.

[/ QUOTE ]

Are you saying he was fined £10,000 for NOT answering the radio? It is not compulsory to have a radio, so I can see a potentially huge revenue stream here.

 

[LymingtonPugwash]

[ QUOTE ]
James Jermain is quite correct.

There have been a couple of cases if I remember correctly one where a motor boat entered Dover or Folksstone and did not respond to repeated radio calls (His radio was probably not switched on) y he was fined about £10k as well. Then there was a skipper of a scool boat traveling the wrong way down a TSS on the French side who was fined a similar amount.

It seems that the courts use a little black book cointaining recommended tarrifs for offences and it is quite clear that the fines are compleatly out of proportion to the offence. What I am amazed at is that I can't see that anyone has appealed the level of the fines.

[/ QUOTE ]

Thanks for this Tosca.... my question at the start was not based on whether the chap could afford 10k or whether he was sailing a 70 footer or 20 footer, but I was really asking whether there was a precedent for such a large fine and if so, then is it something which happens to private boats regularly?

According to Tosca, it seems there have been a number of incidents with small boats previously where the fine has been similar..... though I must agree with the general opinion that it really does seem to be out of all proportion to other more regular misdemenour committed ashore! /forums/images/graemlins/frown.gif

 

[deep denial]

[ QUOTE ]
take your point about disproporitionate fines compared to motoring offences. However the fine is not as disastrous as the potential outcome of drifting into a TSS without paying attention to the boat's position.

[/ QUOTE ]
What disastrous consequence? It seems to me that the safest place to cross is through a TSS, where you know where the ships are coming from, and that they won't change course. Elsewhere you still have the same number of ships to negociate, but they could be all over. Surely the TSS is primarily to regulate up/down channel shippinig movements, and the suggestion for yachts to avoid the TSS is ill thought out?

 

[Blueboatman]

Ok
The implications on a practical level are that you stay out of the zones,quite common sense of course,the Dover straits being as busy as they are and Dover harbour entrance being used by tightly scheduled fast operators....
NEVERTHELESS when the precious lecky goes down(say a cooked impellor is all it needs) and the radar, ais ,vhf and gps are no longer available your plotted circle of error regarding where you are gets interesting,no?
Or a vigorous fast moving low storms up the Channel,so in murkyvis,tired cold and wet as you are,and irrespective of the tidal situation vis a vis the wind you go on the wrong tack at your very expensive peril,....now do you see how things have changed,as I said?

 

[deep denial]

No, I don't I'm afraid - those problems also apply to not being in TSS - same number of ships to negociate, but less predictable. As for fast boats around Dover - if they're crossing, they won't be using the TSS ??!

 

[bobgoode]

Justice may be difficult to apply with equality but that is no excuse for blatant injustice.

 

[Searush]

Errm, Like Manuel "I know nothing Mr Fawlty", but many laws specify minimum penalties. These particular laws are aimed at Shipping companies, so fines will be proportionate for them. Yotties getting fined are not within the planned scheme of things, so same minimum fines apply. No leeway to modify law thus no appeal possible in "legal terms". As Mr Micawber stated some years ago "The law is an ass!"

Just my 2pworth, but doesn't seem to have been considered so far.

 

[wotayottie]

The fine wasnt 10k - it was 6k. The rest is the lawyers helping themselves out of his pockets, with no need to justify the amount to anybody.

I wonder if there would have been equivalent action had he reported a merchant vessel for some misdemeanor?

 

[Blueboatman]

Aye,the problems are the same but in addition some department is very keen to fine you heavily for getting it wrong,according to a code of conduct based on mechanically driven vessels with adequate reserves of power and ancilliary backups.. I guess my question is: Is there any evidence to date that the prosecutors do look beyond their radar image 'evidence' as to why you might actually be where in all common sense no yacht would wish to be ?

 

[Seven Spades]

Ok here is the first link at it was £15,000 ouch

http://www.mcga.gov.uk/c4mca/mcga-newsro...;m=5&y=2006

 

[tillergirl]

'many laws specify minimum penalties' - Really? Can you name one? Laws specify maximum penalties and then there are sentencing guidelines. There are, of course, fixed penalties but those don't apply in court - apart that is for Murder when the sentence is mandatory - Life. Not that life means life.

Looking at Tosca's example, which I guess answers the origin question in this thread - a precedent has been set. And assuming that the vis was ok, the skipper in that case looks on the basis of that track to have taken leave of his senses.

 

[bilbobaggins]

[ QUOTE ]
You are a professional seafarer, you are experienced, and it is your business to navigate safely.

You were putting your crew at risk.

[/ QUOTE ]

This is far from the first professional yacht skipper to be fined significant money for breaking the laws of the ColRegs. This is the LAW - get over it, and get on with it. There is an entirely-adequate alternative to boring up a TSS the wrong way.....

What do these silly barstewards think they have to prove?



/forums/images/graemlins/shocked.gif

 

[LymingtonPugwash]

[ QUOTE ]
Ok here is the first link at it was £15,000 ouch

http://www.mcga.gov.uk/c4mca/mcga-newsro...;m=5&y=2006

[/ QUOTE ]

So it seems that Dirk De Ridder on Mean Machine got away very lightly compared to this chap! /forums/images/graemlins/shocked.gif
Never mind, just as well he was French! /forums/images/graemlins/grin.gif

 

[Blueboatman]

Good link ,thanks

 

[Bilgediver]

Why should this be seen as a clamp down on leisure sailors.....we are all controlled by the same rules so why go down the marine version of a motorway in the WRong LANE???????????

He was probably let of lightly. Do you think the QE11" would get such an insignificant fine for the same offence /forums/images/graemlins/laugh.gif /forums/images/graemlins/laugh.gif

 

[rickp]

Clause 6(1)a of 'The Merchant Shipping (Distress Signals and Prevention of Collisions) Regulations 1996' states:

[ QUOTE ]
(a) in the case of any infringement of Rule 10(b)(i) (duty to proceed with traffic flow in lanes of separation schemes) of the International Regulations (being an offence corresponding to an offence under section 419(2) of the Merchant Shipping Act 1894[10]) by a fine not exceeding £50,000;

[/ QUOTE ]

Definitely an expensive mistake to make!

Rick

 

[jamesjermain]

[ QUOTE ]
why go down the marine version of a motorway in the WRong LANE???????????


[/ QUOTE ]

I rather take this as support for my point. If you drove the wrong way down a motorway you would probably be fined something in the region of £400 to £500 and maybe...maybe, lose your licence. If there was no actual accident you might get away with points deducted.

But going the wrong way on a motorway is to risk almost certain collision and probably multiple deaths. In a TSS in good visibility the risk of causing death is as close to nil as makes no odds, and the person who would die is you and your crew, not some innocent third party.

Unless someone knows of a small (sub 40ft) yacht that has been fined under £1,000, I stick to my view that the penalty for breaking TSS rules is rediculously severe in relation to the likely financial circumstances of the skipper of a small boat.

 

[LymingtonPugwash]

Excellent point James!

 

[mel80]

[ QUOTE ]

Unless someone knows of a small (sub 40ft) yacht that has been fined under £1,000, I stick to my view that the penalty for breaking TSS rules is rediculously severe in relation to the likely financial circumstances of the skipper of a small boat.

[/ QUOTE ]

On the other hand, can you give any examples of amatuers who have been fined at all. So far, four examples have been given, 3 of which were explicitly stated as professional skippers and 1 (the motor boat inFolkstone) which isn't clear.

EDIT: I've just had a look through the list of prosecutions (listed on the MCA website) from 2003 to 2007. Out of roughly 60 cases, there were two involving amatuer skippers each case involved a collision and each case the breach was so severe that a custodial sentence was appropriate (one involving a fatality). I've yet to be convinnced that there is any problem here.

 

[jamesjermain]

Thanks for that information, Mel80. It throws useful light on the subject - maybe it's not such a threat to you and I