Local Sailing Club - Trial requested by the RIBnet Court

[9D280]

A thought..... as it's a club organised event, do the safety fleet boats need to be fully coded?

I refer to the use of a VHF by a club safety fleet on specified channels within the confines of an event and the requirements (or not, to make the point clear) to have everyone with a VHF certificate....... Does a similar "small print" coding rule allow that?

[paul tilley]

jono whether the boats should have been coded ect is irrelevant the boat was used at an agreed price with crew and as such the club should pay up but be more explicit in their job description in the future . certainly a bit embarassing for you being piggy in the middle but the father should have a bit more balls also and stand up for his kids ,if it were my kids someone would have a bloody nose if they didnt pay up .

[Daniel]

Originally Posted by 9D280

I refer to the use of a VHF by a club safety fleet on specified channels within the confines of an event and the requirements (or not, to make the point clear) to have everyone with a VHF certificate....... Does a similar "small print" coding rule allow that?

I beleive a club licence permits members to use the channel (and only that chanel) for appropiate use (ie organising sailing) without a licence.

[9D280]

Yeah, I know that for the VHF, I just wondered if there was a similar "get out clause" for sailing club rescue boats...

[Observer]

Originally Posted by 9D280

A thought..... as it's a club organised event, do the safety fleet boats need to be fully coded?

See my post #19 on this thread. However, the carve-out for club-owned boats doesn't apply here because, in this case: (a) the boat wasn't 'club owned' and (b) the club paid the owner for the hire of it. So, on both counts, it was not a "pleasure vessel".

[m chappelow]

although not related to this thread reminds me about 25 years ago when a couple of amateur sport divers were hired to clear the propellers from a new ferry that had been getting fitted out by a ship yard on a tidal river for a nominal fee, a lot of debris had washed into the props ,the divers had cleared some wood ,the propshaft had not been locked off and the prop turned with the flow of the river trapping and killing the 2 scuba divers ,,as it was sport divers undertaking a [fee] it was classed a commercial operation,, it dident go down too well with the authoritys at the inquest .,,,,back to jono,, its a bit embarassing for jono as he was only the messenger , really it was down to the club and the hire boat to have sorted it all out before hand .

[ben tye]

personally I would not be happy to run an event with under 16 crew, however I do agree that most safety boat drivers are volunteers and despite they age are less then ideally qualified and it could be argued in an emergency they may be of no use or make the situation worse. I live by the notion that as a skipper you are responsible for your crew and they should be paid before you out of your own pocket. that is what they were promised, it is then up to you follow up with the club. I think for the amount they were getting paid you would expect people with higher experience levels. Clearly the club did not communicate this or assumed it was obvious.

[Channel Ribs]

Originally Posted by ben tye

I think for the amount they were getting paid you would expect people with higher experience levels.

Your in RESCUE and you think 20 pounds a day is a high wage?

[Jono Garton]

Originally Posted by ben tye

I think for the amount they were getting paid you would expect people with higher experience levels.

On another subject-


Were the RYAC not looking for safety boats and crew for Weymouth events in exchange for money?

[chewy]

Originally Posted by biffer

ok, chewy, say you had a boat with 75hp two stroke that blows up would you be happy with a replacement 45/50 four stroke, it's about the same weight, you can guess what happens 90 percent of the time

I get a used Yam 75 off the RNLI and fit that.

[Poly]

Originally Posted by biffer

thats interesting if thats right that all boat need codeing for commercial stuff, run with me on this one for a while, small rib from a good company, has rcd, ce plate etc, most likely been in production for 4/5 years, now, if we go to code it with all the kit they say we have to have that boat will probaly fail the rcd test, for if the boat was a few years old it would have been tested with a two stroke on it at best or maybe a load of bodies in it to simulate the weight, now that four strokes are the norm and are much heavier plus all the kit the freeboard at the transom would be too low if not underwater, so without the rcd, no ce plate the boat is not codeable, i'm trying to make some in roads to the mca to suggest that they don't generalise boats in there code book but to look at ribs with a more specific code of practice, after all i wouldn't mind betting that ribs are there biggest part of the codeing, check out what anchors you have to have on a 8.5 m boat, you could use them on a 7 tonne yaght, it's time the code rules were updated properly

Biffer - I'm not sure I fully follow the gist of your sentence.

As I understand it a boat used commercially does not need to comply with the RCD, and e.g. I could buy a brand new Delta which would not be RCD certified (unless I am mistaken) but could be full compliant with the code.

Actually I think in terms of coding yachts (all charter yachts requiring coded) make up a very sizable proportion of the boats.

Actually I think I could probably get my boat (3.9m) through the coding requirements. The liferaft would be a PITA, but presumably would only need to be a 4 man version. It might make it crampt on board and probably would mean I wanted to upgrade to a bigger engine, but I still think I would be able to get it through coding for Cat 5/6 - and the boat probably too small to use predicatbly (weatherwise) beyond that range anyway!

[Poly]

Originally Posted by Observer

See my post #19 on this thread. However, the carve-out for club-owned boats doesn't apply here because, in this case: (a) the boat wasn't 'club owned' and (b) the club paid the owner for the hire of it. So, on both counts, it was not a "pleasure vessel".

I think if challenged the club and owner will point out that they weren't hiring ribs or paying staff but reimbursing reasonable expenses (which is why in an earlier post I said it was niave of the Club Secretary to refer to wages). A professionally crewed coded boat would probably have cost 5x this and I am sure Jono would have been happy to provide this himself.

£30 a day for rib fuel and £20 a day for travel etc doesn't seem unreasonable (as expenses) to me.

[fred bolton]

Well if they were paid wages and the club did not deduct tax I would think the Revenue would be interested so perhaps they should "settle" on that basis

[Observer]

Originally Posted by Polwart

I think if challenged the club and owner will point out that they weren't hiring ribs or paying staff but reimbursing reasonable expenses (which is why in an earlier post I said it was niave of the Club Secretary to refer to wages). A professionally crewed coded boat would probably have cost 5x this and I am sure Jono would have been happy to provide this himself.

£30 a day for rib fuel and £20 a day for travel etc doesn't seem unreasonable (as expenses) to me.

The condition to be satisfied is that the vessel is:

on a voyage or excursion which is one for which the owner does not receive money for or in connection with operating the vessel or carrying any person, other than as a contribution to the direct expenses of the operation of the vessel incurred during the voyage or excursion

Reimbursement of fuel costs falls within the boundary but travel expenses is (I think) not a "direct expense" so outside it. I don't suppose the MCA would be particularly concerned about this sort of arrangement. The problem (if any), for the owner and the club, is invalidating the owner's insurance, particularly third party liability cover.

If I was a Club secretary and wished to make such an arrangement, I think I would characterise the payment as "reimbursement of fuel and incremental maintenance costs". Obviously the amount of the payment would have to be reasonably consistent with that description.

[biffer]

polwart, it is my understanding that you won't get a ce plate without an rcd test, so legally you couldn't buy your new delta or any other new boat in this country, i doubt if you could code a boat unless you have these tests, all chartered boats be them ribs or yachts should be coded and if your'e right about numbers i bet the gap isn't too big, as for codeing your boat, it's not just a liferaft you're needing, reading the code book it looks like they class small ribs as tenders and there is no real code for them, but can you imagine putting all the kit on and getting it surveyed and if i'm right and your free board is less than 250mm (transom height to water line) then it would be fruitless, unless you could get someone to bend the rules slightly

[chewy]

Originally Posted by biffer

polwart, it is my understanding that you won't get a ce plate without an rcd test, so legally you couldn't buy your new delta or any other new boat in this country, i doubt if you could code a boat unless you have these tests, all chartered boats be them ribs or yachts should be coded and if your'e right about numbers i bet the gap isn't too big, as for codeing your boat, it's not just a liferaft you're needing, reading the code book it looks like they class small ribs as tenders and there is no real code for them, but can you imagine putting all the kit on and getting it surveyed and if i'm right and your free board is less than 250mm (transom height to water line) then it would be fruitless, unless you could get someone to bend the rules slightly

Commercial boats don't need RCD catergorys.
Have you seen the transom height on an Atlantic Lifeboat, you can't code them lol!

[Poly]

Originally Posted by biffer

polwart, it is my understanding that you won't get a ce plate without an rcd test, so legally you couldn't buy your new delta or any other new boat in this country,

Sorry that was part of the point I was trying to make (but failed!) - as Joe Public I can't buy a non-RCD rib but as Chewy said Commercially JP Ltd can, and it doesn't need RCD/CE approval. It can still be coded. Indeed it would probably be necessary to code it to prove to trading standards that it was not purchased for "recreational use".

i doubt if you could code a boat unless you have these tests,

you can. Deltas, Pac22s, etc all have been coded but none are RCD/CE approved.

as for codeing your boat, it's not just a liferaft you're needing,

I know that - since I have never seriously considered it I might be missing some major items - but I can't off the top of my head think of anything that would sink my boat. I'm not sure what my transom freeboard is fully loaded but it might be 250mm? others on here have had to build up their transom, add a skirt around in in hypalon or do other things to convince the examiner it was OK,

reading the code book it looks like they class small ribs as tenders and there is no real code for them,

I guess SMALL ribs are not really expected to be opperating commercially with passengers outside categorised waters. There are guidelines for use in "inland waters" which I think take account of many of the issues you highlighy. e.g. small boats may be suitable for certain types of use, ribs may be more capable that larger hardboats.

[biffer]

this is all very confusing, are you telling me that you can buy new boats with no ce plates if you use it commercially, which is the whole point of us codeing the boat in the first place, the codeing poeple have ask for all the test results on my boat, in theory what you are saying i didn't have to do any of it, am i reading you right and if this is right i'm going to have a row with the mca

[Pete7]

Originally Posted by biffer

this is all very confusing, are you telling me that you can buy new boats with no ce plates if you use it commercially, which is the whole point of us codeing the boat in the first place, the codeing poeple have ask for all the test results on my boat, in theory what you are saying i didn't have to do any of it, am i reading you right and if this is right i'm going to have a row with the mca

Biffer, yes you can buy a commercial rib without RCD. This is why Delta pulled out of the recreational market in 1998 (I think) because it was just too much trouble for the number of sales each year. There main market was in commercial sales. Whether you can sell a new rib in the EEC without CE is another question and I would have thought not.

Having to jump through all the hoops to get a boat coded is completely different from the Recreational CRaft Directive. Had to do the same, complete with lots of bodies on board, tubes inflated, tubes deflated. Measure transom clearance etc and then check all the kit.

Now as to the original problem well:

[biffer]

didn't think you could sell a boat without a ce plate here in uk, it's cost me loads and for no reason, they know the boat is commercial why else would i be codeing it yet i've still had to go through all this bollox, time for a cuppa me thinks aarrrrrgh