Page 2 of 4 FirstFirst 1234 LastLast
Results 11 to 20 of 36
  1. #11
    Join Date
    Aug 2013
    Location
    SW Scotland
    Posts
    19,166

    Default Re: Replying to the MCA consultation

    Quote Originally Posted by halcyon View Post
    But some insurance companies have already bought in safety critical exclusions, admittedly only on boat navigation ( propulsion / steering ) and at least one stopped marine cover. The above is for a business working in the marine industry, not comercial vessel.
    Have all insurance companies refused to cover anyone doing this work or has one insurance company refused to cover one person?
    "Seamen are always wanting to do things the proper way; and I like to do them my way."

  2. #12
    Join Date
    Apr 2002
    Location
    Cornwall
    Posts
    8,625

    Default Re: Replying to the MCA consultation

    Quote Originally Posted by JumbleDuck View Post
    Have all insurance companies refused to cover anyone doing this work or has one insurance company refused to cover one person?
    One pulled out of doing product liability / public liability, broker spent two weeks going round to find two who would offer cover, but with marine safety critical limitation, At the time I thought it odd that safety critical had popped up, then this thread suddenly linked in with it and the MCA, even though the MCA did not intend it, The case opened a loop hole for the future that professional cover could become liable for an accident more easily, so they cover themselves before it occurs.

    Brian
    Kddpowercentre VASR charge

  3. #13
    Join Date
    Nov 2015
    Location
    Portsmouth
    Posts
    203

    Default Re: Replying to the MCA consultation

    Quote Originally Posted by Tomahawk View Post
    I think we should be focussing on the extent to which this a problem that needs to be addressed.

    How nay accidents happen each year compared to other types of accidents?

    CR and Hooligan VIII were high profile cases. But how many yachts a year founder after a grounding?
    How many accidents are actually caused by amateur maintenance?
    How many accidents are caused by someone changing the prop, adding a furling genny, changing a pipe from an "approved" one to an alternative etc?
    Yes we would all love to know the actual statistics and then we could form an opinion about whether any of this regulation is justifiable. However I don't think any such statistics exist - except perhaps where fatalities occur. Even where fatalities occur the reasons for it are almost never attributable to a single cause, still less attributable to specific issues of neglect of maintenance or departure from the original design intent of the boat. I'd be most surprised if there is any quantitative analysis behind the MCA's sudden zealous interest.

  4. #14
    Join Date
    Sep 2010
    Location
    Where life is good
    Posts
    13,406

    Default Re: Replying to the MCA consultation

    I found this after just five minutes of searching

    https://www.nationalwatersafety.org....orts-and-data/

    The majority of incidents occurred at the coast/shore/beach (68) or on rivers (64). As in previous years, a large proportion of those who died did so while taking part in an activity in which they never intended to be in the water – 106 people drowned while walking or running.
    Life is too short to drink bad wine.

  5. #15
    Join Date
    Aug 2013
    Location
    SW Scotland
    Posts
    19,166

    Default Re: Replying to the MCA consultation

    Quote Originally Posted by scrambledegg View Post
    Yes we would all love to know the actual statistics and then we could form an opinion about whether any of this regulation is justifiable. However I don't think any such statistics exist - except perhaps where fatalities occur.
    There are probably some statistics on how many RNLI callouts to pleasure craft are linked to poor maintenance. I'd be surprised if it's much less than 80%.
    Last edited by JumbleDuck; 02-07-19 at 16:32. Reason: Sod it. Thanks, dom.
    "Seamen are always wanting to do things the proper way; and I like to do them my way."

  6. #16
    Join Date
    Dec 2003
    Posts
    5,371

    Default Re: Replying to the MCA consultation

    Quote Originally Posted by JumbleDuck View Post
    There are probably some statistics on how many RYA callouts to pleasure craft are linked to poor maintenance. I'd be surprised if it's much less than 80%.
    Although 80% of zero is still zero!

  7. #17
    Join Date
    Jan 2004
    Location
    Med
    Posts
    5,909

    Default Re: Replying to the MCA consultation

    Tomahawk has opened the door , where do we go from here ? , or do we wait till it's too late .
    Warning forumite dyslexia near by
    www.bluewatersailorcroatia.webs.com

  8. #18
    Join Date
    Nov 2015
    Location
    Portsmouth
    Posts
    203

    Default Re: Replying to the MCA consultation

    Quote Originally Posted by sailaboutvic View Post
    Tomahawk has opened the door , where do we go from here ? , or do we wait till it's too late .
    Good question. It seems to me that we shouldn't give up on the RYA too quickly, they have fought this battle against creeping oversight/legalism for a long time.
    Last edited by scrambledegg; 02-07-19 at 15:29. Reason: superceded by breaking news about RYA interest

  9. #19
    Join Date
    May 2007
    Location
    Itinerant. On an adventure!
    Posts
    2,810

    Default Re: Replying to the MCA consultation

    Think we should seek real separation between professional boats and private individual owners

    That is if you are in business chartering boats, so Coded, or carrying passengers for reward then the passengers have a right to be protected.

    If you are a private owner then you have a self interest and moral obligation to maintain your vessel in good order.

    I assume the regulations for airlines are different to those applicable to light aircraft.
    That's the kind of differentiation that needs to be made.
    Gwylan, a settee with a sail

  10. #20
    Join Date
    Dec 2001
    Location
    Grenoble
    Posts
    29,747

    Default Re: Replying to the MCA consultation

    Quote Originally Posted by Gwylan View Post
    Think we should seek real separation between professional boats and private individual owners

    That is if you are in business chartering boats, so Coded, or carrying passengers for reward then the passengers have a right to be protected.

    If you are a private owner then you have a self interest and moral obligation to maintain your vessel in good order.

    I assume the regulations for airlines are different to those applicable to light aircraft.
    That's the kind of differentiation that needs to be made.

    All this came about because a twat blurred the lines between pleasure and commercial in the sake of £ and expediency.

Page 2 of 4 FirstFirst 1234 LastLast

Bookmarks

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •  

Latest YBW News

Find Boats For Sale

to
to