Hit And Run..

[Maxwellian]

1 minute ago, SPEEDTRIPLE said:

We'll, if that's the case, I think the TOS need to be relaxed, absolutely no need for over zealous modding in my opinion. 

 

Your are entitled to that opinion Neil. Under the TOS however you are not entitled to name and shame.

[vanessan]

51 minutes ago, CambridgeCabby said:

So that members are aware , I forwarded a copy of this video yesterday 20 mins after it was posted online to Richardson’s .

And did you get any response?

[trambo]

Having also posted a link to the video early on, I must admit I wondered if I was contravening Forum rules only to have that thought confirmed within minutes when it was removed. 

This sort of damage can be sorted very quickly but I really feel sorry for the hirers on  San Marino who would have returned to that damage. It certainly would spoil my holiday, even though I had not been responsible.

I know it's going over old territory but it's about time the old security deposit was reintroduced.

Fred

[RealWindmill]

have just watched the long version of this video.

No speculation here, just observing that larger and higher sided boats will always be at the mercy of the wind.

Are the Broads becoming more like bumper boats land and will staycation first timers increase this risk?

[vanessan]

6 minutes ago, trambo said:

This sort of damage can be sorted very quickly but I really feel sorry for the hirers on  San Marino who would have returned to that damage. It certainly would spoil my holiday, even though I had not been responsible.

If this video hadn’t been available and passed on to Richos, the hirers on the damaged boat would probably have got the blame for it. It would certainly have tainted my holiday to return to the boat and find that damage and have to carry the can for it. Having said that, I’m sure Richos deal with many such incidents in an understanding way. 

[grendel]

26 minutes ago, SPEEDTRIPLE said:

We'll, if that's the case, I think the TOS need to be relaxed, absolutely no need for over zealous modding in my opinion. 

 

which laws do you suggest we break to relax the TOS? the TOS are structured around the minimum necessary to comply with the law.

[Meantime]

1 minute ago, vanessan said:

If this video hadn’t been available and passed on to Richos, the hirers on the damaged boat would probably have got the blame for it. It would certainly have tainted my holiday to return to the boat and find that damage and have to carry the can for it. Having said that, I’m sure Richos deal with many such incidents in an understanding way. 

However, and I know this is the bit that will spark controversy, what if that had been a private boat and no video had been available. That is then someone's insurance claim and next years renewal increasing in price. As much as a hirer will feel aggrieved at having to hand back a boat with damage they did not cause, on most occasions the CDW will cover them. It really is incumbent on all of us, hire or private, or just land based observer to report incidents like this, or leave their contact details as a witness on the boat that was hit along with details of the boat that hit them.

[JennyMorgan]

When we see such behaviour then it is inevitable that we question it. It raises a number of issues mainly because it involved repeat ramming by one boat of another, it was clearly not accidental.

We have discussed the obvious issues previously but we probably have new members since back then.

I go back to Jimmy Hoseason and his agency in Oulton Broad. He was a great believer in demographics and in that respect was remarkably adept at matching clients to a hire yards requirements. Alec Hampton at Safari Cruisers was justly proud of his boats and understandably protective of his investment. Very few 'undesirables' infiltrated Hoseason's vetting system and those that did had a fair old indoctrination by Alec. Other yards were less possessive of their boats, indeed some simply grabbed any customer that came their way, as many still do. Many years later & I still question those who seemingly, in my eyes, condone anti social boating.

[MauriceMynah]

Three different issues here. 

1. Should that footage have been shown (or links to it) on this forum?

2. Should that footage have been posted on YouTube?

3. What if it had been a private boat damaged?

The ToS for this forum are clear. It should not have been shown here, though links to it would be a slightly harder call.

This forum (or any other) has no control on what may or may not be uploaded to YouTube. Personally I would support the placing it there.

If it were a private boat being damaged, then it would be down to the witness to make the owner aware that there was footage of the incident.

That's how I see it. 

[Hylander]

1 minute ago, MauriceMynah said:

Three different issues here. 

1. Should that footage have been shown (or links to it) on this forum?

2. Should that footage have been posted on YouTube?

3. What if it had been a private boat damaged?

The ToS for this forum are clear. It should not have been shown here, though links to it would be a slightly harder call.

This forum (or any other) has no control on what may or may not be uploaded to YouTube. Personally I would support the placing it there.

If it were a private boat being damaged, then it would be down to the witness to make the owner aware that there was footage of the incident.

That's how I see it. 

and your point is??  

[SPEEDTRIPLE]

15 minutes ago, grendel said:

which laws do you suggest we break to relax the TOS? the TOS are structured around the minimum necessary to comply with the law.

So why are people allowed to post such clips on YouTube (not Facebook as someone mentioned) if it's breaking laws, all forms of public media and fora are bound by the same laws, and naming and shaming IS'NT against the law. 

Anyway, suppose it was a boat being rammed by a boat full of drunken idiots, that boat being owned by a forum member living several hundred miles away, and knew nothing about it because "wemust'nt film it" and nothing got reported. I for one would be extremely grateful to anybody naming and shaming if it was the only way to let us know that Lightning had been hit, as I'm bloody sure any other forum member would if it was THEIR boat. 

[vanessan]

24 minutes ago, Meantime said:

However, and I know this is the bit that will spark controversy, what if that had been a private boat and no video had been available. That is then someone's insurance claim and next years renewal increasing in price. As much as a hirer will feel aggrieved at having to hand back a boat with damage they did not cause, on most occasions the CDW will cover them. It really is incumbent on all of us, hire or private, or just land based observer to report incidents like this, or leave their contact details as a witness on the boat that was hit along with details of the boat that hit them.

I don’t see anything controversial at all in that post, it’s all common sense. I know we have returned to our boat and found damage before now, luckily nothing too drastic. I would be extremely grateful for any witness with details to help me. 

[JennyMorgan]

12 minutes ago, grendel said:

which laws do you suggest we break to relax the TOS? the TOS are structured around the minimum necessary to comply with the law.

As an ex professional photographer I had to be aware of what I could and could not do and that included what I could and could not publish. Provided an event took place in public, and was photographed from a public vantage point, then no law was broken. A photograph should not misrepresent reality and basically that is it. If the event happened in a public place, was photographed from a public place and the photographer does not misrepresent reality then there is no reason why that photograph should not be published without restriction.  What we do in public is open to the public gaze and comment.

[CambridgeCabby]

When I originally posted the link to the video on another thread I did so forgetting the TOS of this site and it was rightfully modded , and as I agreed to the TOS when joining the NBN I had no problems at all with it .

I then posted another comment alluding to the existence of such a video on YouTube but didn’t post a direct link thereby keeping within the sites TOC and maintaining the integrity of this forum.

Whilst some may feel the TOC too restricting , we all agreed when joining to abide by them and can have no complaints when we are modded when we breach them , our mods do a hard and thankless task and for that I thank them 

[grendel]

as i previously stated naming and shaming falls under the safeguarding section of the TOS, nothing stopping people filming what they want and posting wherever will let them post it, but that place isnt here. We have examined the current and up and coming legislation and comply to that.

fail to comply to our TOS and you end up on pre-authorisation, carry on and it could lead to a ban, simple, everyone has signed up to the terms to be able to post here.

[Meantime]

Last year I was moored at Sutton and got hit by a boat which managed to remove the fender, rope and fender eye out of the fibre glass. I know this because someone had kindly retrieved the fender and placed it on the gas locker complete with rope, fender eyes and screws still attached. It didn't end up there as a result of the hit, as it was the opposite side to where the damage was. So I consider one of three scenerios happened.

1. The boat that hit me retrieved it and placed it back on my boat. I thank them for that, but they could have left their details.

2.. Someone witnessed the offending boat hit me and retrieved the fender for me. Again I thank them for that, but they could have left details of the offending boat that hit me.

3. Someone retrieved it from the water and decided it matched my fenders and therefore must be mine and placed it there. Again I thank them for that.

Fortunately the damage was fairly minor and reasonably easy to sort. It still would have been far better if someone had owned up, or a witness had left details.

 

[trambo]

32 minutes ago, grendel said:

 

 

I do remember an old Guardian advert from years ago taken from two perspectives. One showed what we thought to be a thug up to no good and the other the same person running to save a life. Thats why we have to be careful judging the event. We are told it was a hit and run but we actually don't know what happened next. Did they contact the yard or moor up and go back to the scene to apologise. All we know for certain is what's on the film clip. 

However in this case the cynic in me says I doubt it....So hang em by the..... but only after they know they have lost their £500 security deposit.

Fred

[Maxwellian]

20 minutes ago, SPEEDTRIPLE said:

So why are people allowed to post such clips on YouTube (not Facebook as someone mentioned) if it's breaking laws, all forms of public media and fora are bound by the same laws, and naming and shaming IS'NT against the law. 

Anyway, suppose it was a boat being rammed by a boat full of drunken idiots, that boat being owned by a forum member living several hundred miles away, and knew nothing about it because "wemust'nt film it" and nothing got reported. I for one would be extremely grateful to anybody naming and shaming if it was the only way to let us know that Lightning had been hit, as I'm bloody sure any other forum member would if it was THEIR boat. 

No laws to my knowledge, but Timbo is our expert. As part of TOS we have no naming or shaming. Others have different rules. You agreed ours and we reset all auto logins when we changed the TOS and you all had to agree them. So please follow them. You have expressed your opinion and it has been noted Neil. If anything has happened to another boat then please report it to the authorities and boatyard or PM them if known.

[vanessan]

52 minutes ago, trambo said:

We are told it was a hit and run but we actually don't know what happened next. Did they contact the yard or moor up and go back to the scene to apologise. All we know for certain is what's on the film clip. 

The whole film clip is quite long. The story is that the boat had turned at the bridge but had insufficient room to fully complete the turn. It ‘nudged’ the other boat a couple of times to allow completion of the turn and then continued on its way. That’s my understanding of it anyway. I did wonder initially if it was an inexperienced helm just getting it wrong but, looking at the video again, I’m not so sure.

[Guest]

3 hours ago, CambridgeCabby said:

So that members are aware , I forwarded a copy of this video yesterday 20 mins after it was posted online to Richardson’s .

So did I..

[rightsaidfred]

Whether it was turning or moored is irrelevant, its the damage and that evidently it didn't stop is what matters.

Fred

[SPEEDTRIPLE]

1 hour ago, Maxwellian said:

No laws to my knowledge, but Timbo is our expert. As part of TOS we have no naming or shaming. Others have different rules. You agreed ours and we reset all auto logins when we changed the TOS and you all had to agree them. So please follow them. You have expressed your opinion and it has been noted Neil. If anything has happened to another boat then please report it to the authorities and boatyard or PM them if known.

Then that makes me ask questions, who owns the forum, and who decides what the TOS should be?.  Is the forum "owned" by an or some individuals, and does that or those individuals decide who they want as mods and appoint them, as well as deciding what the TOS should be, or do they allow the mods to decide what's best for us members?. 

[vanessan]

It has just occurred to me that the registration of the culprit boat is only two digits out from that movie about a U boat! (Good thing the helm didn’t think he had torpedoes on board!) 

[Maxwellian]

9 minutes ago, SPEEDTRIPLE said:

Then that makes me ask questions, who owns the forum, and who decides what the TOS should be?.  Is the forum "owned" by an or some individuals, and does that or those individuals decide who they want as mods and appoint them, as well as deciding what the TOS should be, or do they allow the mods to decide what's best for us members?. 

I will answer this one more post from you on this subject then not authorise any others.

answers in order

1) Me

2) Committee (Me, Timbo as chair and a few others)

3) See 1

4) See 2 as well as input from MoDs

We run in a collaborative and civil way taking advice and bouncing ideas.

 

[ScrumpyCheddar]

Still beats me how someone can stand there and film it with out shouting out.... What’s wrong with them...???

That’s just as bad as the boat driver ramming the boat in my eyes.. Total no respect at all.... No wonder the price of hiring of boats are going up thanks to these utter idiots.... 🤬🤬🤬🤬..