Overtaking prohibited in vicinity of marina!

[psneeld]

I would either request the police report or have a lawyer send one a request.

Generally without a report or eye witnesses, hard to get law enforcement support.

Plus one can argue the other boat didn't satisfy normal seamanship preparation/ lookout etc.

 

[Kapn]

All sailors will complain about wake. Then when they are running a power boat, whether they are first time race committees or on a trawler, they throw a wake. It really takes looking backwards and observing the wake interaction with docks to finally convince some owners what they are doing has an impact.

 

[psneeld]

Or not despite the yells from shore.

But I agree not enough people look over their shoulder.

 

[Olebird]

First I believe they can not bring him in NY as a MA resident, they must sue in MA. He has no business in NY or nexus



that likely means different lawyer from MA.


Second when a lawyer asks for a specific amount like that he has no experience in injury law.

I would just sit do nothing until served with court papers.


Bet it goes away

Agreed! Would alert insurance and personal attorney, then ignore it. Sounds like a setup - cameras too handy. No witness, waves could have come from anywhere. $50 dash cam pointed aft might be good investment if you run frequently in busy areas.

 

[SoWhat]

The USCG only deals with no wake of vessels over 1600 GRT I believe. ALL white no wàke buoys àre stàte or privàte.

I stand corrected. Aids to navigation can be federal, state or private, but they are regulated by Corp of Engineers and approved and inspected by USCG District. A sign stuck on a marina's dock probably isn't a USACE/USCG approved ATON. 33 CFR 66.01 is very clear about the process.

Interesting to note regs pertaining to ICW below Chesapeake Bay:
33 CFR 162.65(3)
Speed. (i) Vessels shall proceed at a speed which will not endanger other vessels or structures and will not interfere with any work in progress incident to maintaining, improving, surveying or marking the channel.

(ii) Official signs indicating limiting speeds through critical portions of the waterways shall be strictly obeyed.

Private marina signs are not "Official" unless approved by USCG District Commander.

 

[psneeld]

I would be interested in a clear explanation in a link or reference..as far as I know, the USCG has a VERY few areas with speed limits...but no "slow speed, no wake" areas anyplace...that is strictly state or local.

Slow speed, no wake signs in the Carolinas are regulated by the state. Other states I would think also but can't say for sure.

 

[rider2003]

I come across many boats fishing complaining about me going too fast (5 MPH) causing big waves and too close too them (60 feet) and they are the same boat that passed me 1/2 hour so earlier going 20 to 30 mph and much closer than 50 feet to me. They don't care about anyone when they are under way but bitch about every one else on the water.

 

[slowgoesit]

Does anyone have experience defending against wake damage? I have a friend who is fighting one now on Ct. coast. He is based out of Boston and traveling through Long Island Sound off Fishers Island in an Albin trawler. He claims he was only doing 6 knots (with a max speed only about 10 knots) during tide change. Another boat he passed at anchor offshore (during peak tide so rough water anyway). They sent him a cell phone picture of him plowing through another boat's wake and video on the inside of their boat with objects falling off counters and a woman being throw against a counter and falling to the floor claiming due to wake he was responsible for. He got a letter from a lawyer stating he wants $10k in damages and medical or will sue in NY court. He's trying to decide if it is a scam, contact insurance and let them deal with it, or settle. Seems very setup up that they got just the right picture of his boat (telephoto?) and then a possible staged interior showing claimed injuries.

Anyone have similar experiences and how did it work out. How can you defend against a possible scam without spending a lot of money or getting your insurance jacked up?

It would be interesting to check the metadata associated with the photo and the video. The video and pic may not have even been taken at the same time or location. If that is correct, end of problem. If the metadata is missing, or deleted, end of problem. If it is present, and data tends to lend credence to their allegations, they would still have to prove that there were no other boats present, and that only HIS boat could have caused the problem. How long ago did this happen? Here's a long shot. Any AIS data available for the location/time frame? As mentioned earlier, any police or USCG report filed? Certainly sounds to me like a shakedown attempt . . .

 

[firehoser75]

hpogue123,
Your friend may have to "pay" one way or the other. I know laws vary by State, and I am not a lawyer or an expert in any type of law. However, I did take a course on liability law once given in Washington State. The lawyer delivering asked the question: " could you sue me because my bright, colourful necktie caused you stress and upset?" Most people answered that is ridiculous. The lawyer stated you could! He then outlined his 3 choices for response. One, never come back to Washington state (he was from California). Two, come back and defend himself in court. Three, pay a settlement to make it go away. It is a sad system according to him.
So, even though it seems way too convenient that they have video inside the boat and an exterior photo showing his boat encountering another wake (which to me proves nothing except there were other wakes around), your friend may have to "pay" in one form or another if this issue is "pushed". Other potential costs could be legal bills and increased insurance premiums. If true, it doesn't seem fair.
However, it would be fair if his wake did actually cause injuries and damage.

 

[psneeld]

The teacher really forgot a step....

Where both lawyers know there is no real case and some letters are exchanged leading to one of the other choices or even it just going away without money.

 

[firehoser75]

psneeld,
Always possible it will "just die a natural death", however, even if the lawyers exchange a few letters, it will still cost for legal fees which add up quickly!!
Case in point.
A couple of years ago, a builder was starting work on the lot next door to my house (on the down hill side). He excavated right to the property line to a depth of between 20 and 30 feet without taking any mitigation measures to secure the embankment. My concrete stairway and sidewalk collapsed, and there was even some fear about damage to the house foundation (footings undermined?)
Even though we did not go to court, to ensure a proper repair was done, I had to pay for my own lawyer and engineer! I was not at fault in anyway, but had to bear fairly large costs anyway. Not fair, but my lawyer advised me that was the best I could hope for. She said that going to court would be mucho expensive and I would not come out ahead.

Anyway, my whole point was, "sometimes it costs you" when legal issues arise even if you did nothing wrong.

 

[psneeld]

I know...m just saying there is another ossible step and outcome that a "teaching lawyer" didn't mention.

That says something right there.

 

[BandB]

Does anyone have experience defending against wake damage? I have a friend who is fighting one now on Ct. coast. He is based out of Boston and traveling through Long Island Sound off Fishers Island in an Albin trawler. He claims he was only doing 6 knots (with a max speed only about 10 knots) during tide change. Another boat he passed at anchor offshore (during peak tide so rough water anyway). They sent him a cell phone picture of him plowing through another boat's wake and video on the inside of their boat with objects falling off counters and a woman being throw against a counter and falling to the floor claiming due to wake he was responsible for. He got a letter from a lawyer stating he wants $10k in damages and medical or will sue in NY court. He's trying to decide if it is a scam, contact insurance and let them deal with it, or settle. Seems very setup up that they got just the right picture of his boat (telephoto?) and then a possible staged interior showing claimed injuries.

Anyone have similar experiences and how did it work out. How can you defend against a possible scam without spending a lot of money or getting your insurance jacked up?

There are frivolous lawsuits every day but for every one of them there are hundreds threatened. My way of handling such is always lawyer to lawyer. The moment the other person resorts to a lawyer, even for writing a letter, then all communication is between lawyers, whether mine or the insurer's. The vast majority of the time, one letter back stops the entire thing.

Proof of liability in such a situation as described would be extremely difficult. Very few attorneys are even going to take such a case. They may send one letter but nothing more. Not going to take it on contingency and how much is one going to spend with an attorney on a $10k case. So, typical small claims case if the plaintiff even pursues.

Once they proved fault, which would be nearly impossible, they then have to proved damages. That means for any item of damage, the original receipt showing purchase price and date and then depreciate that to current market value. For medical, it means all the medical bills, proof of payment, and doctor's report indicating the injury and the cause. "I didn't go to the ER because I don't have insurance" doesn't fly.

The involvement of multiple states just adds to the cost of suit and serving of papers and the complication.