Picture the scene...

[3889]

...
Joined
26 May 2003
Messages
4,141
Visit site
...Enjoying a late Autumn day tinkering with the roller reefing gear when, looking up, I notice a sturdy clinker built gaffer with no hands aboard, bearing down on my beloved tupperware on its mooring, .
Said vessels mooring strop had "failed" and the 3 Knt ebb was carrying it on a collision course toward me.
Hastily start engine and slipped mooring to witness runaway collide with the next boat on trots then piroute gracefully away, coming to rest on a nearby sandbank.
With only a faint tremor in my voice I informed HM of events via VHF, only to find my stern moored tender has now become entwined with yet another staunch timber vessel, onto which I was inexorably drawn by the unforgiving tide. I informed HM of collision and asked him to relay details to owner of 3rd vessel involved.
Four months later I receive a letter from insurance Co requesting detail of incident.
My boat lost a guardwire which I have since repaired without claim. The boat I struck suffered what appeared to be minor paint damage to Stbd bow. My insurance Co ( who insures both myself and the 3rd vessel) wants to know whether I consider myself liable for damage.
I think not but I'm biased and post here seeking a more balanced view.
 

ShipsWoofy

New member
Joined
10 Sep 2004
Messages
10,431
Visit site
Theory

If I arrived at my boat on a Friday evening and found evidence of collision during my absence I certainly would not take it on the chin. So I would expect, some one other than me to cough up.

So now you hit me, so you are liable.

You took avoiding action to prevent a runaway from hitting you, in doing so for a brief moment lost concentration and ran into another boat (mine) so you are liable. Prior to calling the coastguard you had avoided being hit and presumably were sitting pretty, had you gone back to your mooring and then called, the second collision would not have happened presumably. You hit a boat, after the commotion not in trying to get away.

Not what you want to hear, but that is what I read. Commended on your honesty btw.
 
G

Guest

Guest
It depends on whether you were negligent or not. It's hard to give a firm answer without a more detailed knowledge of the facts, but based on your rough description, I would say:

if you had been forced to take immediate evasive action to avoid damage to your boat, but in doing so you bumped into the other boat without a reasonable chance of avoiding it, then you should not be liable. The fact however, that you had time to speak to HM on the VHF (at least to start to speak to him) before becoming entangled, suggests the collision wasn't as immediate as that and that there may have been a brief interlude in which you had the opportunity to take some evasive action. For example, if you hadn't been speaking on the VHF, but had instead been concentrating on manoeuvring, perhaps you might have been able to avoid the accident? If so, you're probably liable.
 

Sammo

New member
Joined
23 Jan 2005
Messages
1,004
Location
Adrift
Visit site
Don`t see a problem
You had an accident, the only reason we take out insurance is to pay for accidents.
Admit liability and get on with something else.
I run a fleet of vans and whenever a small bump happens (all the time) I try to settle it quickly.
I never go to litigation even if I`m in the wrong. That way I don’t have any sleepless nights. And it costs the minimum to get it settled.
Then go and buy the biggest fender you can stow, and keep it ready for such emergencies as most shunts happen in slow motion you will find it can be very effective.

A trick I learnt when I kept the boat on the Broads

………………….
Aw! Bang! Crash! Crunch……………............................sorry.
 
Top