The RNLI at it again.

Surely the RNLI is between a rock and a hard place . If they went home and the dinghy foundered and loss of life resulted the relatives would be down the "no win no fee" route in seconds. Only those at the scene and in the control centre know what went on at the time. As to poorly equiped anglers, how many times each year do you hear "Is there a vessel in the xxxxx area who can tow a 16 foot fishing boat that has broken down-run out of fuel-taking on water or leaking-back to yyyyyyy? Some anglers do push their luck...........
 
WTF do you expect them to do? CG receives reports from concerned members of the public, tasks 2 RNLI boats to go find. The CG stand down one RNLI boat, the other is retained on scene.
Do you really expect the guys on the lifeboat to say "sod it", ignore the CG and go home?
 
What does the RNLI know? That small inflatable the fishermen were in looks perfectly seaworthy for any conditions, the outboard would, I'm sure, be powerful enough to also cope with any conditions. And who ever heard of sport fishermen going to sea poorly equipped? How ridiculous.:rolleyes:
 
Must admit I have a little trouble with the last statement, 'A mobile telephone is no use when calling for help or in communicating with the rescue services.'

If you have a signal which they almost certainly would have then dialling 999 would do just that!! I always have mine as in UK waters it gets me the weather, has full navionics charts with GPS on it, and can ring for help if all else fails. Just as when abroad my sat phone was my second emergency communication method after my EPIRB.

Oh and also look at the photo - the headline says 'rough seas' - looks flat calm to me.
 
Last edited:
mainsail1 said:
In days gone by they would have checked that you were OK and if you said yes they would go home. Now they tell you to go home ......and wait until you do.
http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-england-somerset-20875462
Happy new Year!
Click to expand...

Why have ago at the RNLI, it was the CG who tasked the lifeboats and told them to stay watching the fisherman and if they hadn't and the fishermen were now missing it wouldn't be a little article tucked away, it would probably be

"RNLI leave Fishermen to Drown"

I have posted before about the right not to be rescued and if you want to take issue with CG for not saying "You say you are OK, so it is on your head" then OK but they are in an impossible situation. What they did was guarantee the safety of two individuals, frankly IMHO who should be grateful that someone cares enough to ignore their lack of common sense and ensure they reached shore safely when they were ready.
 
HoratioHB said:
Must admit I have a little trouble with the last statement, 'A mobile telephone is no use when calling for help or in communicating with the rescue services.'

If you have a signal which they almost certainly would have then dialling 999 would do just that!! I always have mine as in UK waters it gets me the weather, has full navionics charts with GPS on it, and can ring for help if all else fails. Just as when abroad my sat phone was my second emergency communication method after my EPIRB.

Oh and also look at the photo - the headline says 'rough seas' - looks flat calm to me.
Click to expand...

The problem with the use of the mobile phone is that it is a point to point system not broadcast. So you can call the CG but not the RNLI boat, no one else can hear you to offer assistance and it's all too easy to loose the signal. Finally, given the size of the dinghy (looks to be about the tender size) it'd be all to easy for the phone to get soaked in sea water and give up altogether.

I don't think that the RNLI are in any way at fault here, especially not at the level of the crews involved. The CG are their tasking authority and if the CG requested that they remain on station, then the boat would remain there until stood down. IMO the CG should have talked directly to the fishermen (via the RNLI VHF), told them of the likely deterioration in weather and sea conditions and if the fishermen had refused to return to shore, the CG should have stood the RNLI down and let things run their course. But don't go blaming the lifeboat crew or the RNLI who were only doing what the CG asked them to do.
 
If they went home and the dinghy foundered and loss of life resulted the relatives would be down the "no win no fee" route in seconds.




Interesting thought, is there any history of legal action against the RNLI or Coastguard and what might be the legal argument against them when both have explained the dangers to the third party.

Just wondering.

Peter.
 
Adonnante said:
If they went home and the dinghy foundered and loss of life resulted the relatives would be down the "no win no fee" route in seconds.




Interesting thought, is there any history of legal action against the RNLI or Coastguard and what might be the legal argument against them when both have explained the dangers to the third party.

Just wondering.

Peter.
Click to expand...

The magic and ever present 'duty of care'
 
rotrax said:
Surely the RNLI is between a rock and a hard place . If they went home and the dinghy foundered and loss of life resulted the relatives would be down the "no win no fee" route in seconds.
Click to expand...

They might, hopefully the courts would tell them where to go, but in the meantime we would be treated to hours of weeping relatives bemoaning the heartless rescue services, in truth the damage done to the reputation of CG and the RNLI would be far worse than any damages. Some on here of course would see it all very differently, but be honest how many people in the wider world would care what we think however well informed.
 
Adonnante said:
So if I fall off my boat and drown somebody else has to share the responsibility?

Peter.
Click to expand...

Yes.
Somebody else will be at fault, according the the no win no fee parasites.
Lets start with the boat builder and designer- if you managed to fall off the boat, well clearly the guard rails are not fit for purpose.
Who trained you- (doesn't matter if he he was paid or not) clearly you were not trained to not fall over and drown.

First two targets identified, I am sure we can identify a few more!
 
NorthUp said:
Yes.
Somebody else will be at fault, according the the no win no fee parasites.
Lets start with the boat builder and designer- if you managed to fall off the boat, well clearly the guard rails are not fit for purpose.
Who trained you- (doesn't matter if he he was paid or not) clearly you were not trained to not fall over and drown.

First two targets identified, I am sure we can identify a few more!
Click to expand...


So, to repeat my earlier post, is there any evidence of a person or organisation being taken to court due to a leisure boating activity/accident?

Peter.
 
As a member of a CG Coast Rescue Team and one with years of experience in the ways of the sea, and also most importantly the Law of Sod, I have been on many shouts involving potential if not actual danger where we have quietly stuck around and kept an eye on the possible victims until we're satisfied that they will be OK. It's just what we do.
 
Cantata said:
As a member of a CG Coast Rescue Team and one with years of experience in the ways of the sea, and also most importantly the Law of Sod, I have been on many shouts involving potential if not actual danger where we have quietly stuck around and kept an eye on the possible victims until we're satisfied that they will be OK. It's just what we do.
Click to expand...

And good on you for doing it. It's just a pity that selfish toe rags make these thing necessary.
 
Adonnante said:
So, to repeat my earlier post, is there any evidence of a person or organisation being taken to court due to a leisure boating activity/accident?

Peter.
Click to expand...

Well, a quick google finds... none. :)

But, a few years ago, nobody sued for whiplash after denting the wing of their car, now the insurance companies expect it.

Its just a matter of time before someone tries it on.:(
 
The responses so far have highlighted exactly the problem that good people like the Coastguard and the RNLI have.
In the crazy society that we live in good people who try to help are often vilified and even prosecuted when things go wrong even if the whole train of events was started by others who are less accountable or who have died.
I suspect the only reason the Coastguard and RNLI's did what they did was to 'cover their backs' as the press simply would not accept the perfectly sensible response if things had gone wrong later of: 'they said they did not need help'.
Surely we need to stop this downward spiral of good people being blamed when others get themselves into difficulty. But how can we even begin? A return to the rule that you are entirely responsible for your own safety at sea would be a start.
Recent events make me wonder whether the RNLI is getting itself in a pickle by appearing to assume safety responsibilities it was never set up for.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

Other threads that may be of interest

N
Volvo Penta Alarm Module/Alternator Issues
Replies
1
Views
125
superheat6k
superheat6k

Share this page

Top