did somebody say watch your wake?

Well - Good news / Bad News:

Letters from the owners attorney to victim(s) agree to pay for damages as per agreed-upon values based on a professional surveyor's assesment of each vessel/facility. In exchange, the victim(s) has to agree to never ever hassle the owner in any way shape or form about the incident.

The letter makes no indication of who the owners are by name, only "BB Yachting, Ltd., a Cayman Islands company".

The letter offer states "On behalf of the owner, we apologize for any inconvenience or difficulties the wake incident of July 5, 2009 may have caused your business or guests." It does not state that the owner (who is now believed to have been onboard at the time) apologizes or even cares.

So: In exchange for what the victims were due all along and a limp apology, the owner wants to be let off of every potential hook. The victims will have to choose their path...
 
Would you expect any less? Of course if they settle with the owner they it will absolve him of future recourse. That's typical for any legal settlement.
 
The victims/claimants, are being paid to stay quiet. That's their business. They need to do what they need to do to get compenstaed for their losses. .... However, the rest of us, including witnesses, are not held to that. If we see that boat blowing through no wake zones, or being operated recklessly, we will certainly not hold our tongues. ..... Sounds like they probably did NOTHING to get rid of that captain. If they did, it's likely they would have said so, to aleave the worries of the rest of us on the waters in thar area.
 
A most interesting thread. What is surprising to me is that there was no direct action by law enforcement or CG toward this vessel immediately. Certainly a good thing that the boat was chased down, the name was confirmed and that the "captain" was in some way signaled that he had caused damage and injury.

I was indirectly involved as a witness and rendering medical care, where a 112 foot yacht came into Charlotte Amilie (US Virgin Islands)and tangled his prop into the anchor chain of a 78 foot charter ketch. The ketch sustained over $100,000 worth of damage, and loss of charter for 3 months, and a crew member sustained a broken arm. I responed to the ketch, rendered first aid and transported the crew member to an ambulance via inflatable. We immediately notified the police and Port Authority of the accident. I then took the owner of the Ketch to the yacht--no response on radio, or upon pounding on the hull. We boarded the yacht, and found the "captain" in a stupor. It turns out that he had signed on a mate (the only other person aboard the yacht), who was not qualified to stand watch, and the captain had been at the helm ever since leaving Miami several days before. He was not aware of the accident, since the stern of the boat was where the collision occured.

The next AM the Port Captain prepared to have the vessel "Arrested"--or siezed by the Marshall. The siezure lasted until the proceedings were completed against the yacht and restitution was made to the charter vessel and the injured crew person. I do not know if that captain lost his license or not.

My question here is would be if the captain of the "SeaDoo" was a US licensed captain (He should be British licensed by terms of the Cayman Registry)--and if any action were taken against his license. It also seems that criminal charges should have been filed; Deleware and MD both have requirements of reporting accidents, stopping to render aid, and penalities, as well as federal penality of $5,000, and up to a year of prison for Negligence or gross negligence in operation of a vessel resulting in the endangerment of lives and/or property. It seems that this would apply in this case. It seems to me that if there were penalities we would see less of this type of behavior--nothing to do with lawyers or owners--its the person who is running the boat.
 
quote:
Originally posted by thataway4

I was indirectly involved as a witness and rendering medical care, where a 112 foot yacht came into Charlotte Amilie (US Virgin Islands)and tangled his prop into the anchor chain of a 78 foot charter ketch. ... I responded to the ketch, rendered first aid and transported the crew member to an ambulance via inflatable.
Click to expand...


You're a good man, Bob. Your questions above are quite intriguing too.
 
Maybe it was foolish fantasy to expect the owner to do anything beyond the absolute minimum. All I can say is that I recieved several PM's and phone calls indicating that he is a "stand up" or "honorable" man. Maybe this is the case, and his legal team is standing in his way for reasons that make sense from their point of view. All I know is that I work for a man who would have handled this completely differently. He would have made the captain turn around, told his legal guys to go screw themselves, gone back to the marina, met with every one of the victims personally, and really cared that they be properly taken care of. By the time it was over, every one of the victims would have thought far more of him than if they had not been through the experience.

Instead, we are left feeling strangely violated and abandoned, not only by the "SeaDoo for Dad" crowd, but also by Bombardier Recreational Products, who promised decisive action and by the USCG and local police, who seem to have simply vanished.

I have no idea what my reaction might be should I ever encounter this vessel or it's owners. I hope that I never do. Frankly: I hope that they NEVER feel comfortable cruising the waters of the eastern seaboard; that they ALWAYS feel nervous about the stares from the docks and other boats, never knowing whether they are being admired or despised; and that they dread every boat that pulls up next to them and attempts to hail them. May they never be comfortable in an eastern port - they made themselves a pariah by their actions, and they will have to live with it.

I'm disappointed and disgusted by the whole thing.
 
It's official - the USCG is out of the picture, stating that "it's not in our jurisdiction". It would have been nice if they had said that on July 5th (two months ago). They say it should be handled by the Maryland Department of Natural Resources. I'm not sure if the DNR ever got involved, so it looks like there will be no charges filed - the owner writes some pocket-change checks in exchange for being left alone and the operator gets off 100% scott-free. Nice. That's how the system works "in the real world".
 
USCG says, "it's not in our jurisdiction".

Is this really even possible? I thought they had jurisdiction in any U.S. waters. No?

Do you think it was some sort of political payoff, and a call from a Congressman to the Dept of Homeland security / USCG?

It smells rotten.
 
Maybe someone didn't want President Obama to have to apologize to the Ships owners or Cayman Islands or whomever.
 
Since when does the USCG have no jurisdiction in the navigable waters of the Chesapeake Bay and the C&D Canal in particular????
 
Update: I got waked by a USCG cutter in the same basin on 9/19/09. I called them on VHF 16 and told them what they had done, and they stopped talking to me. I emailed the Commander of USCG Sector Baltimore directly two days ago. No response there, either. See the "Yacht wreaks havoc" thread on ATC...
 
Sea-Doo for Dad is now back in Ft. Lauderdale. Funny - They didn't stop by to say hello on the way back down...
 
Obsession is a perfume as well as a way of being.

Just an observation.
 
Good news - Patience and peresistence (not to be confused with obsession...) pays off. I recieved this email today:

"The Maryland Natural Resources Police is aware of the incident that occurred on the C & D Canal on July 5th, 2009 and thank you for the links to the on-line conversations pertaining to it. We, the Natural Resources Police, appreciate your concerns with that incident and with the continued safety of boaters using the canal.

In reference to that incident, the investigation is complete and all the property and vessel owners have been put in contact with each other to take care of damages. The investigating officer gave all involved his contact information so that if there were any problems or issues he could be contacted.

The C & D Canal is under the jurisdiction of the Army Corp of Engineers and any new laws such as “Speed Zones” or “No-Wake Zones” would have to be approved through them. I spoke with Mr. Thomlin from the Army Corp at Chesapeake City and he said that the residents of Chesapeake City have written a letter to the Army Corp Engineer to request that the Corp look into the possibility of enacting a No-Wake or Speed Zone in the canal around Chesapeake City.

If you have any other questions, my contact information is below.

Respectfully,

Lt. W. Nicholas Powell
Commander Area 6, Central Region
3738 Gwynnbrook Ave.
Owings Mills, MD 21117
(410) 356-9687
Cell (443) 480-2900
wpowellrb2@gr5tdnr.state.md.us"

Hopefully the COE will see it through.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top