I disagree with a reply in Motor Boats Monthly.

Jim@sea

Well-Known Member
Joined
12 Feb 2010
Messages
4,598
Location
Glasson Dock
Visit site
In the "Ask the Experts" in Motor Boats Monthly a reader complained about a boatyard who serviced his seacocks leaving one open and one closed and he may have damaged his engine.
The reply was that he could have Legal Redress against the Boatyard.
I disagree. Surely it is the boat owners responsibility to ensure that his seacocks are open "before" he sets off. And presumably closes them when he leaves the boat. And as many boatyards employ staff who are not fully trained to do routine maintenance would you really set off in a boat without checking things. OK you shouldent have to but this is the real world. Even trained mechanics make mistakes. (I know I employed some)
 
In the "Ask the Experts" in Motor Boats Monthly a reader complained about a boatyard who serviced his seacocks leaving one open and one closed and he may have damaged his engine.
The reply was that he could have Legal Redress against the Boatyard.
I disagree. Surely it is the boat owners responsibility to ensure that his seacocks are open "before" he sets off. And presumably closes them when he leaves the boat. And as many boatyards employ staff who are not fully trained to do routine maintenance would you really set off in a boat without checking things. OK you shouldent have to but this is the real world. Even trained mechanics make mistakes. (I know I employed some)
I would have assumed they were booth closed, in fact if I had a gripe at all it would be that one was left open. If the boat had sunk due to a bust pipe who would have been to blame. It amazes me how many of my friends leave there boats unattended for several days and no doubt weeks without closing all sea clocks except cockpit drains. Chances are that when they do come to close them they have seized.
Mike
 
I thought the same thing ... magazine's 'experts' not as clever as they might think they are! Of course you should check your own seacocks before setting off and especially if you've had work done. Can't believe somebody didn't spot that answer before publishing.
 
It amazes me how many of my friends leave there boats unattended for several days and no doubt weeks without closing all sea clocks except cockpit drains. Chances are that when they do come to close them they have seized.

I installed all the plumbing in Ariam, and I'm quite confident that it isn't going to inexplicably burst under the negligible head of a few inches of water. Apparently you have the same confidence in your cockpit drains, but not the others for some reason?

The point about unused valves getting stuck is valid, and when I find myself near one of them I open and close it a few times to scrape off the crud on the ball. But since getting to the heads outlet involves emptying everything out of the cockpit locker and climbing into it, you'll understand why I don't exercise that every time I go to the boat.

Pete
 
The manual for Sadler Yachts always recommended leaving the seacock open when leaving the boat. The reason was that there was a very small risk indeed of the boat sinking through a failed seacock or pipe. There was a much greater chance of the owner starting the engine and "driving off" with the seacocks shut (if they were left shut). The balance of risk lay in leaving them open all the time.

Sometimes I do, sometimes I don't ! On my latest Sadler (sinkable) I turn 'em off.

Back to the thread.......... yes bonkers advice as it is elementary responsibility to check the engine seacocks. I would have left written instructions as to how I wanted the work left but, even were that done, I wouldn't expect (and not check) that they had been left like that and simply drive off.
 
The manual for Sadler Yachts always recommended leaving the seacock open when leaving the boat. The reason was that there was a very small risk indeed of the boat sinking through a failed seacock or pipe. There was a much greater chance of the owner starting the engine and "driving off" with the seacocks shut (if they were left shut). The balance of risk lay in leaving them open all the time.

There are ways to avoid the risk of starting the engine with seacocks closed. My boat has a big plastic "key" for each battery isolator. The one for the engine battery is hung on the seacock lever, so it is impossible to start the engine without first diving behind the engine to get to the seacock. Obviously the risk of a Sadler sinking is negligible, but the water damage due to a flooded interior would be on a par with an overheated engine. Probably worse in fact, as the overheat alarm should go off before any real damage is done.
 
I haven't seen the question but did the owner drive off with one shut or did the boatyard start the engine with one shut?

If the latter then I would say the 'expert' is correct.

W.
 
Assuming it was the owner starting the engine, I suspect that this is one of those things that need to be tested in court. My own opinion is that checking the exhaust for water flow is a routine part of every skipper's duties, whether or not he would be expected to examine the seacocks, and that he would lose a case in court.
 
The owner doesn't stand a chance in court.

In what way has the contract been breached (?) and, even if it had, it is difficult to see how damage could flow from that breach if the skipper had not been seriously negligent by either failing to check the seacocks or, as john* says, by failing to check the water flow through the exhaust or, in my view, failing to do both because checking the seacock is open does not guarantee water.

The owner is lucky they left one open and, if there is damage, it is to one engine rather than two (I presume - I take it that on twin engine installations each engine has an exclusive seacock or can they share ??)
They could easily have shut both seacocks down.

It is very sad for that owner but there it is
 
It amazes me how many of my friends leave there boats unattended for several days and no doubt weeks without closing all sea clocks except cockpit drains. Chances are that when they do come to close them they have seized.
Mike

Don't know about your boat, but mine have two cockpit drains that are double the diameter of the engine inlet. In fact of all the skin fittings on the boat the ones that would sink it the quickest are the cockpit drains - heads outlets are just below the waterline so less pressure. So on that basis I usually leave the engine inlet open (although I do hide the engine battery key under a note telling me to open the seacock if I ever do leave it closed). Others are generally opened and closed as necessary.

And my next boat is having an open transom and no cockpit drains (then I'll have no excuse re the engine inlet).
 
The owner doesn't stand a chance in court.

In what way has the contract been breached (?) and, even if it had, it is difficult to see how damage could flow from that breach if the skipper had not been seriously negligent by either failing to check the seacocks or, as john* says, by failing to check the water flow through the exhaust or, in my view, failing to do both because checking the seacock is open does not guarantee water.

The owner is lucky they left one open and, if there is damage, it is to one engine rather than two (I presume - I take it that on twin engine installations each engine has an exclusive seacock or can they share ??)
They could easily have shut both seacocks down.

It is very sad for that owner but there it is

I'm not sure I agree. If the manual states / the industry standard is to leave open, as has been suggested above, then the yard may well be in breach. It is implied into every contract that the person doing the work will exercise the reasonable skill and care of a competent (in this case) engineer. A reasonably competent engineer will adhere to the industry standard. Not to do so is negligent.

Doubtless, the skipper would be liable for a healthy dose of contributory fault, but I don't think the magazine expert was negligent!
 
Top