Ridiculous legislation

Not so sure...

To: MCA (Enforcement)
Re: Passage Northney to Cowes 17/05/04 SY Breathless

** WITHOUT PREJUDICE **

The following reportable incidents ocurred en route

1) 1 member of crew failed to report

Refer to our 999 call 1604. Thanks to you and Hampshire Police for locating him so quickly and in such embarassing circumstances. We trust that any further action will be left to his wife. Was she angry or what!

2) Insufficient Provisioning

We have held our own enquiry. The Co-op 2-for-1 offer on pot noodles did not extend to the 'Bad Boy' brand selected for the passage. The MCA is recommended to approach the Co-op management in Emsworth with a view to establishing more consistent labelling. All joining crew are now asked to bring spectacles - see our 'No Lense, No Hens' notes.

3) Equipment issues

As you are no doubt aware from our VHF communications on the day there were 4, all easily explained.

i) Blocked Heads

False alarm. We shall appeal your notice of pollution and fixed penalty on the grounds that the discharge under immense pressure once we had discovered the sea-cock handle represented merely an 'instant and obnoxious emission' under the Act and of no greater long-term environmental consequence than the planned slow release.

ii) Radar Reflector

We freely admit that this was removed at some point in the journey. Our subsequent enquiry revealed that we had a crew member on board with minority interests. This placed the remaining crew under severe stress and challenged the bridge management training recommended by the MCA. Actions already taken include the removal of all reflectors with transparent sleeves and 'mirror-like' reflecting internal surfaces, and a ban on lipstick for males.

We have copied this to our MEP as we feel MCA have provided inadequate quidance on gender and minority issues.

iii) Electrical Failure

MCA Communication failure. Our radio operator only said Buggered Lights after the greeny hit the chart table. If you'd bothered to listen to your tape, you would have heard the word 'Malboro'.

iv) Gas Explosion

You should be careful jumping to conclusions. Our gas installation has been tested and certified by a Corgi LPG inspector and is therefore current. I regard small blue flames from localised areas of the accommodation as a sign of a happy crew, and you won't budge me from this aspect of personal leadership. The explosion only occured as a result of a huge coincidence, and none of the crew were in hospital more than 48 hours.

4) Collisions

None this time.

5) Reportable Damage

Toe rail smashed to pieces, suspect lightning.


I have attached a small biometric sample to prove my identity and request your ackowlegement and speedy response.

<hr width=100% size=1>
 
c) a pollution event likely to result in the pollution of United Kingdom waters or the coastline of the United Kingdom,<snip> the "quickest means possible" must surely be VHF with call to the CG on 16. lol

"Solent Coastguard, Solent, Coastguard, this is Iditarod, over.
Iditarod, Solent Coastguard go ahead
Solent Coastguard, Iditarod. I've just taken a pee overboard, at the following position......

<hr width=100% size=1>Me transmitte sursum, caledoni
 
Sneaky huh?
Another back-door route to more legislation and costs.

All these reports would be colated and analysed and... etc. etc., the conclusion of which will be that sailing/boating is a hazardous pastime (because of the sheer number of reports generated) and ought to be regulated to prevent an unacceptable level of incidents occuring in the future.

Compulsory registration must be a prerequisite of regulation and so it comes around to the subject of many previous threads concerning alcohol, light dues... etc

So happy I'm not living in the UK anymore... Seems to be a constant battle to stay ahead of the stupid legislative attempts to increase government and associated organisations revenues etc.

-steve-

<hr width=100% size=1>
 
What is not a UK ship

Moose,

found this in the definitions section for a ship. This just about sums it up for me. ROL, More ROL, and even more ROL. In fact I will be ROL'ing all night!

"non-United Kingdom ship" means a ship which is not a United Kingdom ship;


<hr width=100% size=1>
 
To show how daft it all is p**ing over the side would not be.

BUT

P**ing into a bucket then emptying it over the side WOULD BE!

<hr width=100% size=1>
 
Na, cos they'd come back saying things like peeing overboard isn't a reportable incident etc etc, and totally miss the point. Whatever go's to MP's has to be short an succint, and point out major drawbacks etc simply and concisely. They get plenty of letters from nutters, and this thread would fall in that category and get no where

<hr width=100% size=1>Me transmitte sursum, caledoni
 
Re: What is not a UK ship

Steve,

Thats priceless....

It does however lead me to thinking.....If I visited France, drank an awful lot of French Beer, and copious quantities of Coffee in a local cafe, and then peed into a bucket while approaching St Catherines on the way back and tipped it over the side......would an effective defence be "Non-United Kingdom Pollution" which means Pollution which is not of the United Kingdom?

MCA report...

Solent coastguard, Solent coastguard, this is yacht 'red tape' over
Yacht 'Red tape', this is Solent coastguard over
Yes, Solent coastguard, I would like to file a pollution incident as per the new legislation... can you please log a French piss taking incident....

<hr width=100% size=1>
 
Re: Not so sure...

a wee refinement on the scheme could be to address all the reports to 10 Downing St to ensure that they receive the attention they deserve!

<hr width=100% size=1>
 
I Did Try to Warn You...

I posted this SI a couple of months ago. Have you noticed that neither the RYA or MCA are saying don't bother guys we'll sort it?
Don't forget the the SI is in force and has been since 20th Sept. IT'S LAW NOW!!!!
Peter.

<hr width=100% size=1>
 
Re: I Did Try to Warn You...

The RYA are trying to quash it. They can't exactly say they WILL sort it can they? they aren't the rule makers, and have no control over government

<hr width=100% size=1>Me transmitte sursum, caledoni
 
Presumably groundings count as incidents. Should those people with half-tide moorings ask whether block bookings would be sufficient, or should they make two reports each day?

<hr width=100% size=1>
 
Re: Not so sure...

this whole subject got aired in early September and one amongst (not me) was very active in alerting the RYA and others. The statutory instrument to which you refer became law on 20 Sept. In the week before 20 Sept it was supposed to go to judicial review but i assume that got delayed; perhaps so that rya & others didn't go off at half-cock ....

onyways, the proscribed method of communicating the "incident" is either:

(i) part 2 (Standard Reporting Format and Procedures), or
(ii) sections 3.1, 3.2 and 3.3 of part 3 (Guidelines for Detailed Reporting Requirements),
(of the Appendix to the Annex to Resolution A.851(20) adopted by the Assembly of the IMO on 27th November 1997.)

These standards refer to modern satellite coms so I semt an email in September to MCA asking for guidance on these matters (as the alternative is Ch16 ... now, if you really really want to cause trouble ... ) and ... no reply. I also wrote a letter at the same time to various MPs with shipping interests and ... no replies ... which reminds me, must send a reminder ...



<hr width=100% size=1>
 
Wow this is mad. We really do have to report any tiny event, specifically we have to report "any occurrence whereby a ship
(i) is in collision,(ii) grounds,(iii) is damaged,(iv) malfunctions or breaks down,(v) suffers the shifting of cargo, or
(vi) suffers a defective hull or structural failure. And this has to be reported even if no threat to safety was involved, and it applies to recreational vessels less than 45metres. Astonishing. Something malfunctions or breaks down most times I use our boat. The holding tank pump out was dodgy last week. The actual law is here <A target="_blank" HREF=http://www.legislation.hmso.gov.uk/si/si2004/20042110.htm>http://www.legislation.hmso.gov.uk/si/si2004/20042110.htm</A>

As a technicality, reporting it on VHF doesn't suffice. The format of the reporting must comply with part 2 of of the Appendix to the Annex to Resolution A.851(20) adopted by the Assembly of the IMO on 27th November 1997. I haven't looked that up, but it's a written report.

We had better agree a format on this forum, and send these things in by 1st class post or DHL



<hr width=100% size=1>
 
Is there already an official form to fill in, or can we create and post on the forum a document whereby you can fill your details once, then simply insert a brief description of the 'incident'

The less work needed, the more forms we'd be likely to complete, in order to comply completely with the regulations

<hr width=100% size=1>Me transmitte sursum, caledoni
 
I looked for an official form on the MCA site with that in mind. I have several to report from our hand over report - various bits of kit not working - 2 minor "collisions" ( or mooring as i believe it is also known !!)

Couldn't find one.

Maybe the RYA could do that for us in the meantime - find out in what format they want us to report blown fuses etc.

(Does running out of gas count??)

<hr width=100% size=1>
 
Top