Overloaded charter boat

[Steve Clayton]

http://www.mby.com/news/530089/charter-skipper-fined-for-overloading-boat#comments

My view: 5 years in prison and banned from ever running/being involved in charter activity

 

[longjohnsilver]

http://www.mby.com/news/530089/charter-skipper-fined-for-overloading-boat#comments

My view: 5 years in prison and banned from ever running/being involved in charter activity

My view is that 20 people on a 55 footer is not a problem. However as it was coded and presumably on charter then that's a different matter. Don't think a prison sentence would be appropriate but an £800 fine does seem a bit light. I expect he made that from the days chartering!

 

[DAKA]

http://www.mby.com/news/530089/charter-skipper-fined-for-overloading-boat#comments

My view: 5 years in prison and banned from ever running/being involved in charter activity

But was the judge accurate to claim the boat was over loaded ?
Surely the offence was exceeding the licence limit of 12 that Mr Stronge requested.



He could have had adequate life jackets and adequate liferafts for all persons on board .

I'm not suggesting the fine was inappropriate, your 5 years may be a little harsh if the judge hadn't been correctly advised during the hearing.

 

[Steve Clayton]

His insurance is invalid for the number of peeps on board - so his £3M or £5M 3rd party liability ain't valid either. And a £ to a penny he didn't have 22 lifejackets (for the guests) 20 + the 2 spares required on board

 

[2700]

But was the judge accurate to claim the boat was over loaded ?
Surely the offence was exceeding the licence limit of 12 that Mr Stronge requested.



He could have had adequate life jackets and adequate liferafts for all persons on board .

I'm not suggesting the fine was inappropriate, your 5 years may be a little harsh if the judge hadn't been correctly advised during the hearing.

He still made money out of the trip according to the rates on his website.

3 hrs from 10am and 2pm** - £40pp
Full Day from 10am to 5pm - £100pp
Evening from 6pm to 11pm - £50pp
All of the above prices are per person with 12 passengers, an M.C.A. Skipper and crew with light refreshments. Fuel is to be supplied at cost dependant on charter.

The fact that he was going offshore to the I.O.M. with almost twice as many passengers as the boat had a cert. for was in my opinion a pretty big breach of the rules and the fine much too low.

 

[jfm]

Tricky one without knowing the facts. £800 seems a low fine, though 5 years in the clink is ridiculously harsh

What we don't know is the knowledge of the charterers. Sure if they were completely clueless grannies and children who need the protection of the coding rules then the penalty needs to be harsh. At the other end of the scale if it was a group of guys who said "yeah we know it's technically illegal mate and we will bring our own LJs and we're doing this with our eyes open", and the skipper succumbed, then the penalty needs to be small.

You just can't judge unless you know all the evidence

 

[dt4134]

I've seen him post on here. Can't remember his username unfortunately, but would still be interested to hear his side of the story.

 

[volvopaul]

Rules are rules and yes he should be penalised for his act, id say he got off lightly, let it be a lesson learnt for all our safety at sea.

Drug smugglers have the boat confiscated!

 

[Steve Clayton]

My view is that 20 people on a 55 footer is not a problem. However as it was coded and presumably on charter then that's a different matter. Don't think a prison sentence would be appropriate but an £800 fine does seem a bit light. I expect he made that from the days chartering!

All news reports say : caught carrying more than 20 people on his boat

 

[Deleted User YDKXO]

But was the judge accurate to claim the boat was over loaded ?
Surely the offence was exceeding the licence limit of 12 that Mr Stronge requested.

Thats a moot point. I'm fairly sure that the boat is too old to have a CE certificate but if it did, it would be CE plated for a maximum number of people that the manufacturer thinks should be on board in order to comply with the stability requirements of the RCD. In the case of my 53 footer, it's plated for 12 people so I doubt whether a 55 footer would be plated for many more, if any. So IMHO, the judge could be quite right to state that the boat was overloaded with 20 people on board. Also IMHO the type of trip being undertaken would have been a factor. A 10min pootle around the bay with 20 people on board is a lot less risky than an open sea passage in the Irish Sea

He could have had adequate life jackets and adequate liferafts for all persons on board

That might have been mitigating circumstances but if the guy was silly enough to exceed his charter limit by so many people, you can probably bet there weren't enough of either of the above

 

[oldgit]

About £1k per head in this case.

Defendant: Lower Thames and Medway Passenger Boat Company Limited, Dartford Magistrates Court on 15 August 2007.

Date of Offence: 30th August 2006

Offence: Breach of the Merchant Shipping (Survey and Certification) Regulations 1995, Section 23 & 24.

Details: The Duchess M is a vessel which operates the Gravesend to Tilbury ferry service. On the evening of the 30th August 2006 the Duchess M was due to commence a voyage from Gravesend to Tilbury. The Port of London Authority (PLA) at Gravesend received a phone call stating that the Duchess M was carrying 90 passengers. On departing Gravesend terminal the Duchess M reported to PLA Gravesend that it was carrying 62 passengers. Observations using CCTV and crew on a nearby PLA launch confirmed that the Duchess M was carrying persons onboard well in excess of the permitted level of 60 passengers plus 2 or 3 crew. Estimates of the number carried as between 90 and 110. The matter was reported to the MCA who started an investigation into the incident which has led to this prosecution.

The owner of the ferry Duchess M pleaded guilty to one offence under the Merchant Shipping (Survey and Certification) Regulations 1995 for allowing the vessel to proceed on a voyage with a greater number of passengers onboard than that stated on the ships Passenger Certificate. In passing sentence the Magistrates made clear that they considered it a very serious offence.

Penalty: Fine £18,000 and Costs of £9,000.

_________________________________________________________________

 

[jfm]

Defendant: Lower Thames and Medway Passenger Boat Company Limited, Dartford Magistrates Court on 15 August 2007.
_________________________________________________________________

Oldgit that's exactly the sort of case where a high penalty is needed. Members of public turning up and boarding a ferry need protection from this kind of behaviour by the ferry operator. They didn't consent to the overloading

In contrast we have no information on the details of this Princess 55 charter and how badly behaved the skipper was, so we have no basis to decide the appropriate fine/sentence. For example, it is possible the passengers consented to or even encouraged the overloading. If that is so, the guy is still guilty but the sentence should be lighter. It's amazing that posters above can form a view on the appropriate sentence without knowing the facts

 

[MapisM]

It's amazing that posters above can form a view on the appropriate sentence without knowing the facts

LOL, I don't think that's really amazing. It always happens, just think of Amanda Knox: everyone and his dog pretended to know better than the court...

Good point re.the difference in the two cases.

 

[petem]

LOL, I don't think that's really amazing. It always happens, just think of Amanda Knox: everyone and his dog pretended to know better than the court...

Yeah but you'd think twice about getting into a threesome with her!

 

[MapisM]

Yeah but you'd think twice about getting into a threesome with her!

See? Exactly what I meant: anyone knows better than the judge!

...not that I disagree, anyway. I'd definitely look elsewhere for a threesome - better safe than sorry!

 

[sarabande]

Eight extra persons weigh about 700 kg.

That's 700 litres of water or about 800 litres of fuel.

The risks are from stability issues if they all decide to look at a dolphin pod on one side, and from sufficient safety kit (life rafts, etc).


Put a cost of about £2 million on each person's life if there is a fatal accident.

 

[capsco]

Yeah but you'd think twice about getting into a threesome with her!

I wouldn't think twice but I would tie her up first.

 

[petem]

I wouldn't think twice but I would tie her up first.

I like your thinking!

 

[MapisM]

I like your thinking!

+1.
I'm sure also Mr.De Bono would appreciate...

 

[GrahamHR]

Ok, over the limit for the certificate; but 20 passengers on a 55 footer uinsafe (assuming enough lifejackets) ?, My 24 footer can carry 8 people according to the CE plate; and the Bowrider version is certified for even more ? Seems a bit Elf and Safey over the top to me; but of course he broke the law, so he threatened the existence of the Universe