“Duty of Care” when taking others on personal vessel, to dive

[Wookie]

True, but that is not medical grade.
It's not about pure oxy, it's about breathing pure oxy.

I don’t know of anyone in the states able to source medical grade in t bottles anymore, and ABO is easily obtained.

 

[BRT]

True, but that is not medical grade.
It's not about pure oxy, it's about breathing pure oxy.

I've pumped a fair amount of it into tanks.

 

[mmerriman]

I believe it actually has to be 51% or greater (of fuel/operating costs) to be considered a "charter" per USCG....looking up the details on that now. But that is what I have always heard.

any type of compensation AT ALL makes it a charter.

 

[mmerriman]

I'm not sure I follow. Are you saying that your friends chipping in for fuel and helping with clean-up constitutes a boat for hire in the CG's eyes? I don't believe that's correct. Now, it can be a bit of splitting hairs. Passengers can voluntarily share in costs, but if it is mandatory for boarding, then that makes it for hire.

Illegal Charters: Don't Step Aboard

Illegally operated charter boat operations are more common than you think. Here's an inside look at a Coast Guard sting operation.

www.boatus.com

The friends that I take often give me some money, offer to bring food, etc.

The CG is undoubtedly cracking down on illegal charters, especially in some areas. For the most part, they are not looking for a person taking out a few friends and getting some money for fuel, ice, etc. The illegal charters they are after are a bit more organized, and run pretty much like a charter. Minus those pesky insurance, captain's credentials, etc.

That's not to say that you can't get in trouble, just the same. It all depends on the individual doing the checking. If a group of friends know each other pretty well, and there is no set fee for the trip, then chances of being considered an illegal charter drop significantly.

chipping in makes it a charter.

 

[Still Kicking]

any type of compensation AT ALL makes it a charter.

My simple approach is to not ask or expect any compensation (I take buddies out as a gesture of friendship) and the cost of the trip is worth it to me to get out diving with friends. If my buddies choose to chip in for gas AFTER everyone is safely back on the dock, I may or may not accept it.

Whether they get a return invite has a lot more to do with how they behave on the boat and in the water (no drama/no headaches) than whether they offered cash afterward.

 

[mmerriman]

There is no defined percentage, every "is this a charter or not?" enforcement action is examined based on the totality of the circumstances. In many ways this is similar to "what would a reasonable boat owner do" - which is how a duty of care is defined in court. Neither is a spreadsheet of expenses or equipment.

As an example, the USCG doesn't require any vessel to have an anchor. A reasonable boat owner of a canoe or kayak may never own one. A reasonable owner of a 24ft dive boat would.

however your state might require an anchor (example MA)

 

[SpeedyJ]

any type of compensation AT ALL makes it a charter.

Any type of *REQUIRED* compensation. Its not a charter if I voluntarily bring beer or put my card down for gas.

 

[Belzelbub]

Any type of *REQUIRED* compensation. Its not a charter if I voluntarily bring beer or put my card down for gas.

Yeah. That's the distinction that I've been familiar with. Set price for boarding = charter. Passengers throwing in some money after to help isn't.

This statement is in the Boat US article I posted above:

"Passenger for hire" is defined as a passenger for whom consideration is contributed as a mandatory condition of the charter. "Consideration" means an economic benefit and includes payment of money or donation of fuel, food, beverage, or supplies. A passenger may volunteer to share costs, but if the contribution is a requirement (i.e., the charter won't happen without it), the vessel is operating as a passenger vessel and requires a Coast Guard credentialed operator.

The distinction is around Mandatory vs. Voluntary. The people I take on my boat are not told up front that the trip will cost $X. They often offer to bring food, drinks, etc. and throw in some money afterwards. It's not a requirement, though.

 

[rjack321]

however your state might require an anchor (example MA)

This is true but States don't decide if you /aren't a charter. Although some states do co-license charters in various ways. Out here in Washington if you run a commercial fishing charter the USCG has authority over your crew and vessel and the Department of Fish and Wildlife has authority over your fishing gear (and requires you to be licensed as a charter with them)

If you somehow fail (or not) to be "reasonable" in your duty of care, 99.9% of the time that liability will be decided in a state civil court. You'd have to be Conception level negligent to rise to the level of criminality.

 

[84CJ7]

I am assuming this is a US based debate where we have totally *'d up legal, medical and insurance systems in place.

I skipped ahead, but if nobody else mentioned it, require all divers on your boat to have DAN insurance. Especially if they have no other insurance.
Even your best friend might sue your insurance company if the alternative is six figure medical bills due to emergency airlift out to a hyperbaric chamber or something. And also obviously make sure you have the appropriate level of liability insurance in place yourself for the boat and your body of course.
Otherwise I would think duty of care would be limited to the same kit you would carry if it were just you and your boat. Anything else people want they can bring themselves.
I would also ban alcohol (and obviously drugs) on a dive boat. If people want to be stupid and call it "relaxing" they can get their own boat.