Rocna Anchors acquired by Canada Metal Pacific

[bob234]

Just saw this. Thanks Neeves.

Are you currently working on a story?

If, as Grant has said, Bambury was told by the RINA people that bribery was what it would take, laying it all on Bambury is inaccurate and unfair. There also would have been no story had the RINA people not asked for money to begin with.

If you read again Grant's recent post where he first refers to this you will see he did NOT say that he was told this by the RINA people. He goes on to clarify in a later post that he was not asked this by anyone at RINA.

Bob

 

[smackdaddy]

If you read again Grant's recent post where he first refers to this you will see he did NOT say that he was told this by the RINA people. He goes on to clarify in a later post that he was not asked this by anyone at RINA.

Bob

I read it. But he has stated several things in his many posts that are conflicting/confusing/opaque.

Using Grant's statements, I laid out in a previous post above why his words implicate RINA. Perhaps I should use the words "strongly implied" instead of "said".

Regardless of semantics, according to him, RINA people were allegedly fired for corruption. You can read his words to make out the why of that.

 

[Neeves]

Smackdaddy - the story is about Rocna, as was this thread. There might be other issues, that would be another story. But I might caution a forum persecution of RINA without evidence. Yes they had a questionable employee, they dealt with them swiftly.

There is nothing in the public domain on RINA. I have personal email correspondence and notes on telephone conversations I had with them. If it were necessary I am sure I could ask RINA's permission to release information but I do not see the need. You basically have a summary, or conclusions, of the conversations in the post above and in the YM article in Oct 2011 YM.

As to whether Grant's statement that the individual or individuals involved no longer work for RINA I simply cannot comment. But RINA are aware of the direction this thread has taken and I guarantee they will not take any risk to cover up - it is simply too easy to be caught out. Consequently Grant's statement has a very strong ring of truth. I might reiterate the remedial action must have been taken some time ago - thus RINA acted immediately they became aware of the problem.

At this point, or in the short term, the concern must be to ensure that anyone who has, or might have, a underspecified (420 shanked) Rocna anchor is made aware as early as possible of the possible dangers involved. They, the owners, can then make a decision as to whether they wish to take the responsibility of continuing to use the anchor or scrap it in preference for another.

Its part of being the owner of a vessel - one takes responsibility (for everything).

Whether refunds, replacements etc are part of that process is a completely separate issue - and should have nothing to do with the owner's decision. There are mechanisms, aired on this forum, for owners to follow in order to gain refunds independent of the largesse of CMP.

A problem that I identify is that advertsing of the safety issue is not high on the agenda for the people involved. Sadly not everyone reads YM, YBW, PS etc and most people using the anchors are simply not aware. CMP are in the position to know which anchors went where, as they have Mr Bambury and Mr Smith on their books as employees, or consultants - but CMP do not seem to be actively involved in accurately advising even their distributor base.

Jonathan

 

[toad_oftoadhall]

If you read again Grant's recent post where he first refers to this you will see he did NOT say that he was told this by the RINA people.

It's pretty clear the suggestion of the bribe came from Rina staff:

I was told to ask what it would take to conclude certain aspects of the certification that seemed to be stalling at one employees desk.

The answer in early 2010 was that $$$$$$$$$$ needed to be paid

 

[smackdaddy]

Smackdaddy - the story is about Rocna, as was this thread. There might be other issues, that would be another story. But I might caution a forum persecution of RINA without evidence. Yes they had a questionable employee, they dealt with them swiftly.

There is nothing in the public domain on RINA. I have personal email correspondence and notes on telephone conversations I had with them. If it were necessary I am sure I could ask RINA's permission to release information but I do not see the need. You basically have a summary, or conclusions, of the conversations in the post above and in the YM article in Oct 2011 YM.

As to whether Grant's statement that the individual or individuals involved no longer work for RINA I simply cannot comment. But RINA are aware of the direction this thread has taken and I guarantee they will not take any risk to cover up - it is simply too easy to be caught out. Consequently Grant's statement has a very strong ring of truth. I might reiterate the remedial action must have been taken some time ago - thus RINA acted immediately they became aware of the problem.

At this point, or in the short term, the concern must be to ensure that anyone who has, or might have, a underspecified (420 shanked) Rocna anchor is made aware as early as possible of the possible dangers involved. They, the owners, can then make a decision as to whether they wish to take the responsibility of continuing to use the anchor or scrap it in preference for another.

Its part of being the owner of a vessel - one takes responsibility (for everything).

Whether refunds, replacements etc are part of that process is a completely separate issue - and should have nothing to do with the owner's decision. There are mechanisms, aired on this forum, for owners to follow in order to gain refunds independent of the largesse of CMP.

A problem that I identify is that advertsing of the safety issue is not high on the agenda for the people involved. Sadly not everyone reads YM, YBW, PS etc and most people using the anchors are simply not aware. CMP are in the position to know which anchors went where, as they have Mr Bambury and Mr Smith on their books as employees, or consultants - but CMP do not seem to be actively involved in accurately advising even their distributor base.

Jonathan

Thanks for this Jonathan.

If RINA is watching this thread, I think they'd do very well to address this issue ASAP. Grant's statements are obviously pretty serious indictments (ones that I had personally never seen or heard of prior to his post in this thread). It IS news, and a potential black eye for RINA to say the least

BUT, it's certainly not a "persecution". All that is happening here is an effort to get straight the facts behind some pretty stunning (IMO) statements made by Grant in this forum.

Some critical items of concern for RINA, even in light of your post above, are these:

1. As Grant has implied, did any RINA (or RINA-affiliated) personnel inform him that "bribes/payments/machine-oiling/etc." were required to assist in RINA certification? Was this part of the reason for the dismissal(s)? Or did Bambury just make wild guesses on all this and start handing out money?
2. As implied by Grant, was this "standard practice" for the dismissed employee(s) at the time? How long was this behavior going on? And how widespread was it?
3. What other products (in addition to Rocna anchors), etc. were affected?
4. Grant mentioned multiple RINA personnel being removed and punished. You mention a single employee as the problem - and that RINA "dealt with them swiftly", but then you say they "must have" taken action "some time ago". Which is it? It would certainly help RINA's case to provide facts on exactly what happened, who was involved, and what was done about it.
5. What was the "punishment" mentioned? Are there any public records on this?
6. Has this type of corruption happened in any other RINA business sector? If so, what and where?
7. Is there any reason, based on this occurrence, to suspect other RINA certifications in other business sectors or products? Or was this a one-time-one-place occurrence, with Rocna being the only "perpetrator"?

Even your account above is a bit conflicting, and differs from Grant's, and both of you guys are unable or unwilling to provide all the facts....not that you're required to, obviously.

But, it's important to understand that the "business as usual" mentality mentioned above, specifically as applied to RINA's reputation is potentially very damaging. All that is required to put the issue to bed are the facts.

I'll send an email to RINA. Can't hurt to ask.

 

[jordanbasset]

Hi Toad, you started a new thread to discuss the issue of Rina, in your own words below

"Registro Italiano Navale - Breaking News
I don't often read the circular anchor squabbles. God knows why but today I had a quick read down.
I'm glad I did because tucked away in the middle is a post which, if true, utterly eclipses the original story.
I suspect most people ignore the anchor threads now so re-posted in it's own thread:"

As I said before the Rina is interesting in it's own right, but may it help if you kept it on the thread you specifically started to discuss it. If as you say people ignore anchor threads surely you will get a better response in the thread you started. In the meantime others can concentrate on trying to hold Rocna to account for their alleged wilful misleading of the public as to the quality of their products

 

[Rigger Mortice]

. In the meantime others can concentrate on trying to hold Rocna to account for their alleged wilful misleading of the public as to the quality of their products

+1, a thousand times over. The amateur armchair detectives are simply confusing the issue.

 

[toad_oftoadhall]

Thanks for all this interesting stuff Neeves! I guess it isn't just Grant now.

But I might caution a forum persecution of RINA without evidence.

Quite right, but there is no persecution, just a search for the evidence. When we can all read the facts for ourselves, there will be no need to ask questions. I don't think anyone apaert from you and Grant is saying that Rina & Rocna have been inolved in corruption. We just don't know.

Of course the quest for hard facts might clear Rina & Rocna of this.

Yes they had a questionable employee, they dealt with them swiftly.

Grant says two? Is one of you mistaken? How did Rina "deal" with these employees? Were the Police involved?

Is there *any* way of backing this up with verifiable fact to your knowledge? (you say there is nothing in the public domain on RINA).

If it were necessary I am sure I could ask RINA's permission to release information

If it's not to much bother I'd like to see anything you have.

You basically have a summary, or conclusions, of the conversations in the post above and in the YM article in Oct 2011 YM.

YM have already covered Rina-gate? Did you write that article?

RINA acted immediately they became aware of the problem.

How did they become aware? What action did they take?

How did Rina become aware of the problem? Was/were the employee(s) involved in approving products other than anchors? Have Rina changed their processes to make future bribery more difficult?

I think what would help here is some hard facts about the Police investigation into Grant over the 'not stolen' $5000. Surely there must be some public record of that somethere? That would confirm a lot of this.

I'm really interested in gaugeing how widespread this kind of abuse of standards is. If if turns out Rina's processes allow one employee to do it then I don't really see why this wouldn't be widespread in Rina and in all other standards organisations.

 

[toad_oftoadhall]

As I said before the Rina is interesting in it's own right, but may it help if you kept it on the thread you specifically started to discuss it. If as you say people ignore anchor threads surely you will get a better response in the thread you started.

Ok everyone, you heard Jordan & Rigger, they'd prefer us to be talking about this here:

www.ybw.com/forums/showthread.php?t=295136

I'll duplicate my last post there, so people can respond to it there if they wish.

In the meantime others can concentrate on trying to hold Rocna to account for their alleged wilful misleading of the public as to the quality of their products

You don't think Rocna bribing a standards organization is "wilful misleading of the public as to the quality of their products"???!!!

 

[Neeves]

Hi Toadie,

I'm very much at fault in misleading you.

I had heard of the corruption allegations as part of my investigation into the RINA certifcation of the Rocna anchor. At the time they were never substantiated, the situation remains the same. I will not deal without corrobarative evidence. I know no more than you of these allegations. I have simply lifted the information from postings on this forum. As far as I am aware these are simply allegations there is no proof, at all. When it was first mentioned to me it was 'a person' more recently on this forum it has become persons (your guess is as good as mine). When originally mentioned to me it was 'a person' more recently it has also become another (or others) at a factory (unnamed). If you read carefully what I have posted you will find it simply repeats what has been posted by another. If I gave any impression of knowing any more than you - my sincere regrets. (My focus was on Holdfast/Rocna and RINA.)

But I emphasise there is no evidence, other than this forum, for the allegations. They may be true, they might not. I do not know - which is one reason I am not interested in terms of forum research. If I find through sources that are credible that the story is true - then I am interested.

But to hound and bay for blood on the basis of statements that have no substantiation looks, I struggle for words, sensationalist. Quietly worry away and find some hard evidence, or not, fine - but I am of the belief people are innocent until proved guilty - but maybe that is out of fashion.

Shoot first, ask questions later?

 

[toad_oftoadhall]

I had heard of the corruption allegations as part of my investigation into the RINA certifcation of the Rocna anchor. At the time they were never substantiated, the situation remains the same. I will not deal without corrobarative evidence.

Quite right too!

I I know no more than you of these allegations. I have simply lifted the information from postings on this forum.

Understood, thanks for being clear.

But to hound and bay for blood on the basis of statements that have no substantiation looks, I struggle for words, sensationalist. Quietly worry away and find some hard evidence, or not, fine - but I am of the belief people are innocent until proved guilty - but maybe that is out of fashion.

Nobody is baying for blood. Nobody has accused Rina of anything apart from Grant (and it seemed for while you, but that seems to be no longer the case).

Shoot first, ask questions later?

Nobody is shooting as far as I can see. Some people are asking the obvious questions that come to mind after such a claim has been made. Those questions are just as likely to clear Rina as to condemn them. In fact I suspect Grants silence is making many people suspect there's no foundation to this story at all. Maybe Rocna and Rina are off the hook on this new allegation?

 

[Rigger Mortice]

In fact I suspect Grants silence is making many people suspect there's no foundation to this story at all.

I rather doubt that. Those of us who have been following this since it first started will recognize Grant's modus operandi. He tends to come on, stir things up then go quiet for a while.
To be honest, I can understand why he does it. The drip feed has kept it going far longer, and far, far more effectively, then if he just released it all in one fell swoop.
Rocna probably don't like it, CMP probably don't like it, Bambury won't like it, the Smiths won't like it. But it's been very effective.

From what I've read, most people accept that, if Grant says it, then it's likely to be both true and supportable.

 

[smackdaddy]

As Toad said - no shooting at all. Just trying to get at the facts.

I'm working on it.

Hi Toadie,

I'm very much at fault in misleading you.

I had heard of the corruption allegations as part of my investigation into the RINA certifcation of the Rocna anchor. At the time they were never substantiated, the situation remains the same. I will not deal without corrobarative evidence. I know no more than you of these allegations. I have simply lifted the information from postings on this forum. As far as I am aware these are simply allegations there is no proof, at all. When it was first mentioned to me it was 'a person' more recently on this forum it has become persons (your guess is as good as mine). When originally mentioned to me it was 'a person' more recently it has also become another (or others) at a factory (unnamed). If you read carefully what I have posted you will find it simply repeats what has been posted by another. If I gave any impression of knowing any more than you - my sincere regrets. (My focus was on Holdfast/Rocna and RINA.)

But I emphasise there is no evidence, other than this forum, for the allegations. They may be true, they might not. I do not know - which is one reason I am not interested in terms of forum research. If I find through sources that are credible that the story is true - then I am interested.

But to hound and bay for blood on the basis of statements that have no substantiation looks, I struggle for words, sensationalist. Quietly worry away and find some hard evidence, or not, fine - but I am of the belief people are innocent until proved guilty - but maybe that is out of fashion.

Shoot first, ask questions later?

 

[evm1024]

I would never beat the golden goose. For one thing the Gooses needs are different than mine.....

Patience Is A Virtue and rash action often breaks things.

The difference between reasonable hard questioning and hounding is your view. Are you the questioner or the questionee?

Regards

 

[Colvic Watson]

A fascinating unfolding story has just disappeared up its own arse. Now that the amateur sleuths have hijacked the thread instead of starting their own, this has become a tideous rehash of speculation based on guesswork and innuendo. I used to check in to see what the latest news was but now the facts have been supplanted by the "ooooh I bet I know what REALLY happened" brigade, the thread has lost its way. Someone pm me when Grant posts again

 

[LittleSister]

Please Mister, can we have our anchor thread back?

 

[Rigger Mortice]

Please Mister, can we have our anchor thread back?

Yes! To recap.

Craig Smith attacked every anchor manufaturer, saying that his product was better than everything else. Rocna got caught lying about under spec. anchors and various certificates. Craig Smith was struck dumb. Bambury closed his company and was struck dumb. CMP got involved and, through RocnaOne, said

We are concentrating on

• sorting out the Q420 reduced spec steel problem
• identifying and replacing when requested any 420 anchor
• building up the quality controls which Rocna had properly implemented in the production factory early last year
• strengthening the supply chain management
• rebuilding the website, and ensuring that it is always accurate and timely
• working with our distributors and sales points to provide full technical information to customers
• providing a source of clear and accurate information to the yachting press
• joining in the relentless forum debates on anchors, with dignity and useful data

RocnaOne has been struck dumb.............................................
CMP has been struck dumb......................................
Smith Snr has always been dumb.........................................

Grant has not been struck dumb.

 

[braehouse]

Yes! To recap.

Craig Smith attacked every anchor manufaturer, saying that his product was better than everything else. Rocna got caught lying about under spec. anchors and various certificates. Craig Smith was struck dumb. Bambury closed his company and was struck dumb. CMP got involved and, through RocnaOne, said



RocnaOne has been struck dumb.............................................
CMP has been struck dumb......................................
Smith Snr has always been dumb.........................................

Grant has not been struck dumb.

And CMP have now stopped responding to my emails on the replacement of my 420 anchor when I asked whether it was going to be replaced with Bisalloy! So looks like they are not even keeping their promise to replace the "identified" anchors! No mention of a 620 replacement..............nada, zip! Pretty p_ss poor response and customer service all round.........so much for the fancy words from the CMP CEO and the CMP spokesman RocnaONE.

 

[Rigger Mortice]

And CMP have now stopped responding to my emails on the replacement of my 420 anchor when I asked whether it was going to be replaced with Bisalloy! So looks like they are not even keeping their promise to replace the "identified" anchors! No mention of a 620 replacement..............nada, zip! Pretty p_ss poor response and customer service all round.........so much for the fancy words from the CMP CEO and the CMP spokesman RocnaONE.

Sorry to hear that. When they started it did look as if there was a chance that they might sort out the mess but it increasingly looks as if it was no more than warm words.

Maybe the only thing to do is to return it to the chandlers as either not being fit for purpose or not as advertised?

 

[bob234]

Hi Toadie,

But I emphasise there is no evidence, other than this forum, for the allegations. They may be true, they might not. I do not know - which is one reason I am not interested in terms of forum research. If I find through sources that are credible that the story is true - then I am interested.

But to hound and bay for blood on the basis of statements that have no substantiation looks, I struggle for words, sensationalist. Quietly worry away and find some hard evidence, or not, fine - but I am of the belief people are innocent until proved guilty - but maybe that is out of fashion.

Shoot first, ask questions later?

+1 Beautifully put.

Bob