Legal considerations for the Fire on dive boat Conception in CA

[drrich2]

...and folks refusing to take responsibility for the products and services they put out into the market.

Problem is that 'responsibility' is subject to being defined after-the-fact by lawyers, juries and regulatory agencies, who are not always bound by realistic practicality or true justice. Just how far a boat operator has to go to mitigate risk is far from universally accepted, so boat op.s under the thumb of insurance companies protecting their own interests have to act on what someone might decide.

I think the 'taxi' descriptor has been misinterpreted. Anyone with good sense will act to minimize his potential liability regardless of how passionately committed to customer safety he is. But in diving, the 'taxi' term means something else.

Take a live-aboard trip on an Aggressor boat in the Caribbean, and staff in uniforms do things like make your bed during the day while you're out diving, etc..., you might even get a complimentary chocolate on your pillow! And when you're in the water, why there's a no added charge guide you can follow around so you don't have to navigate.

The California dive scene appears to be different. I was happy with my 5-day trip on the Vision, but nobody made my bed or wore a nifty uniform and there was no included guide.

 

[Texas Torpedo]

Frank, @Wookie
I figure you are one of the best here for this question. How liable is a Captain if the crew member assigned to anchor / fire / idiot watch goes to sleep without the Captains knowledge - because the Captain was scheduled to be sleeping?

And has this now moved into the criminal realm, at least for the person who fell asleep when he should have been at watch? If not others.

Other Captains feel free to chime in as well. I'm curious, but don't have much knowledge of maritime law.

 

[ChrisM]

I agree, I think the "taxi" term has been misinterpreted, at least as I would use it. When I get into a taxi, I don't expect it to blow up. Same as a dive boat. They aren't 'just" getting me from the mainland to the island, they need to be safe when doing it. But it is no frills as mentioned. No hot towels after a night dive, no comfy sheets, etc.

 

[JohnnyC]

IANAL, but this seems like whoever was supposed to stand watch is criminally negligent, and whether or not TA is as well will be dictated by whether or not the sleeping watchman was doing so on company direction.

This is also a good example for why the limitation of liability suit was fired. If the company was fully compliant and it was a single crew member’s actions that caused this, the company will try to protect itself.

Now it just remains to be seen what else comes out of this.

 

[ChrisM]

The federal lawsuit (at the risk of this being sent to the legal thread) does not mean the boat gets off if the pax can prove negligence.

This report goes a long way for the plaintiffs in doing just that. In my opinion.

There is a principle in the law called "negligence per se." If you violate a law, and someone suffers an injury that the laws was supposed to prevent, you are presumptively negligent. You can rebut it, but now the burden is on you to defend yourself, as opposed to the plaintiff having to prove negligence.

 

[ChrisM]

To add. I think this report will essentially scuttle the federal lawsuit. The principle of negligence per se will apply here and the plaintiffs have what they need to show that the boat was negligent (which negates the maritime law limitation).

ETA - If true

 

[Ojai Diver]

No "storied law career" here, but I was wondering if dive boats will continue to allow the courtesy of the overnight stay on the boat before departure on one day trips.

I don't know, but it seems like a liability of which they or their carriers would gladly be rid.

 

[Wookie]

No "storied law career" here, but I was wondering if dive boats will continue to allow the courtesy of the overnight stay on the boat before departure on one day trips.

I don't know, but it seems like a liability of which they or their carriers would gladly be rid.

As long as they have a watch onboard, it shouldn't be an issue.

 

[Bob DBF]

IANAL, but this seems like whoever was supposed to stand watch is criminally negligent, and whether or not TA is as well will be dictated by whether or not the sleeping watchman was doing so on company direction.

If the watchman was sleeping in any other place than the bunk room it could just be a breach of proper watch standing.

This is also a good example for why the limitation of liability suit was fired. If the company was fully compliant and it was a single crew member’s actions that caused this, the company will try to protect itself.

The ability for a watchstander to sleep while on watch, in the bunk room, takes the skipper and crew to overlook the breach. From the perspective of an old watchstander, behavior so bold was not an isolated incident with that crew. This practice may be the reason the other crewman was in the passenger quarters, not in her crew quarters bunk.

This is where the incident pit started.

Now it just remains to be seen what else comes out of this.

My thoughts as well.


As I said before, I have seen nothing but professionalism from the crews I have been out with over the years, and I'd dive with them today. Anomalies happen, as well as their consequences.



Bob

I would feel very nervous about no anchor watch when I'm anchored 60 feet from rocks.

Like a long tailed cat in a room full of rocking chairs.

 

[Wookie]

. So now what, the captain is responsible for not defining crew roles or are all
The individual crew members responsible?

Can they blame it on the deceased crew member in the bunks with the guests?

I think I posted this upthread this morning, but it bears repeating.

From 46 CFR 185.410

§ 185.410 Watchmen.

The owner, charterer, master, or managing operator of a vessel carrying overnight passengers shall have a suitable number of watchmen patrol throughout the vessel during the nighttime, whether or not the vessel is underway, to guard against, and give alarm in case of, a fire, man overboard, or other dangerous situation.

The Captain and owner will be buried by the admiralty judge, and no, you can't pass it off to the dead crewman.

Charterer in this case had a very specific meaning, and the person sponsoring the trip is not a charterer. The charterer applies in the case of bare boat charters, and this wasn't one of those.