Yacht Justice Sinks

[savageseadog]

Your post is one of the most pompous I have heard in a long time.

I thought it was an insightful and sensitive description.

I wasn't going to bother but..............

The way the "report" reads, at least to me, is implied criticism of the skipper. I don't think posting heresay comments on this (or any other) forum is appropriate. An insurance claim and possible legal action will result from the wreck and I don't think prejudicial comments like "or perhaps you didn't even know what the best line is" is a very nice thing to do. There are follow up comments which take the lead of the original post regarding the use of a chartplotter and so on. Anyone who wants to join the kicking fest should realise that they could be the next victim. It is, as I've said before an mix of story, fact and opinion inapproriately written the the third person.

 

[rallyveteran]

An insurance claim and possible legal action will result from the wreck and I don't think prejudicial comments like "or perhaps you didn't even know what the best line is" is a very nice thing to do.

Such a comment isn't a very nice one to make regardless of whether there will be a claim or action but you are surely going too far by suggesting that the result of any dispute might be influenced by what is written on these Boards.

If the report had been written by someone with no knowledge of the area or the conditions I'd join the criticism but I'd say the poster was doing a service to readers of this Board, and I'd like to see more reports of the type he provided.

Rallyveteran

 

[lw395]

I wasn't going to bother but..............

The way the "report" reads, at least to me, is implied criticism of the skipper. I don't think posting heresay comments on this (or any other) forum is appropriate. An insurance claim and possible legal action will result from the wreck and I don't think prejudicial comments like "or perhaps you didn't even know what the best line is" is a very nice thing to do. There are follow up comments which take the lead of the original post regarding the use of a chartplotter and so on. Anyone who wants to join the kicking fest should realise that they could be the next victim. It is, as I've said before an mix of story, fact and opinion inapproriately written the the third person.

I didn't find the report that critical, but the way I see it:

As skipper, you are responsible.

If it goes wrong people will think you did it wrong. We can't just say 'Oh bad luck', it's better that those who feel the skipper took the wrong risks come out and say so.
Hopefully then the rest of us will be a little more careful or a bit better informed.

I don't think anyone's legal action will be prejudiced by the general public discussing the issues. We should remember we don't have all the facts though. We should avoid directly accusing anyone of recklessness or negligence, that's possibly a bit too close to defamatory if decisions were made for reasons we don't know about.
But I think it's fair enough for someone to say 'I wouldn't have done that myself, I prefer a larger margin for error.'

Thankfully total losses are so rare that they probably aren't a major driver of insurance premiums. For ever incident like this, there are probably several thousand £5k bumps, a depressing number of thefts etc etc.

Take care and good sailing.

 

[moondancer]

Having read all this thread again, and looked at the upsetting youtube footage my views have changed on this.

I am very sorry for the owner and crew. It must be devastating to go through an experience like that. Also tinged with despair over the loss of a new boat which must represent lots of hopes and dreams.

However..... the more I think about it the more stupid their decisions seem. This is only my opinion and wouldn't be influential in any legal stuff.

You have a boat that draws over 2 m. You have inexperienced crew. It is a new boat that you don't know that well. It is very cold. The forecast is for NE 7.

You are stuck in Ramsgate. You probably want to get back to St. Kats as soon as possible.

You have three options. 1) Get the train home. 2) Go the longer way round probably about 3 hours later but only getting to Queenborough on the tide. 3) Take the short cut which if you work out the tides on an optimistic basis is marginal at best with a room for error of around 100M.

All this with cold and windy weather and tired inexperienced crew.

Option 1 - Completely safe but you don't get the boat home.

Option 2 - Safe but you might be out for an extra day.

Option 3 - A bit quicker but under any sensible analysis must be so fraught with danger.

It was clearly the wrong decision given the events, and to me it looks a competely daft decision.

 

[photodog]

I don't think posting heresay comments on this (or any other) forum is appropriate. An insurance claim and possible legal action will result from the wreck and I don't think prejudicial comments like "or perhaps you didn't even know what the best line is" is a very nice thing to do..

I dont know if I have read the same account as you.... this is what I read..

Having been the forumite on the spot, with as much local knowledge as anyone round here, met the skipper and crew and also one of the lifeboat crew

So, what we have here is a firsthand account from someone who directly interviewed the individuals involved, and who witnessed the aftermath.

This is not a hearsay account, and is far from sub-judice.

I would submit that sugesting that comments passed on the forum might be effectivley sub-judice is in itself prejudical... as it assumes that court action of some sort, and in particular criminal actions involving a jury, are likely to, or have actually, commenced. Which in this case has not occured or is likely to.

The suggestion that individuals should not discuss this suggests some sort of knowledge or belief that a criminal act has taken place, as the effect of public discussion to potentially prejudice a jury trial are virtually non existant for a civil case.

Whilst the original OP's account may not fullfill all the classical rules for a journalistic acount of a incident, I think that it is probably superior to most of what is being reported as fact or news in our media today.. as the OP has actually attended the scene, and discussed what happened with people directly involved.

Better direct attribution of events would be good... but this is still far from hearsay.

The belief that we should not discuss something because in the future some action which may or may not take place, may or may not somehow be affected by our discussions, is a good way to discourage the discussion of virtually anything except the weather... or Coronation street.

Suggestions of a topic or discussion being sub-judice, is one of the tools that is used to surpress public discussion, and it is interesting to note that the US has enshrined in the first ammendment to their consitution the right to discuss things in public which in the UK would be considered sub-judice. A right that has been repeatedly tested in the US courts. In addition the right to freedom of speech and expression is enshrined in article 19 in the UDHR.

 

[savageseadog]

I can assure anyone who wants to know that marine insurance companies read this forum and use the information gleaned, it's not supposition but a fact I happen to know. An insurance claim is a process involving apportionment of liability and compensation for loss, this takes place within a framework defined by law. I'm sure the owner or skipper would not be happy to be judged by a report written in the way it was, which appeared to have insider information from the rescue services. This was followed by various opinions which may or may not be valid.

 

[Ubergeekian]

The way the "report" reads, at least to me, is implied criticism of the skipper.

He chose to take his boat through a shallow channel, in a near gale, with an inexperienced crew, in winter. Go on, put a good gloss on that lot.

 

[sailorman]

The only sure way of not making a cock-up/mistake

He chose to take his boat through a shallow channel, in a near gale, with an inexperienced crew, in winter. Go on, put a good gloss on that lot.

Is to Stay on the Mooring.
Many do this

 

[photodog]

I can assure anyone who wants to know that marine insurance companies read this forum and use the information gleaned, it's not supposition but a fact I happen to know. An insurance claim is a process involving apportionment of liability and compensation for loss, this takes place within a framework defined by law. I'm sure the owner or skipper would not be happy to be judged by a report written in the way it was, which appeared to have insider information from the rescue services. This was followed by various opinions which may or may not be valid.

Sorry SSD, I dont think that sparing the owners blushes, or helping/hindering the insurance industry is a good enough reason to surpress the publics natural right to free speech.

As you point out there is a legal framework for this... and if it's not robust enough to have a carefull and proper examination of the facts, then it needs redesigning... We need to have enough confidence in the "jury" (Be they the public, or professionals..) to believe that they will make a accurate judgment based upon a presentation of the facts as laid out to them... The UK is one of the few countries that still believe that somehow the public is incapable of coming to a accurate judgment without the carefull hand of the legal system guiding them, and I find that a bit condescending.

The belief that somehow idle speculation or media reports will hold more sway over a jury of your peers, or a group of professionals working within a legal framework were a proper examination of facts is undertaken, is a throwback to a previous era which hails from a bygone age when the ruling elite thought juries could not be trusted to come to the "right" verdict unless closely protected and guided by the legal establishment. In this more democratic age it is surely time to start treating jurors as adults equipped to sift through the evidence presented to them during any proceedings?

As a highly respected Forumite from here says...

"If I'd wanted to live in a Banana Republic I'd have gone to South America."

 

[LONG_KEELER]

I can assure anyone who wants to know that marine insurance companies read this forum and use the information gleaned, it's not supposition but a fact I happen to know. An insurance claim is a process involving apportionment of liability and compensation for loss, this takes place within a framework defined by law. I'm sure the owner or skipper would not be happy to be judged by a report written in the way it was, which appeared to have insider information from the rescue services. This was followed by various opinions which may or may not be valid.

I think it would be fair to say that in general, all our comments on here are personal opinions.

Surely we all have the right to voice them.

I thought that was the idea of the forum.

All you have succeeded in doing is to create an atmosphere of fear where people will be reluctant to make any contribution unless it is a cast iron published fact.

 

[Searush]

(snip)
All you have succeeded in doing is to create an atmosphere of fear where people will be reluctant to make any contribution unless it is a cast iron published fact.

Bollox. "I ain't afraid of no ghosts!" Even SavageSeaDogs whose bark is worse than their bite don't frighten me. I don't think mant forumites would take much notice of the comments anyway - other than to assess them in the light of their own knowledge & experience..

 

[nortonmotors]

Is to Stay on the Mooring.

Sorry, sailorman, but I don't wholly agree.
Plan ahead, review the options, consider the alternates, etc..... and act accordingly. If that means staying on the mooring, then there'll be other opportunities. But if the plan seems reasonable, then go and enjoy it.
I wouldn't, for example, cross Colne Bar at LWS in a F6 (my limit), always choosing to go round the buoy. Some might consider that risk worth taking, but to me it's unnecessary. I get to Pyefleet a little later - but so what ?
As I suggested much earlier in this thread, making the passage at that time, with that draft and weather, would have been too bold for me.

By the way, noted.

 

[sailorman]

[Sorry, sailorman, but I don't wholly agree]

me, Im not bothered what "you agree to" its the Skippers decision every time.
never follow others, make your own mind up based on info available.
If things not in your favour stay on the mooring, but we all "Cock-up" apart from those that never drop the mooring of course & there are many of those & they never get into trouble do they

 

[LONG_KEELER]

Bollox. " I don't think mant forumites would take much notice of the comments anyway - other than to assess them in the light of their own knowledge & experience..

Thanks for the response.

Afraid I have to disagree. I think it is very unlikely that Cantanta, or possibly many others , will feel free to report in like manner again.

People do not like that kind of aggression and level of disrespect.

 

[Searush]

C'mon Guys, Do I have to say it again?

Risk = likelyhood of event occuring x consequence of it occuring


CONSEQUENCES are the critical part of the equation, if the consequence is severe - DO NOT TAKE THE RISK - unless the likelyhood is extremely low. An example of this is crossing the road. The consequence of failure (being hit by a car) is probably lethal, therefore one does everything one can to minimise the risk of it happening (which is fairly low anyway) - but one will still cross the road.

Why do we find it so hard to make sensible risk assessments. I can understand that being out there in bad weather may affect one's judgement. But without knowing that passage, it doesn't sound like an easy one & the consequence of grounding in those conditions are bound to be catastrophic.

Please, everyone, think about risk assessment when you next need to make a decision.

 

[LONG_KEELER]

C'mon Guys, Do I have to say it again?

Risk = likelyhood of event occuring x consequence of it occuring


CONSEQUENCES are the critical part of the equation, if the consequence is severe - DO NOT TAKE THE RISK - unless the likelyhood is extremely low. An example of this is crossing the road. The consequence of failure (being hit by a car) is probably lethal, therefore one does everything one can to minimise the risk of it happening (which is fairly low anyway) - but one will still cross the road.

Why do we find it so hard to make sensible risk assessments. I can understand that being out there in bad weather may affect one's judgement. But without knowing that passage, it doesn't sound like an easy one & the consequence of grounding in those conditions are bound to be catastrophic.

Please, everyone, think about risk assessment when you next need to make a decision.

Thankyou God for giving us all a damn good telling off !

Pomposity Rules !

 

[Seven Spades]

Wrong to judge

At least one poster here knows this area well, I on the other hand know nothing about this area of our coast line.

None of us including the OP have any idea how well the owner of the said yacht knows that route, he may for all we know have been doing it all his life. Whilst many here would have chosen a different route the decision lies with the skipper it is his call. Anyone who buys a brand new J1/33 is likely to have been pretty experienced and does not have the benefit of hindsight. It may be that his log was not correctly calibrated, I don't know.

It was his decision and for some reason it went wrong, anything could have happened, log miscalculation, of tidal height, navigation or mechanical failure, who knows, none of us.

I feel that this thread has taken a somewhat macabre direction. It is very sad and only those on board will know the truth. We are all fallible and I think this owner deserves our sympathy not ridicule.

 

[Pye_End]

2) Go the longer way round probably about 3 hours later but only getting to Queenborough on the tide.

Going round the outside of Margate Hook would not have added anything like that time, With the sort of speed a boat like that would have made on a braod reach the extra time would barely have been noticable.

Havn't done the maths, but we would have got a lot further in one tide than Queenborough.

As regards the weather, it was not extreme, just windy. Look at Dick's video taken a few hours after the grounding - does the sea state really look intimidating (unless you are bouncing on a breakwater)? With wind with tide and the sands taking out the worst of the swell it is pretty flat, and we are talking about a 13.3m performance boat not a dinghy. Can't critisice somebody for going out in that weather - if I did I would spend most of the last 2 summers in the marina! He failed to appreciate the depth there for some reason, and thus should have gone round Margate Hook - end of story.

 

[Sailfree]

I wasn't going to bother but..............

The way the "report" reads, at least to me, is implied criticism of the skipper. I don't think posting heresay comments on this (or any other) forum is appropriate. An insurance claim and possible legal action will result from the wreck and I don't think prejudicial comments like "or perhaps you didn't even know what the best line is" is a very nice thing to do. There are follow up comments which take the lead of the original post regarding the use of a chartplotter and so on. Anyone who wants to join the kicking fest should realise that they could be the next victim. It is, as I've said before an mix of story, fact and opinion inapproriately written the the third person.

After every incident someone states on here dont discuss it untill all the fascts are known. But these are often only published a year or so later. Providing the comments are clearly expressed as factual or speculation this is the ideal place for many to learn very quickly from others unfortunate experience and even some armchair warmers opinions can be food for thought. I, and I am sure many, learnt a lot from the speculation/comments about the Ouzo incident. As a result I immediately purchased a waterproof handheld VHF and a personal GPS EPIRB.


Whatever the fact what I am reading is emphasising to me the care that is necessary with shallow shifting sandbanks and obviously even experienced skippers can get it wrong plus I wonder whether the effects of the cold or tiredness influenced the decision to take this route.

If speculation on here causes many to take extra care then it is worthwhile and unfortunately human nature results in people being more interested and taking note of recent events even though the MAIB reports are informative and well written they do, with the passage of time loose some of their impact.

 

[aquaholic]

Do you know what, I have just spent 10 minutes compiling a detailed informative reply regarding my experience and that of others that I know in that area, just before hitting the submit button, a really horrible feeling came over me wondering what comments regarding my post I would have to endure.
So I wont bother.......just to prove that the actions of some do prevent others posting!

Oh and thanks to Cantata for a very good report, keep up the good work !