The Sport or Pleasure Vessel Code

[ImpImp]

New document out from MCA:

The Sport or Pleasure Vessel Code The Safety of Small Vessels in Commercial Use for Sport or Pleasure – A Code of Practice

https://assets.publishing.service.g...QhZU8KSxRYLgkSQGBB_aem_tV5lWRsidocOXOPrZiq8Fw

 

[dunedin]

There was an MCA (or DfT?) consultation” on this a few months back - thread on here somewhere refers.
RYA and BM were I think trying to push back on this as there were many new, onerous and expensive requirements - and plenty of simply bonkers new requirements.

Whether anybody at MCA was listening would need a detailed read to uncover (I fear not from a quick scan).
Need to employ a team of adminstrators to review and ensure compliance with all this stuff?

 

[dunedin]

For example - Big worries over new MCA Sport and Pleasure Code of Practice

though encouragingly the CEO of British Marine is quoted as being pleased with the results of their “2 year collaboration” on the new rules. Hope this is the case - Safety and innovation at heart of new code for small commercial vessels used for sport or pleasure

 

[Mark-1]

"the rapidly changing needs of the small commercial vessel sector used for sport or pleasure" --- Such as?

 

[RunAgroundHard]

"the rapidly changing needs of the small commercial vessel sector used for sport or pleasure" --- Such as?

Examples:-

Hybrid drives
All electric drives
Battery Technology
Electronic Navigation Systems
Risk management
Redundant codes and regulations based on old information.

There are upgrades, revisions and additions to the code. The old code(s) were not always suitable for modern vessels and how they are used commercially.

A good example is the all electric creel fishing boat based out of Tayvallach. The MCA found it awkward to code as the propulsion system did not have any guidance on safe use in codes and standards. “It Will Never Work” is the story behind this fishing boat.

The code also ties in a type approved mini ECDIS (it’s not called this, but I can’t remember) system for when paper charts go. The spec was developed by the fishing industry.

Anyway, that’s my take on it, based on the consultations, and feedback.

 

[Mark-1]

Examples:-

Hybrid drives
All electric drives
Battery Technology
Electronic Navigation Systems
Risk management
Redundant codes and regulations based on old information.

There are upgrades, revisions and additions to the code. The old code(s) were not always suitable for modern vessels and how they are used commercially.

A good example is the all electric creel fishing boat based out of Tayvallach. The MCA found it awkward to code as the propulsion system did not have any guidance on safe use in codes and standards. “It Will Never Work” is the story behind this fishing boat.

The code also ties in a type approved mini ECDIS (it’s not called this, but I can’t remember) system for when paper charts go. The spec was developed by the fishing industry.

Anyway, that’s my take on it, based on the consultations, and feedback.

Thanks, fair enough!

 

[st599]

I notice that clubs must now be affiliated to the relevant sport's national governing body.

It also now defines Lithium Ion batteries and has some information on requirements when used in propulsion systems.

 

[Mark-1]

Maybe someone who's read the rules in detail can help me:

Do Club Safety Boats need to be coded for club member volunteers to take them by sea to event where they will be used as a rescue boat? Do club safety boats need to be coded at all? (Section 27?)

What about club owned/managed open rowing boats for access to moorings? Need to be coded?

 

[ylop]

I notice that clubs must now be affiliated to the relevant sport's national governing body.

I don’t think that is a change - it’s the same definition as MGN280 isn’t it?

 

[ylop]

Maybe someone who's read the rules in detail can help me:

Do Club Safety Boats need to be coded for club member volunteers to take them by sea to event where they will be used as a rescue boat? Do club safety boats need to be coded at all? (Section 27?)

What about club owned/managed open rowing boats for access to moorings? Need to be coded?

The definitions say (as per current rules) that most club owned boats are outside the scope. To understand the details actually depends on who is using it, how the club is constituted, etc so needs careful reading.

 

[Mark-1]

The definitions say (as per current rules) that most club owned boats are outside the scope. To understand the details actually depends on who is using it, how the club is constituted, etc so needs careful reading.

Ahhh thanks, that took me to the right section, I think. 3.1.1 says specifically "commercial". I'd hope that vessels belonging to a private club are not "commercial", even if the club is set up as a limited company.

Plus the definition of Pleasure Vessel is the one in the MSA 2025. So no problem.

 

[st599]

Ahhh thanks, that took me to the right section, I think. 3.1.1 says specifically "commercial". I'd hope that vessels belonging to a private club are not "commercial", even if the club is set up as a limited company.

It depends on if the club meets the requirements listed in the definitions section of the document. If it doesn't meet the requirements, then it is commercial.

“Member’s Club” means an affiliated club under the rules of which:
(a) a person may not -
(i) be admitted to membership; or
(ii) be admitted as a candidate for membership, to any of the privileges of
membership,
without an interval of at least two days between their nomination or application
for membership and their admission.
(b) a person who becomes a member without prior nomination or application may
not be admitted to the privileges of membership without an interval of at least
two days between his becoming a member and his admission;
(c) any profits of the club may not be distributed to the members of the club;


“Pleasure vessel” as defined in the Merchant Shipping (Vessels in Commercial Use for Sport or Pleasure) Regulations 2025 (SI 2025 No. 1195), as amended, means:

(b) any vessel wholly owned by or on behalf of a member’s club formed for the
purpose of sport or pleasure which, at the time it is being used, is used only for the
sport or pleasure of members of that club or their immediate family, and for the use
of which any charges levied are paid into club funds and applied for the general
use of the club.

where, in the case of any vessel referred to in paragraph (a) or (b), no other payments
are made by or on behalf of users of the vessel, other than by the owner; and in this
definition “immediate family” means, in relation to an individual, the spouse or civil partner
of the individual, and a relative of the individual or the individual’s spouse or civil partner,
and “relative” means brother, sister, ancestor or lineal descendant


“Affiliated club” means a club which is affiliated to a national governing body of sport; (RYA for sailing in the UK)

 

[st599]

I don’t think that is a change - it’s the same definition as MGN280 isn’t it?

I don't think that the affiliation was a requirement previously.

 

[benjenbav]

Ahhh thanks, that took me to the right section, I think. 3.1.1 says specifically "commercial". I'd hope that vessels belonging to a private club are not "commercial", even if the club is set up as a limited company.

https://assets.publishing.service.gov.uk/media/5f23e4bbd3bf7f1b0fa79fec/mgn280.pdf

In addition to st599’s comment it’s worth reading 1.19 of the linked document: an expressed wish that, even if legally exempt, clubs apply the code’s standards.

Clearly there’s a difference between what one is legally obliged to do and what the government would like one to do.

But, if the club was ever required to fight a negligence claim, adoption of good practices might well be helpful.

 

[dunedin]

Now that the can of worms that is the definition of a Pleasure Vessel has been opened up, it is important to be aware that it is the vessels CURRENT USAGE that counts, not the type of boat ….
The term “Pleasure Vessel” refers to how a vessel is used at the time of operation, not what a vessel has been designed or built to do
MGM 599
And further
2.8 Pleasure Vessel (according to SI 1998/2771) means -
(a) any vessel which at the time it is being used is:
i) (aa) in the case of a vessel wholly owned by an individual or individuals, used only for the sport or pleasure of the owner or the immediate family or friends of the owner;

Which is fine when we are sailing our own boat with our friends and family. BUT what about if you pay somebody to move the boat - sea trial, delivery skipper etc. This would breach this definition, and could in theory require coding for this.
There could be a saving grace on this, but then we need to look at the detail of the definitions of temporary single-voyage basis.

Here I think we need to call in the experts like Halcyon

 

[ylop]

I don't think that the affiliation was a requirement previously.

It does:

 

[ylop]

Now that the can of worms that is the definition of a Pleasure Vessel has been opened up, it is important to be aware that it is the vessels CURRENT USAGE that counts, not the type of boat ….
The term “Pleasure Vessel” refers to how a vessel is used at the time of operation, not what a vessel has been designed or built to do
MGM 599
And further
2.8 Pleasure Vessel (according to SI 1998/2771) means -
(a) any vessel which at the time it is being used is:
i) (aa) in the case of a vessel wholly owned by an individual or individuals, used only for the sport or pleasure of the owner or the immediate family or friends of the owner;

Which is fine when we are sailing our own boat with our friends and family. BUT what about if you pay somebody to move the boat - sea trial, delivery skipper etc. This would breach this definition, and could 8n theory require coding for this.
There could be a saving grace on this, but then we need to look at the detail of the definitions of temporary single-voyage basis.

Here I think we need to call in the experts like Halcyon

I think you may be right - this used to be covered under the IPV code, but this document seems to replace the IPV code but includes no provision for such use.

 

[Sea Change]

It also now defines Lithium Ion batteries and has some information on requirements when used in propulsion systems.

It does, and makes no distinction between LiFePO4 and other lithium chemistries.
However, on the specific issue of batteries producing explosive gases, it does contain a proviso that the specific chemistry should be taken in to account when establishing the concentration level at which an alarm should be sounded.

 

[dunedin]

RYA statement on the new code - New MCA Sport and Pleasure Code of Practice to begin a phased introduction

They clearly have been very busy on this topic, over a period of 3 years.
As ever, it looks like they have achieved some improvements but not all of the changes they asked for.
Will be interesting to see how this pans out - existing boats have a minimum 3 year exemption from these rebukes, so will be just a few new boats which will need to test the waters (and suspect currently relatively few new build charter and sailing school boats are being commissioned).

 

[benjenbav]

I think you may be right - this used to be covered under the IPV code, but this document seems to replace the IPV code but includes no provision for such use.

Late to this and offer the following with some hesitation: I may well be wrong…

I had a quick look at the legislation, specifically what has been repealed, and could not see that the IVP code was included in that.

Thinking a little bit more about it, I think the IVP code is guidance rather than legislation. Hence, perhaps one might expect it to be followed (save where there is a specific reason not to) under the new legislation just as before.