Boat safety

[Steve Manc]

https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/articles/cn7x7y08dgdo.amp

 

Will the boat safety be updated?

 

Will this effect hire boats who sometimes have drunken holidays makers. Especially the day hires.

[Arthur Marshall]

Not sure how a tendency to drunkenness could be included in the BSC.

Legislation which can't be enforced is a waste of time, so I think hirers are safe.

[ditchcrawler]

The only thing that could work is including private skippers in the same drink drive regulations as commercial ones, so the police could breathalyse any suspected skippers following an incident or suspicion .

[MtB]

3 hours ago, ditchcrawler said:

The only thing that could work is including private skippers in the same drink drive regulations as commercial ones, so the police could breathalyse any suspected skippers following an incident or suspicion .

 

And the obvious flaw in this proposal is the question "Who is the skipper?" out of the 12 inebriates on board swerving the boat from bank to bank up the cut...

 

 

[IanD]

Just now, MtB said:

 

And the obvious flaw in this proposal is the question "Who is the skipper?" out of the 12 inebriates on board swerving the boat from bank to bank up the cut...

 

The one who signed their name as the skipper when they picked the boat up?

[ditchcrawler]

Just now, IanD said:

The one who signed their name as the skipper when they picked the boat up?

What about the non hirers.

[IanD]

5 minutes ago, ditchcrawler said:

What about the non hirers.

AFAIK the one who signs the hire agreement as the skipper is responsible for safe navigation and any damage, just like on a ship. If they let someone else who's drunk steer then they would presumably be held to blame, as well as the drunk steerer. Or maybe the drunk steerer gets away with it since they didn't sign anything so can't be held responsible...

Edited May 8 by IanD

[MtB]

32 minutes ago, IanD said:

The one who signed their name as the skipper when they picked the boat up?

 

Curiously, they are not on the boat. How did THAT happen?

[nbfiresprite]

I was at the Poole Regatta when this happen in 2022, We both heard and saw the boat or rather its wake (No Nav Lights turned on) as it shot out of the Yacht Club moorings with both throttles hard over as it raced off into the darkness of the harbour. Like many others we called up the Harbour Masters office on the VHF to report this. 

 

The feeling among many is that he should have got more than three years as will be out in less than eighteen months or less.

 

Question is how do you inforce any change in the rules that the coroner wants? There are over 8000 boats moored in Poole harbour alone. How do you check each one before it departs that the person in command is sober. You will need alot of people to check even a few hundard when the weather is good.

 

Copy of the coroner's report.

 

REGULATION 28 REPORT TO PREVENT FUTURE DEATHS

 

Secretary of State for Transport
Chief Executive Officer of the Royal Yachting Association (RYA)

 

CORONER

I am Rachael Clare Griffin, Senior Coroner, for the Coroner Area of Dorset.

 

CORONER’S LEGAL POWERS

I make this report under paragraph 7, Schedule 5, of the Coroners and Justice Act 2009 and Regulations 28 and 29 of the Coroners (Investigations) Regulations 2013.

 

INVESTIGATION and INQUEST

 

On 16^th May 2022 I commenced an investigation into the death of David John Haw, born on the 9^th September 1997 who was, therefore, aged 24 years at the time of his death.
The investigation concluded at the end of the inquest on 17^th December 2024.
The medical cause of death was:
 
Ia Drowning
 
The conclusion of the Inquest was unlawful killing.

 

CIRCUMSTANCES OF THE DEATH

On the evening of the 1st May 2022, David attended a prize giving event at Poole Yacht Club, Poole as part of Poole Regatta having been a member of crew for the vessel Off Beat. At just after midnight on the 2nd May 2022 having left the event, David as a passenger with others, boarded on a ridged hull inflatable boat (RHIB) called Fargo, which was a support boat being used for another boat at Poole Regatta.

The RHIB travelled to Poole Quay Boat Haven, dropped 3 people off and left there at 0.15 hours at which point David was sat in the bow of the deck of the vessel. At 0.18 hours RHIB Fargo collided with Diver Buoy in Poole Harbour, Poole causing David to be thrown out of the vessel into the water. He disappeared and was later recovered from the water on the 14th May 2022, about 100 metres from Diver Buoy.

At the point of the collision the RHIB was being helmed at excessive speed, approximately 30 knots, which is 3 times the speed limit for the waters, which was not a safe speed. The helm of the vessel did not hold appropriate qualifications to helm the boat at night and was under the influence of alcohol at the point of the collision. There was no pilotage plan for the journey, nor was there a safety briefing or offer to passengers to use lifejackets. There was no challenge by the helm to David about his position sitting in the bow of the deck. The helm used a navigation app on a phone which is not an approved method of navigation and would negatively impact on night vision. The helm failed to keep a proper look out.

 

CORONER’S CONCERNS

During the course of the inquest the evidence revealed matters giving rise to concern. In my opinion there is a risk that future deaths could occur unless action is taken. In the circumstances it is my statutory duty to report to you.

The MATTERS OF CONCERN are as follows.  –

As the Royal Yachting Association (RYA) state in Addendum A (RYA) – Recommended Notice of Race Wording to their Guidance and Good Practice, “Sailing is by its nature an unpredictable sport and therefore inherently involves an element of risk.”
 
Vessels that operate on the water are categorised as either pleasure or commercial vessels under current legislation and the legal requirements governing the design, construction and operation are very different, with commercial vessels being more heavily regulated.  The definition of a pleasure vessel is provided under Regulation 2 of The Merchant Shipping (Vessels in Commercial Use for Sport or Pleasure) Regulations 1998 and any vessel that does not meet the definition under regulation 2, is a commercial vessel.
 
I have concerns that pleasure vessels are being used in a manner, and in conditions, that would be very similar to commercial vessels without the same safety mitigation. For example, there is no requirement to have a safety briefing prior to a journey on a pleasure vessel, whereas there is on a commercial vessel, however the risks may be the same, which can include death.
 
Further in relation to pleasure vessels, there is currently no legislation prohibiting the use of alcohol or drugs by those who are helming a vessel for private or pleasure use, whereas for those helming a commercial vessel, there is. The Railways and Transport Safety Act 2003 was enacted on 10^th July 2003. Section 78 & 79 of that Act created an offence for professional mariners to perform their duties if impaired by alcohol, with Section 81 setting a prescribed limit for alcohol consumption. This position is very similar to an offence of driving a motor vehicle under the influence of alcohol. Under Section 80(3) there is a specific offence applicable to non-professional mariners of operating a vessel underway whilst under the influence of alcohol or drugs, however it is not currently in force. Accordingly, it is not illegal to helm a pleasure vessel under the influence of alcohol or drugs. Helming a vessel under the influence of alcohol or drugs could lead to a future death given the impact alcohol and drugs have upon perception, control, judgement and decision making.
 
Further, I have a concern that personal floatation devices, such as lifejackets or buoyance aids are not legally required to be carried on all vessels, nor is there any legal requirement to wear lifejackets. The current legalisation, The Merchant Shipping (Life-Saving Appliances and Arrangements) Regulations 2020, only requires pleasure vessels of over 13.7 metres in length to carry lifesaving appliances. I have concern that the lack of life saving appliances on all vessels could lead to future deaths.
 
Finally, I have concerns about the use of support boats, often RHIBs, at sailing events or regattas, and particularly when they are used outside of the designated sailing time but in a way linked to the event, for example to transport people to and from the organised social events linked to the regattas, where often there is alcohol available.
 
I have concerns that there is a culture of using such support boats as a form of taxi particularly at the social events, albeit not for pecuniary gain. This means they could come under the definition of a pleasure vessel and as those helming these vessels may be in drink, they may not take necessary precautions and safety measures given the lack of regulations. Further the owner and operator of the vessel may not be aware, as was the case in David’s death, of the use of the vessel in this way, or of the identity of those on board which may result in the vessel falling under the commercial vessel definition for the purposes of those journeys with the appropriate regulations not being followed.
 
Under Rules 89 and 90 of the World Sailing Racing Rules of Saling (RRS20212024Finalwithbookmarks-[27255].pdf) (The Rules) there is a requirement for race organisers to issue a “Notice to Race” and “Sailing Instructions” for the race. Under Appendix J to the Rules, at paragraph J2.2, it is stated “Unless included in the notice of race, the sailing instructions shall include those of the following that will apply: …….. (9) restrictions on use of support boats, plastic pools, radios, etc.; on trash disposal; on hauling out; and on outside assistance provided to a boat that is not racing”.
 
The RYA in their guidance recommend a risk statement is used by race organisers for sailing events, however, the RYA guidance does not contain a specific section to deal with the use of support boats. I am concerned there is a lack of guidance to organisers of race events to ensure that the owners, operators and skippers/helms of vessels are aware of the responsibilities around use of support boats during the period of sailing events, which could lead to a future death.
 

ACTION SHOULD BE TAKEN

In my opinion action should be taken to prevent future deaths and I believe you have the power to take such action.

 

YOUR RESPONSE

You are under a duty to respond to this report within 56 days of the date of this report, namely by 14^th February 2025. I, the coroner, may extend the period.
Your response must contain details of action taken or proposed to be taken, setting out the timetable for action. Otherwise, you must explain why no action is proposed.

 

 

[Momac]

7 hours ago, nbfiresprite said:

There are over 8000 boats moored in Poole harbour alone. How do you check each one before it departs that the person in command is sober. You will need alot of people to check even a few hundard when the weather is good.

There are 33 Million cars in the UK. How do you check whether each driver is  sober ?

Of course its impossible. But there are penalties for those who are caught which acts as a deterrent.

Perhaps a driving license for boats as per a car is a possibility but I suspect the cost would outweigh the benefits.

 

[IanD]

8 hours ago, MtB said:

 

Curiously, they are not on the boat. How did THAT happen?

Does it make any difference? If they signed the agreement aren't they the one legally responsible for making sure the T&C are followed, including no drunk-boating and paying for any uninsured damages?

[Llamedos]

It's about time there was some sort of crackdown on stag and hen parties hiring narrowboats and then getting pissed out of their skulls.

 

I'm not holding my breath though. The police are always charecteristically disinterested whenever there's an incident. I'm thinking of the idiots who sunk that ABC boat on the Droitwich Canal a couple of years back. Despite numerous calls to them saying someone was going to get hurt they took no action. It's a wonder no one from the stag party was drowned let alone all the moored boats they literally slammed into. Disgraceful.

Edited May 9 by Llamedos
clarification

[jonathanA]

This is the problem with our country. I'm sure the coroner is well meaning and its tragic waste of a 24yo lads life but the implication is that thousands of boaters could have to jump through some bureaucratic hoops in the vain hope that it somehow stops some other pissed up folks killing themselves (or others). 

Sometimes people have to accept responsibility for their actions and this would seem to be a good example.

 

For me canal boating is still relatively free from interference by the nanny state, long may that continue. 

 

 

[Alan de Enfield]

 

But the 24 year old did not die die by his own hand - it was a 'pissed up' 3rd party who was responsible.

 

It is this person that should be locked up on a charge of manslaughter!

[IanD]

43 minutes ago, Alan de Enfield said:

 

But the 24 year old did not die die by his own hand - it was a 'pissed up' 3rd party who was responsible.

 

It is this person that should be locked up on a charge of manslaughter!

Agreed. But such a rare tragedy doesn't justify placing restrictions on all boaters who fancy a tipple, 99.99% of who cause no harm whatsoever, and possibly penalising people and giving them a criminal record for something which is extremely low risk.

 

It's not at all the same as drink-driving, which kills thousands of people a year, because a car (not) controlled by a drunk is far more deadly than a boat.

Edited May 9 by IanD

[Arthur Marshall]

34 minutes ago, Alan de Enfield said:

 

But the 24 year old did not die die by his own hand - it was a 'pissed up' 3rd party who was responsible.

 

It is this person that should be locked up on a charge of manslaughter!

You also have to be aware that the deceased must have known that the boat was being driven dangerously at illegal speeds by someone drunk and did nothing about it except sit at the front and enjoy tte ride. I am always a little suspicious of reports that give the impression that someone who dies in an incident where other people are being condemned is always a totally innocent and faultless specimen of humanity.

[Wafi]

16 minutes ago, IanD said:

Agreed. But such a rare tragedy doesn't justify placing restrictions on all boaters who fancy a tipple, 99.99% of who cause no harm whatsoever, and possibly penalising people for something which is very low risk.

 

It's not at all the same as drink-driving, which kills thousands of people a year, because a car (not) controlled by a drunk is far more deadly than a boat.

It depends on the boat. There's quite a lot that can go wrong in a RIB doing 30 knots across open water in the dark, even when the occupants are sober, and it's not a very forgiving environment. That said, motoring slowly out to an anchored/moored yacht in a squidgy little inflatable with a poorly-maintained outboard is not without risk, especially in the dark, after a night out, on an ebb tide, but I must have done it scores of times. I'd draw my personal acceptable vs unacceptable risk line somewhere between the two.

 

[Llamedos]

17 minutes ago, Arthur Marshall said:

You also have to be aware that the deceased must have known that the boat was being driven dangerously at illegal speeds by someone drunk and did nothing about it except sit at the front and enjoy tte ride. I am always a little suspicious of reports that give the impression that someone who dies in an incident where other people are being condemned is always a totally innocent and faultless specimen of humanity.

How do you know he didn’t die yelling SLOW DOWN to the guy in charge of the boat? You can’t ‘gaslight’ the person who died. There’s no way he should bear any guilt. 

[MtB]

2 minutes ago, Llamedos said:

How do you know he didn’t die yelling SLOW DOWN to the guy in charge of the boat? You can’t ‘gaslight’ the person who died. There’s no way he should bear any guilt. 

 

Well rather than stay perched on the bow as it proceeds along the canal at full speed hitting other boats I think the rational man on the Clapham omnibus might have moved off the bow. Or even made his way back down the boat to the helm to 'remonstrate', (as they say).

[Llamedos]

3 minutes ago, MtB said:

 

Well rather than stay perched on the bow as it proceeds along the canal at full speed hitting other boats I think the rational man on the Clapham omnibus might have moved off the bow. Or even made his way back down the boat to the helm to 'remonstrate', (as they 

Just now, Llamedos said:

4 minutes ago, MtB said:

 

Well rather than stay perched on the bow as it proceeds along the canal at full speed hitting other boats I think the rational man on the Clapham omnibus might have moved off the bow. Or even made his way back down the boat to the helm to 'remonstrate', (as they 

Sorry I agree with the Coroner she has seen all the facts. It’s the fault of the guy in charge of the boat. 
 

We can all speculate on cases like this when we don’t know the full facts. Unless of course you actually do have some knowledge of what happened in which case perhaps you should get in touch with the coroner. 

[MtB]

14 minutes ago, Llamedos said:

 

We can all speculate on cases like this when we don’t know the full facts. 

 

Indeed we can. Its what discussion forums are for. 

 

[Llamedos]

Just now, MtB said:

 

Indeed we can. Its what discussion forums are for. 

 

🙄

[magnetman]

53 minutes ago, Arthur Marshall said:

. I am always a little suspicious of reports that give the impression that someone who dies in an incident where other people are being condemned is always a totally innocent and faultless specimen of humanity.

It's similar to when a schoolkid dies. Everyone says how wonderful they were, a role model and a great person. 

 

I have never heard of a situation where  a dead schoolkid was actually just a nasty little scrote who everybody hated. 

 

Statistically speaking it must happen sometimes. 

 

 

Headmasters address 

 

"Condolences to the family of (name obscured) but to be honest he was a vile little scumbag I would have shot ages ago had it not been illegal"

[Jerra]

1 hour ago, Arthur Marshall said:

You also have to be aware that the deceased must have known that the boat was being driven dangerously at illegal speeds by someone drunk and did nothing about it except sit at the front and enjoy tte ride. I am always a little suspicious of reports that give the impression that someone who dies in an incident where other people are being condemned is always a totally innocent and faultless specimen of humanity.

Similarly with teenagers who die in knife attacks.  They have always be little angels.

[LadyG]

When I was 18 we all went to a dance at the Royal Northern  yacht club by  car, rammed full, illegal these days,and it was a hairy drive. At the age of eighteen we considered ourselves invincible.  Two younger lads borrowed a speedboat that had no bouyancy, whatsoever. They got to the yacht club but never got back.

I would not go in a boat at night without a lifejacket. Never with a drunken skipper, but I can see. that could easily happen. Not sure anything could be done about it, one can't be sure that the passengers were any wiser than the driver. In a small boat, the driver is generally the skipper.

Racing offshore for many years, I generally wore a bouyancy aid during the day, these days it would be a self inflating lifejacket.

 

 

Edited May 9 by LadyG