Italy seizes Russian super yacht.

The friendliest place on the web for anyone who enjoys boating.
If you have answers, please help by responding to the unanswered posts.
See posts with no answers
Wow. I mean, seriously wow! That has got to be one of the ugliest boats I’ve ever seen. It’s like a car carrier with masts. And a car carrier is just an office building floating in its side. So this boat is double-fugly.

IMO
 
Yeah, to each his own when it comes to boat design -- but you look at something like super-sailing yacht Black Pearl and then you look at something like that -- nope, wouldn't want that monstrosity in a million years. That seems to be a more frequent style in superyachts lately though, kind of faux-military, all angular flat surfaces like one of those littoral combat ships. Radar-deflecting. Who knows, maybe it's not faux-military, maybe the owners were trying to prepare for a world disruption like this.
 
Recently I listened to the Manhattan borough president proposing confiscation of Russian oligarch properties in NYC. I kind of scoffed at that. The gov't cannot take your property without due process in the US. Apparently in the EU when you are "sanctioned" they can and do. We are in on those sanctions. Am I wrong that it could not happen here?
 
Comodave said:
I guess money can’t buy taste. That is a truly ugly boat, besides being a sailboat.
Click to expand...


Technically, it is not a sailboat, it is a sail assisted motor yacht. It is not designed to be underway under sail alone. Anyway, to the point of the OP, "Hit 'em where it hurts", nobody likes getting their pockets picked.
 
Gotwex said:
Technically, it is not a sailboat, it is a sail assisted motor yacht. It is not designed to be underway under sail alone. Anyway, to the point of the OP, "Hit 'em where it hurts", nobody likes getting their pockets picked.
Click to expand...

So the worst of both worlds and fugly too…
 
RT Firefly said:
Greetings,
Mr. f. "The gov't cannot take your property without due process in the US." Yes they can! Civil forfeiture in the United States - Wikipedia
Don't have to prove wrongdoing just suspect it. Evidently this has been a source of funding for various county LEO departments for quite a while.
Click to expand...

So I read the Wiki link but didn't watch the You Tube. It seems "civil forfeiture" in dependent on criminal activity. In what criminal activity are the oligarchs now involved? Being pals with Putin and benefiting from that relationship has not been a crime in the past. Possibly I don't understand "sanctions"? Anyhow at face value, I find the confiscation of private property for political reasons onerous.
 
The seizure of assets of Russian Oligarchs by the EU or countries that have separately applied "Sanctions" against the owners of those assets may look similar to "civil asset forfeiture" in its result, but depends only on the application of those sanctions, not on any suggestion of criminal activity by those owners in the country of seizure. The application of sanctions against his people is on the theory that Putin can be pressured by his own people to change something, if those people are under enough pressure by reason of the sanctions.
 
Greetings,
Mr. f. Nope. The way I read it is civil forfeiture in the US can also depend on SUSPICION of criminal activity. NOT necessarily PROOF of same. Suspicion only.


My comment on your comment really has little to do with the Russians. Just trying to correct your "...without due process in the US..." statement. Yup. I know. VERY surprising to me, as well.



And yup, impound those oligarchian holdings.
 
RT Firefly said:
Greetings,
Mr. f. "The gov't cannot take your property without due process in the US." Yes they can! https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Civil_forfeiture_in_the_United_States


Don't have to prove wrongdoing just suspect it. Evidently this has been a source of funding for various county LEO departments for quite a while.
Click to expand...

At a national level, "Sanctions" are an action by US Dept of Treasury and are political in nature. "Seizures" or "Forfeitures" are an action of the US Justice Department in response to actual or suspected criminal activity. Two very different branches of the US Govt.

Peter
 
Just continuing on RTF’s comments. Back in the day, I can’t remember if it was the 80’s or 70’s the US seized Iranian assets. The government to this day still controls those assets.
 
It is a two step process. First, upon issue of sanctions, is seizure which is basically preventing movement or use. However, this is well short of forfeiture which follows and requires a typically very long legal battle. To stop movement or freeze an asset is simple. To actually take ownership of it, is far more complex and time consuming. While the laws of countries vary, nearly all countries we're speaking of follow this process.
 
BandB said:
It is a two step process. First, upon issue of sanctions, is seizure which is basically preventing movement or use. However, this is well short of forfeiture which follows and requires a typically very long legal battle. To stop movement or freeze an asset is simple. To actually take ownership of it, is far more complex and time consuming. While the laws of countries vary, nearly all countries we're speaking of follow this process.
Click to expand...

Also my understanding.

Seizure is like "arresting" a material object suspected in a crime.

Usually.....in the USA..... disposition of that asset is relegated to a magistrate through a legal proceeding.

Like holding a person till the magistrate/judge either allows or denies bail.

If the asset could easily be moved or transferred ownership, ect...that is part of the rationale of seizure.
 
@psneeld, what country are you in? I don’t think we’re allowed to use the word “magistrate” in America [emoji3]
 
Mako said:
@psneeld, what country are you in? I don’t think we’re allowed to use the word “magistrate” in America [emoji3]
Click to expand...

I have seen it used many times in the US.
 
it is normal

Mako said:
Wow. I mean, seriously wow! That has got to be one of the ugliest boats I’ve ever seen. It’s like a car carrier with masts. And a car carrier is just an office building floating in its side. So this boat is double-fugly.

IMO
Click to expand...
It is so ugly because the designer was Philippe Stark ,

the same designer of the Venus the yacht of Steve Job .
Also ugly boat.
 
So once a government ( U..S or otherwise ) siezes a vessel.....are they on the hook the dockage fees, maintenance costs, crew salaries, insurance etc ? I would imagine the monthly expenses for a 200+ foot yacht are substantial. This could be a greater burden for the sanctioner than the sanctionee!
 
I suspect that the owner will have to pay the fees and charges to get the yacht released.
 
Gotwex said:
Technically, it is not a sailboat, it is a sail assisted motor yacht. It is not designed to be underway under sail alone. Anyway, to the point of the OP, "Hit 'em where it hurts", nobody likes getting their pockets picked.
Click to expand...

Did I see the term 'sail assisted"?
 

Attachments

  • coot with sails.JPG
    coot with sails.JPG
    68.3 KB · Views: 41
Comodave said:
I suspect that the owner will have to pay the fees and charges to get the yacht released.
Click to expand...

Owner is responsible for all costs unless and until ownership legally changes. Now that can be complicated. For instance, Lurssen with boat on yard and owner pulls crew off so Lurssen hires small crew.
 
Mako said:
@psneeld, what country are you in? I don’t think we’re allowed to use the word “magistrate” in America [emoji3]
Click to expand...

My country and involved enough in law enforcement to know..... ;)
 
mvweebles said:
I guess this is the ultimate rich-folk problem.

https://www.msn.com/en-us/news/worl...enko-part-of-putins-closest-circle/ar-AAUY8G1
Click to expand...

I photographed that yacht off the Cote D'Azure back in October 2018, while being hosted over there by a TF member who lives in the region. Not the nicest of lines, I do admit, but no doubt very functional. The real irony is the fact that it's sail power optional, but the cost of fuel probably not a big factor to the owner - now past owner - of the time..?

The vessel at the top is another super-yacht, seized by the French it was moored at Antibes at the time.
 

Attachments

  • 8A02BBB2-CE9C-448E-9044-AAA1F9EEE60F.jpg
    8A02BBB2-CE9C-448E-9044-AAA1F9EEE60F.jpg
    112.8 KB · Views: 43
  • F60492FB-97C2-4DA1-89A3-C03746C99256.jpg
    F60492FB-97C2-4DA1-89A3-C03746C99256.jpg
    66.7 KB · Views: 45
Last edited:
But the real question is..... What do they do with a $???M boat? Sell it? How? Auction it off? EBay?

I'm just curious really, Fugly boat with a MASSIVE maintenance bill.

Star.
 
StarChaser said:
But the real question is..... What do they do with a $???M boat? Sell it? How? Auction it off? EBay?

I'm just curious really, Fugly boat with a MASSIVE maintenance bill.

Star.
Click to expand...
And then there`s the problem of the "previous owner" who might feel "hard done by",maybe still feels like the owner, and tries to resume possession.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

Similar threads

more
Choosing the Right Helm Seat
Replies
12
Views
2K
klee wyck
klee wyck
RT Firefly
Overturned catamaran
Replies
15
Views
3K
brian eiland
brian eiland
P
Flare-like fire suppression systems?
Replies
3
Views
2K
Peter Pegasus
P
Adopo
Stability and righting ability
Replies
19
Views
8K
Hippocampus
H
mvweebles
Hurricane Ian. How to help?
Replies
3
Views
920
mvweebles
mvweebles

Latest posts

Back
Top Bottom