Jump to content

Brit charged, fined after yacht lightning-strike fire


Recommended Posts

Posted

Brit charged, fined after yacht lightning-strike fire

By The Phuket News

 

1541477853_1-org.jpg

The news was revealed at Phuket Provincial Hall late yesterday afternoon (Nov 5) at a meeting called by Phuket Governor Phakaphong Tavipatana. Photo: PR Dept

 

PHUKET: The British skipper on board the yacht that caught fire after a lightning strike and burned to the waterline off Phuket late last Friday afternoon has been handed down a three-month suspended jail term and fined B3,000 for operating a boat in Thai waters without the appropriate license.

 

The news was revealed at Phuket Provincial Hall late yesterday afternoon (Nov 5) at a meeting called by Phuket Governor Phakaphong Tavipatana.

 

Governor Phakaphong called to the meeting all officials in Phuket responsible for marine transportation so he could be fully briefed on what had happened in the yacht fire incident, which saw the Beneteau 50-foot sloop Emmjay catch fire after a lightning strike at about 5pm late Saturday afternoon (Nov 3).


Read more at https://www.thephuketnews.com/brit-charged-fined-after-yacht-lightning-strike-fire-69249.php#iU2Duc583kvCtGir.99 

 
tphuketnews_logo.jpg
-- © Copyright Phuket News 2018-11-06
Posted

Legal action taken against yacht helmsman and Thai crew

By The Thaiger

PHOTOS: Newshawk Phuket

 

IMG_3716-1.jpg

 

Legal action has been taken against a Scottish helmsman and a Thai yacht charter ‘caretaker’ in Saturday’s luxury yacht fire.

 

The Phuket PR Office reports that the the fire started by ‘natural causes’ after the 51 foot yacht was hit by lightning just after 4pm on Saturday afternoon.

 

Police have already taken legal action against the helmsman on the day and the yacht’s Thai ‘caretaker’. The court has judged the yacht helmsman, David Stewart Toy from Scotland, and a Thai yacht caretaker ‘Mikey Burker’ were partly responsible.

 

Full story: https://thethaiger.com/news/phuket/legal-action-taken-against-yacht-helmsman-and-thai-crew

 
thtthaiger.png
-- © Copyright The Thaiger 2018-11-06
  • Haha 2
Posted

So you are responsible if a lightning hits your property and you can't extinguish the fire by yourself / it's causing damage to others....
Interesting lay out of the laws

  • Like 2
  • Sad 1
Posted

Just found this gem......Thailand Marine Licencing regulation.

The part of the Thai skipper, which may have actually been the Thai deckhand is interesting. But in reality, the charter company is probably in the wrong for leasing to unlicenced hirers. Maybe the Brit took the fall.

Q: Is it necessary to have a license to use a private Thai registered Boat or Yacht in Thailand.

A: Yes, although this is probably one of the most widely ignored regulation of all, along with the requirement to wear a helmet on a motor cycle. Many boat owners employ a  full or part time Thai Skipper to stay within the law.

  • Like 1
Posted

I would think if a bareboat charter (& the TV bit isn’t clear on that) the charter company is responsible for determining the licensing requirements before renting.

  • Like 1
Posted
4 hours ago, Phuketshrew said:

The accident happened on November 3rd and the helmsman was tried and sentenced on November 5th? They weren't so quick to act when the Phoenix sank killing many Chinese tourists, and that was not an accident.

Thais and Chinese are in the same bed... Brit's are not invited !

Posted

hmm, I was a little confused on this one, however it seems on the threads that he was running the yacht as a business venture, so this wasn't a group of hapless sailors going about their business but a group of tourists who had hired the services of the skipper. This will certainly become interesting for him as to whether or not he had commercial use insurance cover etc. I hope and excuse the pun that he hadn't sunk all his money into this little venture.

  • Like 1
Posted
5 hours ago, Phuketshrew said:

The accident happened on November 3rd and the helmsman was tried and sentenced on November 5th? They weren't so quick to act when the Phoenix sank killing many Chinese tourists, and that was not an accident.

Err- the Chinese owner is not in the country so a bit difficult to prosecute him.

  • Like 1
Posted
3 minutes ago, Redline said:

Meanwhile slave labor, unregulated fishing, and human trafficking go on and on

..... and your point in connection to THIS story is?

  • Like 1
Posted

This is Thai logic he shouldn't  be there , he got no licence he shouldn't there. so if he wouldn't there there wouldn't an Lightning strike on the boat ,,, Yes?

Posted

"David Stewart Toy from Scotland, and a Thai yacht caretaker ‘Mikey Burker’ were partly responsible."

for an act of God,  technical term the insurance companies use when they don't want to pay out.

regards worgeordie

  • Like 2
Posted

I sailed for a living for several years. There's an old saying, "A boat is simply a hole in the water into which you pour money."

 

That was a nice boat too.

Posted

im still not sure about this lightning strike, i mean their are marinas all round the world that get hit by severe lightning storms, never heard of a boat catching fire though or spreading fire thru the marina

Posted
3 hours ago, CLW said:

So you are responsible if a lightning hits your property and you can't extinguish the fire by yourself / it's causing damage to others....
Interesting lay out of the laws

It has nothing to do with the fire but with the helmsman having no appropriate licence for the boat! 

Having been a member of the SNSM in France (National Society of Rescue at Sea) I am well placed to say that many boaters do not have the necessary licences and for me it is more serious than driving a car without a license.

  • Like 1
Posted
13 hours ago, zaphod reborn said:

Although his sentence was light, the lack of a proper license had nothing to do with the natural event of a lightening strike.  Ridiculous use of the administrative licensure system to make an example of a relatively nocuous offense.

" Ridiculous use of the administrative licensure system to make an example of a relatively nocuous offense".

If the case is so "nocuous" [sic] (nocuous means serious) why is a fine so ridiculous?

Posted
9 hours ago, CLW said:

So you are responsible if a lightning hits your property and you can't extinguish the fire by yourself / it's causing damage to others....
Interesting lay out of the laws

No, the report did not say that.  He was fined for not being licenced.  Presumably the fact that the unlicenced captain was responsible for the lives of 9 passengers onboard had something to do with it, lightning certainly did not.

  • Like 1
Posted
13 hours ago, worgeordie said:

"David Stewart Toy from Scotland, and a Thai yacht caretaker ‘Mikey Burker’ were partly responsible."

for an act of God,  technical term the insurance companies use when they don't want to pay out.

regards worgeordie

Absolute tosh!

 

  • Thanks 1
Posted
17 hours ago, car720 said:

and it will blow the poor bugger's insurance claim out of the water as well.

Without reading the policy wording it is not possible to know but if it is a UK based insurance policy, under the insurance act of 2015 insurers cannot decline a claim based on a condition that has no bearing on the type of loss. In this instance even if there's a condition that appropriate licenses must be obtained (which I doubt) the boat would have been hit by lightning anyway, therefore the claim cannot be denied. 

  • Like 2

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!

Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.

Sign In Now
  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    • No registered users viewing this page.



×
×
  • Create New...