Possibly the most expensive drink or water taxi is at Falmouth?

[lw395]

I couldn't claim that I've never had my torch pack up in the tender.
I've used a few tenders without a lifejecket.
But to capsize a tender just because you hit an unlit mooring buoy does not seem right?
Either it's an unstable dinghy or going more than a bit quick?

 

[Stemar]

Two up plus a bag in a small rigid dinghy isn't the most stable arrangement, and I've seen dinghies in Portsmouth Harbour with less than 6" of freeboard, which must get interesting if you get hit by the wake of one of the navy contractor boats that blast up and down regularly. A lurch to one side on impact could easily throw one or both people off balance and they're swimming.

 

[doug748]

Am I the only one to think, there but for the grace of god.......

Two up plus a bag in a small rigid dinghy isn't the most stable arrangement, and I've seen dinghies in Portsmouth Harbour with less than 6" of freeboard, which must get interesting if you get hit by the wake of one of the navy contractor boats that blast up and down regularly. A lurch to one side on impact could easily throw one or both people off balance and they're swimming.

On the face of it, from what we know...

No arguments if the Falmouth Two had been given a huge fine for not showing a light. And the finest degree of care is appropriate where kids are involved.
However the rest of the case is so subjective anyone ending up in the water could be accused of "endangering life". They have been tried under harbour bylaws more appropriate to 40 ft launches carrying 20 paying customers.

There is much to learn from the case, perhaps for experienced adults who know the score:

If you find yourself in the oggin, try to get ashore unaided
Make no statements to any people offering assistance.
Row, don't take the engine.
Wearing lifejackets could be unhelpful when trying to swim for it.

 

[myquest]

I read the report referred to by the OP several days ago and have been baffled by it ever since especially when one compares it to the other incident referred to here. We are patently not getting any relevant information from the BBC report. I fail to see the relevance to the incident of not showing a light as it would have made no difference to the outcome. I get the not keeping a lookout, humans can't see in the dark even if you try but to be fined for it concerns me. Endangering life is tied to the previous point and everyone is guilty any time they are caught out by unmarked lobster pots and need to be rescued. Hundreds of other scenarios can be added to that. Are we to assume that if any of the emergency services attend to us at night we could well be billed through the courts? What the thread does highlight though is that one skipper turned up with a lawyer, the other didn't. Is that the lesson to be gleaned from this?
On the other hand he could have been paralytic but as it reads he was not fined for that.

 

[Seven Spades]

Why was one deemed responsible and fined and not the other. I would have thought that one looking ahead and one looking behind constitutes keeping a good lookout.