banaari 27 Posted March 10, 2014 Share Posted March 10, 2014 The American skipper of a 17m vessel on a round-the-world cruise has been fined $1000 and ordered to pay reparations of $2000 after snagging a family’s fishing craft and dragging it 30m through the water on Waitemata Harbour on 11 January 2014. http://www.voxy.co.nz/national/american ... 0/5/183789 Link to post Share on other sites
Kiteroa 8 Posted March 10, 2014 Share Posted March 10, 2014 The authorities making up for lost ground after that well publicised incident with that classic yacht no doubt. Link to post Share on other sites
waikiore 397 Posted March 10, 2014 Share Posted March 10, 2014 Poor offshore yachtie, doesn't he know that if he had been on the grog and cut them in two the fine would only be 10 percent of that! Link to post Share on other sites
Black Panther 1,566 Posted March 10, 2014 Share Posted March 10, 2014 Not true, he had to be a wealthy lawyer who owned an insurance company, then the fine would have been 10%. Link to post Share on other sites
Clive 13 Posted March 11, 2014 Share Posted March 11, 2014 "The skipper of the Karma, Richard Livu Panescu, was charged by Maritime New Zealand (MNZ) with operating a ship in a manner which caused unnecessary danger or risk to any other person, under Section 65 of the Maritime Transport Act." Can someone remind me why the chap who hit the classic a few years ago and sunk it was not charged under section 65? Link to post Share on other sites
Vorpal Blade 89 Posted March 11, 2014 Share Posted March 11, 2014 "The skipper of the Karma, Richard Livu Panescu, was charged by Maritime New Zealand (MNZ) with operating a ship in a manner which caused unnecessary danger or risk to any other person, under Section 65 of the Maritime Transport Act." Can someone remind me why the chap who hit the classic a few years ago and sunk it was not charged under section 65? for your answer refer to the post above Link to post Share on other sites
banaari 27 Posted March 11, 2014 Author Share Posted March 11, 2014 Anyone know if the culprit, or his insurance company, ever contributed anything to the rebuild? Link to post Share on other sites
Guest Posted March 11, 2014 Share Posted March 11, 2014 The power of the internet and it's ability to turn fiction into fact. With all the info out there and not one of you can get even close to the truth, that's sad. Link to post Share on other sites
khayyam 68 Posted March 11, 2014 Share Posted March 11, 2014 The power of the internet and it's ability to turn fiction into fact. With all the info out there and not one of you can get even close to the truth, that's sad. go on then, set the record straight... Link to post Share on other sites
OYSTR 1 Posted March 12, 2014 Share Posted March 12, 2014 there you go See third result down. Link to post Share on other sites
banaari 27 Posted March 12, 2014 Author Share Posted March 12, 2014 there you go See third result down. Hehehe, an entire app dedicated to the gentle art of RTFM - like it Just that given the ordure cast SCB's way I would've expected the settlement to have received wider coverage than it did (or didn't). Still doesn't really say how much Gypsy's owners were left out of pocket or otherwise. Link to post Share on other sites
Clive 13 Posted March 12, 2014 Share Posted March 12, 2014 Quote from the Herald re Gypsy Asked if he thought $200 was a fair punishment... ... The fine is the largest the harbourmaster, Andrew Hayton, can give under Auckland Council bylaws. Mr Hayton said Charles St Clair Brown was found to be in breach of maritime rules over collision prevention. ... Maritime NZ said it could charge only commercial vessels under the Maritime Transport Act , or the Health and Safety in Employment Act. Interesting ... False reporting by the Herald? False statement from MNZ? Law change? The US skipper fined had a commercial ticket? Link to post Share on other sites
khayyam 68 Posted March 12, 2014 Share Posted March 12, 2014 really glad to hear that gypsy has been put right, that was a terrible thing to see. not exactly the same thing as enforcement, though -- the authorities still come out looking pretty toothless. Link to post Share on other sites
Recommended Posts
Archived
This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.