The end of owner maintenance ...

rszemeti said:
The problem is that while these notes are not actually part of law, they coudl certainly be brought up in a court case for example.

It only needs your insurance company to add the words "maintenance will be carried out in accordance with recognised best practice" .. and when you come to make your claim for total loss, they will rattle these notes as evidence of accepted "good practice" and ask for the engine logs, signed off each year by a "marine professional" and if you have carried out work yourself, then all bets are off!
Click to expand...

So you go to another insurer, or you request a policy alteration, or you don't insure. It's a free market.
 
Re: MCA consultation - in the wake of Cheeki Rafiki

mainsail1 said:
Absolutely. ....keep their nose out of private, pleasure sailing.
Click to expand...

In case you didn't have time to read it:


2.3​For pleasure vessels, this is a sector that is largely unregulated by the MCA (class XII) so in most instances this will be the first time that the MCA, as a regulator, has published such direct advice to the leisure sector. However, great care has been taken to ensure that the advice contained within the MGNs supports and replicates advice given by groups representing the leisure / pleasure sector such as the Cruising Association and Royal Yachting Association (RYA)

So the MC A are offering advice based on a consultation open to everyone and taking great care that it's representative.

Can you tell me please how this is 'sticking their noses in'?

Who else is guilty of that? SOLAS? MARPOL, the International Rules For Prevention Of Collisions At Sea, Harbourmasters regulations, Police, Coastguard? The Marina that tells you not to hang out washing?

What on earth is wrong with promulgating good sound seaman like advice from experienced people?

You can't just do as you please just coz you have a boat........but I'm sure you already know that.

Anyway, if you want to share your suggestions here to the MCA then it may well help someone. :encouragement:
 
Re: Illegal To Maintain Your Own Boat :( The MCA Are Coming

JumbleDuck said:
Or to put it less hysterically, the MCA may recommend at some point that safety critical work on a boat is best carried out by someone who knows what they're doing. Shocking.
Click to expand...

Now you're saying, I will leave that keel-removal to experts... ;)
 
Re: MCA consultation - in the wake of Cheeki Rafiki

mainsail1 said:
Absolutely. ....keep their nose out of private, pleasure sailing.
Click to expand...

I can't post it yet as it's under embargo, but you're probably not going to like what's coming down the pike on Monday from the DfT either.
 
Re: Illegal To Maintain Your Own Boat :( The MCA Are Coming

I doubt that it will directly apply to owner maintenance of pleasure craft but no doubt insurance companies will be quick to look at wriggling out of any claim where it can be shown owner maintenance was involved and they will quote the MCA to back them up.
 
Re: MCA consultation - in the wake of Cheeki Rafiki

I doubt the MCA actually mean it to be directly applied to owner maintenance of pleasure craft but insurance companies will be quick to jump on it and refute claims where there has been owner maintenance, one can imagine a yacht lost when an engine refused to start because of blocked fuel filters but the owner had changed the filters and serviced the engine himself.

Don't forget that this all emanates from twats operating a commercial venture but trying to circumvent responsibilities as defined to commercial craft by employing dubious tactics to declare a voyage as amateur and pleasure not commercial.
 
Last edited:
Re: Illegal To Maintain Your Own Boat :( The MCA Are Coming

Fr J Hackett said:
I doubt that it will directly apply to owner maintenance of pleasure craft but no doubt insurance companies will be quick to look at wriggling out of any claim where it can be shown owner maintenance was involved and they will quote the MCA to back them up.
Click to expand...

Exactly this ... all it needs is additional wording to allow not only Marine Professionals, but also "other competent persons" ... that will sort it.
 
A word about the status of the Draft Marine Guidance Notes which are open for consultation.

They are being quite subtle about this. The drafts are indeed guidance. But read these paragraphs together and see what you think (Bold text is my emphasis):

'For pleasure vessels, this is a sector that is largely unregulated by the MCA (class XII) so in most instances this will be the first time that the MCA, as a regulator, has published such direct advice to the leisure sector.'
2.5 Options:..... Publish Marine Guidance Notes (MGNs) that highlight yacht and powerboat safety at sea. This is the best option to reinforce to owners what it is they need to do to meet reasonable standards of safety and to ensure that guidance on safety is applied equally to those who fall within a regulatory framework and those that fall outside.
There is asymmetry in this market as some vessel owners will be following the regulations on safety more closely than others. This is because a lot of vessel owners will have completed a course that teaches some elements of safety whilst others have not. They have in effect been taught how to interpret the legislation around safety in practice. Whilst it could be argued that this safety legislation is available to all vessel owners, the exact way they should be interpreted in practice may not always be clear. As a result, these 6 MGNs’ purpose is to close that knowledge gap so that everyone is interpreting the regulations in the correct way and applying at least the minimum safety standard. .... The consequence of there being asymmetric information in the market is that passengers going on board pleasure vessels will not be able to determine which owners have put the correct safety measures in place and which ones have not.
Our aim is for the Marine Guidance Notes to come into force no later than the end of August 2019. The Regulations will be published on www.legislation.gov.uk

I think they are saying that we will need to follow the same guidance on safety as those who fall within the "regulatory framework" - which means commercial vessels and motor yachts etc. over 24m - so that everyone is following the same rules whether your boat is a RIB or a day fisher or a big motor cruiser... or a superyacht. And they talk about their "guidance notes" coming into force. That doesn't sound to me like guidance at all, that sounds like regulation.

And for me the killer, the thing that I can't live with, is this:
2.5 Unless trained and/or qualified to do so, safety critical maintenance should not be carried out by the owner/managing agent or skipper.
So (in theory) that's an end to me doing an engine service, or developing our new PC-based nav system, or installing smoke and CO alarms, changing the fire extinguishers, the prop and thruster anodes, or the bilge pump float switch.... etc. etc.

The title of this thread is, I think, correct.
 
Re: MCA consultation - in the wake of Cheeki Rafiki

If the MCA actually wants to reduce accidents a very good starting point would be the RNLI incident logs.How many accidents have occured because someone changed to a larger furling headsail and the yachts righting moment was changed from the designers original calculations?
 
Re: MCA consultation - in the wake of Cheeki Rafiki

I'd say the last place to refer to would be RNLI accounts, usually heavily biased by PR people and the original accounts by anti-yottie fishermen who may be great seamen but clueless about yachts...
 
Perhaps the RYA should point out to the MCA that to many this is a "hobby" and as such many enjoy doing jobs on their boats. This can be seen by the numbers who spend weeks working on them and very little time actually sailing them.
accidents will always happen. All the regs in the world will not stop someone sailing onto rocks or sandbabks or falling overboard. Yachtsmen will still need help when entangled in pots and flotsam regardless of how well the boat was fitted out
As i said many get pleasure from working on their boats and this legislation may well stop that , depending on the view taken by the insurance industry. The simple fact is that most will just ignore it or be oblivious to its existence until a problem arises
 
There's often remarks on here like " this will invalidate your boat insurance" my experience with boat insurance is that the company is very understanding of the realities of marine insurance. I insure with GJW who have dealt with a couple of serious claims without demurr.
JumbleDuck said:
So you go to another insurer, or you request a policy alteration, or you don't insure. It's a free market.
Click to expand...
 
Re: MCA consultation - in the wake of Cheeki Rafiki

I say again, The MCA has no business "as a regulator" getting involved in advice to "Pleasure yachtsmen". I don't care whether they have taken advice from the RYA or some other so called knowledgeable body. Their involvement is a foot in the door that changes the feel of sailing for skippers who will know that if an incident happens they will be judged by the MCA advice. The RNLI already casts a shadow of disapproval if they rescue someone on a flat calm day with engine trouble who is not wearing a life jacket.
 
Re: MCA consultation - in the wake of Cheeki Rafiki

mainsail1 said:
Absolutely. ....keep their nose out of private, pleasure sailing.
Click to expand...

Don't ever call mayday or set off a flare in the UK then, I have to advise you that there is a distinct risk that they might get involved with arranging a rescue.
 
Last edited:
Daydream believer said:
Perhaps the RYA should point out to the MCA that to many this is a "hobby" and as such many enjoy doing jobs on their boats. This can be seen by the numbers who spend weeks working on them and very little time actually sailing them.
accidents will always happen. All the regs in the world will not stop someone sailing onto rocks or sandbabks or falling overboard. Yachtsmen will still need help when entangled in pots and flotsam regardless of how well the boat was fitted out
As i said many get pleasure from working on their boats and this legislation may well stop that , depending on the view taken by the insurance industry. The simple fact is that most will just ignore it or be oblivious to its existence until a problem arises
Click to expand...

Good comments, I agree.
 
Re: MCA consultation - in the wake of Cheeki Rafiki

mainsail1 said:
I say again, The MCA has no business "as a regulator" getting involved in advice to "Pleasure yachtsmen". I don't care whether they have taken advice from the RYA or some other so called knowledgeable body. Their involvement is a foot in the door that changes the feel of sailing for skippers who will know that if an incident happens they will be judged by the MCA advice. The RNLI already casts a shadow of disapproval if they rescue someone on a flat calm day with engine trouble who is not wearing a life jacket.
Click to expand...

If you are involved in an incident at sea you are already subject to judgement and prosecution if appropriate.

Those in the cloud of unawareness that think they can do just as they please with no consequence are dreaming.

Sorry to burst the bubble. If you are unconvinced, ask the MCA Enforcement Unit.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

Share this page

Top