Hot Liquid stripped of RYA recognition

[capnsensible]

I'm not squirming. My point is that Hot Liquid had an adequate people on board to make the go-no go decision and that was all they can really be expected to do. What you've written *supports* that, it doesn't contradict it.




Ok, just for fun, where is the charter, and what is name of the charter firm?

I'm willing to bet you don't need DS to hire in whatever area you're talking about, and I'm even willing to bet that even that specific firm will not require DS, in spite of anything written on their web site.

I will take that bet.....

Coz you do not get to charter either of my 2 yachts without a Coastal Practical Course Completion certificate. The insurance company will approve if someone can give evidence of 3 years sailing experience on a similar sized boat.

But I don't.

 

[Flying Penguin]

I'm not squirming. My point is that Hot Liquid had an adequate people on board to make the go-no go decision and that was all they can really be expected to do. What you've written *supports* that, it doesn't contradict it.

Yes, and they made a stupid call. Which on it's own is not a cause for particular RYA concern, but in light of the frequency of incidents may be reason enough to suggest that the responsibility to ensure that processes were in place to prevent this sort of thing was not being carried out effectively.

Do you have any evidence at all to suggest the RYA acted improperly?

Ok, just for fun, where is the charter, and what is name of the charter firm?

I'm willing to bet you don't need DS to hire in whatever area you're talking about, and I'm even willing to bet that even that specific firm will not require DS, in spite of anything written on their web site.

Well I could tell you, I can even provide you the quote from their website on qualifications, I could even give you the name of the person we booked it with. But I'm not going to bother, because you require written proof when common experience does not accord with how you wish reality to be, and ignore written proof when that doesn't support your view of reality. I've seen enough of your posts to know that I can't be bothered going down that road. Your approval and agreement simply isnn't worth the hassle.

Anyhow, sweet dreams, I'm off to bed!

 

[toad_oftoadhall]

It was a mile builder "cruise" run by Hot Liquid.
They had an RYA qualified skipper to run the cruise.
The crew all had RYA certifications of varying sorts - iirc the most experienced was a day skipper who was several years rusty. The crew were NOT QUALIFIED ...

I think that Hot Liquid were quite within their rights to entrust a boat to 1 Commercial YM/Multiple DS/Multiple CC, leave them to make their own weather choices & expect not to have their boat smashed up.

Even if the one Commercial YM had been single handed I would still say he ought to be trustworthy to make a weather call. To blame Hot Liquid for someone else's weather decision is wrong.

If it turns out Hot Liquid put pressure on to go then that's different but nobody's suggesting that.

The fact that 1 Commercial YM/Multiple DS/Multiple CC wrecked a boat rasies more questions about the RYA who sold them these certificates/qualifications than it does about Hot Liquid who took them at face value.

These really are simple points and quibbling about the definition of various bits of paperwork doesn't really change it.

 

[toad_oftoadhall]

Yes, and they made a stupid call. Which on it's own is not a cause for particular RYA concern, but in light of the frequency of incidents may be reason enough to suggest that the responsibility to ensure that processes were in place to prevent this sort of thing was not being carried out effectively.

Fine. ...and I'm arguing that leaving the decision in the hand of a person/people who had the required certification to make the choice *was* a suitable process. (They'd only get an RYA qualified person to write the policy so if we decide RYA people are not capable of making weather calls who writes the policy?!)

Do you have any evidence at all to suggest the RYA acted improperly?

Well my own personal experience is that the RYA cheerfully sell qualifications to **** sailors, but that's purely anecdotal evidence, that they act improperly.

Well I could tell you, But I'm not going to bother

 

[fireball]

I think that Hot Liquid were quite within their rights to entrust a boat to 1 Commercial YM/Multiple DS/Multiple CC, leave them to make their own weather choices & expect not to have their boat smashed up.

Even if the one Commercial YM had been single handed I would still say he ought to be trustworthy to make a weather call. To blame Hot Liquid for someone else's weather decision is wrong.

If it turns out Hot Liquid put pressure on to go then that's different but nobody's suggesting that.

The fact that 1 Commercial YM/Multiple DS/Multiple CC wrecked a boat rasies more questions about the RYA who sold them these certificates/qualifications than it does about Hot Liquid who took them at face value.

These really are simple points and quibbling about the definition of various bits of paperwork doesn't really change it.

HL cannot absolve themselves of the responsibility - it was their boat, they crewed it and employed a skipper - it doesn't matter his qualifications - he was acting AS Hot Liquid whilst under their employ.

The RYA didn't sell anyone any certificates - the sailing schools that took them did. I've already said that my understanding is that the crew had already requested to suspend the trip.
Hot Liquid have stated that the crew were students of Hot Liquid - therefore they should have a bit more knowledge about their abilities and limitations.

These are simple facts and you can suggest all you like that Hot Liquid shouldn't carry the can for a skippers decision whilst in their employ - it doesn't change the fact that the RYA have removed the endorsement because they believed HL lacked appropriate safety standards expected.

 

[rotrax]

I think that Hot Liquid were quite within their rights to entrust a boat to 1 Commercial YM/Multiple DS/Multiple CC, leave them to make their own weather choices & expect not to have their boat smashed up.

Even if the one Commercial YM had been single handed I would still say he ought to be trustworthy to make a weather call. To blame Hot Liquid for someone else's weather decision is wrong.

If it turns out Hot Liquid put pressure on to go then that's different but nobody's suggesting that.

The fact that 1 Commercial YM/Multiple DS/Multiple CC wrecked a boat rasies more questions about the RYA who sold them these certificates/qualifications than it does about Hot Liquid who took them at face value.

These really are simple points and quibbling about the definition of various bits of paperwork doesn't really change it.

The RYA does not "Sell" certificates. They authorise issue of them to organisations, not all profit making who award them after the students have completed a course. Course completion is not always enough to get a certificate. YM examinations are practical and examiners are independant. If you are going to make sweeping statements get the facts right. Alternativly suggest a better training regime at the same or less cost to the end user. Destructive critisism is easy-constructive is more of a challenge.

 

[toad_oftoadhall]

HL cannot absolve themselves of the responsibility - it was their boat, they crewed it and employed a skipper - it doesn't matter his qualifications - he was acting AS Hot Liquid whilst under their employ.

These are simple facts and you can suggest all you like that Hot Liquid shouldn't carry the can for a skippers decision whilst in their employ - it doesn't change the fact that the RYA have removed the endorsement because they believed HL lacked appropriate safety standards expected.

Well, thanks for actually bothering to address my point!

I take your point but still think the vast bulk of the moral and legal blame for taking a boat out in well forecast boat breaking conditions lies with the people who actually did it, not with the poor sod who ran the firm that owned the boat.

We'll have to agree to disagree.

Be interesting to see what the MAIB have to say about the circumstances around the whole thing.

 

[rotrax]

Well, thanks for actually bothering to address my point!

I take your point but still think the vast bulk of the moral and legal blame for taking a boat out in well forecast boat breaking conditions lies with the people who actually did it, not with the poor sod who ran the firm that owned the boat.

We'll have to agree to disagree.

Be interesting to see what the MAIB have to say about the circumstances around the whole thing.

I have been a Trainee with Jason Manning as Instuctor before he started HL Sailing. I cannot imagine that he was unaware of his Skippers intention to go. I also imagine that the boat was to be a floating exibit at LIBS to allow prospective punters to see the vessel that they may be thinking of booking a course on. Perhaps its just cynical 'ol me that thinks that getting a few paying punters on the boat on its trip to LIBS is a little sweetener to the balance sheet..........

 

[toad_oftoadhall]

I have been a Trainee with Jason Manning as Instuctor before he started HL Sailing. I cannot imagine that he was unaware of his Skippers intention to go.

No doubt we'll find out for sure when the MAIB report comes out.

 

[Simondjuk]

I can barely be bothered to reply after wading through pages of Mr Toads incessant anti-RYA diatribe, so I'll keep it brief.

If I were the Principal of a training centre and had a First 40.7 safely tucked up in a marina with a F10 forecast for the area, I'd be on the phone to the skipper making it absolutely clear to him that the he was forbidden to put out. I'd hope he'd have no intent to do so and that my call would be superfluous, but I'd remove all uncertainty nonetheless.

Not to make the call would seem pretty lax. To make it would seem entirely rational. Yet it appears this didn't happen, or if it did a gross error of judgement was made. Either way, something was clearly lacking.

 

[johndove]

Did LV have to sail or not?

If the Skipper had sailed out into a storm when he could have stayed in, he would be all his fault!


Did the boat need to be at London Boat Show?


Did Mr Manning say don't worry if you don't get to London Boat show!

Or

We need it at the Show!

 

[webcraft]

Well my own personal experience is that the RYA cheerfully sell qualifications to **** sailors

What, you mean they sold you one?

- W

 

[webcraft]

If I were the Principal of a training centre and had a First 40.7 safely tucked up in a marina with a F10 forecast for the area, I'd be on the phone to the skipper making it absolutely clear to him that the he was forbidden to put out. I'd hope he'd have no intent to do so and that my call would be superfluous, but I'd remove all uncertainty nonetheless.

Not to make the call would seem pretty lax. To make it would seem entirely rational. Yet it appears this didn't happen, or if it did a gross error of judgement was made. Either way, something was clearly lacking.

If there was any need to make such a call then there was either something wrong with the principal's decision to employ such an instructor or the principal knew that he had employed a loose cannon.

If I were the principal I would trust my skipper to make the correct decision. When I have been instructing I have not had the principal phoning me up advising me whether to put to sea or not, neither would I expect this to happen.

The school has lost its approval because of a string of incidents. The blame for this can only be laid at the principal's door, but not because he failed to operate his boats by remote control.

- W

 

[rib]

im with you webby.but could you explain why an owner of a sailing school cant stay up 24/7 keeping an eye on one or several boats and the weather forcast and ring up skippers who he has paid to do a job and tell them if thay can sail or not

 

[webcraft]

im with you webby.but could you explain why an owner of a sailing school cant stay up 24/7 keeping an eye on one or several boats and the weather forcast and ring up skippers who he has paid to do a job and tell them if thay can sail or not

Well, I guess they aren't all the sort of superhuman control freak some people seem to think they should be

(Oh, and some of them employ decent instructors as well . . . )

- W

 

[rib]

smiley

 

[Simondjuk]

If there was any need to make such a call then there was either something wrong with the principal's decision to employ such an instructor or the principal knew that he had employed a loose cannon.

If I were the principal I would trust my skipper to make the correct decision. When I have been instructing I have not had the principal phoning me up advising me whether to put to sea or not, neither would I expect this to happen.

The school has lost its approval because of a string of incidents. The blame for this can only be laid at the principal's door, but not because he failed to operate his boats by remote control.

- W

We'd run our businesses differently then.

Given a freelance skipper who I might not know terribly well and who knows the boat is needed in a certain place at a certain time, I'd give him a call for sure.

If he wasn't planning on going, he'd be glad to hear me say, "Bad forecast, eh? Nevermind. Stay put, apologise to the clients and let them know we'll re-book them. We can live without the boat at LIBS."

If he had a problem with me saying that and/or was planning to go with the forecast as was, he's not someone I'd be in the least bit bothered if I offended since I wouldn't be continuing my working relationship with him anyway.

If the boot were on the other foot and I were the skipper, I wouldn't have any issue with receiving such a call. Although given the forecast I'd already have made my own call to say 'Not going' anyway.

Of course, this all may be entirely irrelevant and the principal may have been actively pressing for the boat to go.

 

[Simondjuk]

Well, I guess they aren't all the sort of superhuman control freak some people seem to think they should be

(Oh, and some of them employ decent instructors as well . . . )

- W

Well, if I had the ability to infallibly judge a new hire's character as you assume to have, Webcraft, then I'd not need to make the call.

I wouldn't gamble the safety of others on such an assumption though.

 

[rib]

and if he was and if i was skipper i would tell him to do it himself or get another skipper.you cant have two people run a boat as you obviously know.now going back to the night as i recall he was running before the storm with a later gale forcast in reasonable weather and it went tits up.he didt set out in to the storm but knew it was coming(he made a very bad call) as a owner of a school freelance or not surely you would know the standard of your skipper before giving him this sort of job this time of year(and he was used by this school many times before i belive) i personally would not have gone but i can see why he might have gone.and i dont think time was an issue as it was well before start of show but as allways this is all make belive as we dont know the full facts yet

 

[Simondjuk]

im with you webby.but could you explain why an owner of a sailing school cant stay up 24/7 keeping an eye on one or several boats and the weather forcast and ring up skippers who he has paid to do a job and tell them if thay can sail or not

I think HL have three or four boats. It wouldn't challenge my fairly average mind to retain a vague idea of their movements.

You know, I think I'd even have the spare capacity to notice that a forthcoming significant weather event had been publicised on radio, TV and the internet for the previous couple of days.

I might then perceive a correlation between the two which deserved a little more attention than usual, maybe even a phone call.