rooster59 Posted December 19, 2015 Share Posted December 19, 2015 Phuket superyacht crashes into Thai fishing boatPHUKET: The 65-meter superyacht Lamima crashed into a Thai fishing boat off Phuket’s shore yesterday.The French owner of the Iron Wood hulled phinisi, Dominique Gerardin, was on board the vessel with 18 guests when it collided with Jor Pornpatsinee.Nobody was injured in the incident. Full story: http://www.phuketgazette.net/phuket-news/Phuket-superyacht-crashes-Thai-fishing-boat/62679?desktopversion#ad-image-0 -- Phuket Gazette 2015-12-19 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
craigt3365 Posted December 19, 2015 Share Posted December 19, 2015 “The owner of the superyacht agreed to pay full compensation to the fishing boat, so there was no need for us to charge anyone,” Lt Col Panya said. “We were just there to help.” That's one of the problems here. Pay a bit of money and nothing goes on your record. You're free to cause problems again. If a law was broken, the offending party needs to be charged. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
phazey Posted December 19, 2015 Share Posted December 19, 2015 I've been "close" to an incident like this. It would help to know what time this happened. If it was night time, i'd put money on the Thai vessel having no navigation aids, and the captain was probably enjoying a few jars. The super yacht would have had a manned bridge, and radar i guess. Paying for compensation would be normal practise, and a nice gesture from the captain, as this would be the Thai subsistence method. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
zaphod reborn Posted December 19, 2015 Share Posted December 19, 2015 “The owner of the superyacht agreed to pay full compensation to the fishing boat, so there was no need for us to charge anyone,” Lt Col Panya said. “We were just there to help.” That's one of the problems here. Pay a bit of money and nothing goes on your record. You're free to cause problems again. If a law was broken, the offending party needs to be charged. It sounds like it would be just about impossible for marine police to establish a violation of law that could be proven with evidence. Why should an accident like this result in criminal charges? In the west, payment of compensation through insurance would probably be the outcome. Here, the yacht owner didn't want to dispute fault and took care of the damages which weren't that significant as there were no injuries. He may not have been at fault, but given that he is the farang and obviously has the financial ability to take care of the property damage, he took care of the only thing that may have been in dispute - payment of compensation for damages. If there had been alcohol or injuries involved, the result might have been different. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
stevenl Posted December 19, 2015 Share Posted December 19, 2015 (edited) I've been "close" to an incident like this. It would help to know what time this happened. If it was night time, i'd put money on the Thai vessel having no navigation aids, and the captain was probably enjoying a few jars. The super yacht would have had a manned bridge, and radar i guess. Paying for compensation would be normal practise, and a nice gesture from the captain, as this would be the Thai subsistence method. Daytime, apparently there is no doubt the yacht was at fault. Edited December 19, 2015 by stevenl Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
harrry Posted December 19, 2015 Share Posted December 19, 2015 I've been "close" to an incident like this. It would help to know what time this happened. If it was night time, i'd put money on the Thai vessel having no navigation aids, and the captain was probably enjoying a few jars. The super yacht would have had a manned bridge, and radar i guess. Paying for compensation would be normal practise, and a nice gesture from the captain, as this would be the Thai subsistence method. Daytime, apparently there is no doubt the yacht was at fault. Was it unser sail in which case it is unlikely to be at fault as others give way to sail Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
stevenl Posted December 19, 2015 Share Posted December 19, 2015 (edited) I've been "close" to an incident like this. It would help to know what time this happened. If it was night time, i'd put money on the Thai vessel having no navigation aids, and the captain was probably enjoying a few jars. The super yacht would have had a manned bridge, and radar i guess. Paying for compensation would be normal practise, and a nice gesture from the captain, as this would be the Thai subsistence method. Daytime, apparently there is no doubt the yacht was at fault. Was it unser sail in which case it is unlikely to be at fault as others give way to sail Since the fishing boat was moored/anchored being under sail or not would not matter very much. It was not under sail BTW, all information in the linked article. Edited December 19, 2015 by stevenl Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
cornishcarlos Posted December 19, 2015 Share Posted December 19, 2015 I've been "close" to an incident like this. It would help to know what time this happened. If it was night time, i'd put money on the Thai vessel having no navigation aids, and the captain was probably enjoying a few jars. The super yacht would have had a manned bridge, and radar i guess. Paying for compensation would be normal practise, and a nice gesture from the captain, as this would be the Thai subsistence method. Daytime, apparently there is no doubt the yacht was at fault. Was it unser sail in which case it is unlikely to be at fault as others give way to sail Not if you are anchored But it wasn't under sail, clearly evident if you read the linked article with photos of the incident... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
harrry Posted December 19, 2015 Share Posted December 19, 2015 I've been "close" to an incident like this. It would help to know what time this happened. If it was night time, i'd put money on the Thai vessel having no navigation aids, and the captain was probably enjoying a few jars. The super yacht would have had a manned bridge, and radar i guess. Paying for compensation would be normal practise, and a nice gesture from the captain, as this would be the Thai subsistence method. Daytime, apparently there is no doubt the yacht was at fault. It depends where the boat was anchored. Was it unser sail in which case it is unlikely to be at fault as others give way to sail Since the fishing boat was moored/anchored being under sail or not would not matter very much. It was not under sail BTW, all information in the linked article. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
harrry Posted December 19, 2015 Share Posted December 19, 2015 By the photo the jib was probably out... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
manarak Posted December 19, 2015 Share Posted December 19, 2015 “The owner of the superyacht agreed to pay full compensation to the fishing boat, so there was no need for us to charge anyone,” Lt Col Panya said. “We were just there to help.” That's one of the problems here. Pay a bit of money and nothing goes on your record. You're free to cause problems again. If a law was broken, the offending party needs to be charged. I very much disagree - if parties come to terms for compensation, such case where damages are only material should remain a private matter, unless one of the parties wants to involve authorities. "nullo actore nullus iudex" Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Ace of Pop Posted December 19, 2015 Share Posted December 19, 2015 Brake Fail again Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
craigt3365 Posted December 19, 2015 Share Posted December 19, 2015 “The owner of the superyacht agreed to pay full compensation to the fishing boat, so there was no need for us to charge anyone,” Lt Col Panya said. “We were just there to help.” That's one of the problems here. Pay a bit of money and nothing goes on your record. You're free to cause problems again. If a law was broken, the offending party needs to be charged. It sounds like it would be just about impossible for marine police to establish a violation of law that could be proven with evidence. Why should an accident like this result in criminal charges? In the west, payment of compensation through insurance would probably be the outcome. Here, the yacht owner didn't want to dispute fault and took care of the damages which weren't that significant as there were no injuries. He may not have been at fault, but given that he is the farang and obviously has the financial ability to take care of the property damage, he took care of the only thing that may have been in dispute - payment of compensation for damages. If there had been alcohol or injuries involved, the result might have been different. According to maritime law, a moving vessel that hits a stationary object, especially an anchored vessel, is presumed to have caused the casualty. The reason for a charge is to make sure this is logged against the captain's license. Which can potentially be revoked due to this accident. Letting them go allows a potential repeat of the accident...or worse. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Ace of Pop Posted December 19, 2015 Share Posted December 19, 2015 Your meant to have your warning radar on 24/7 but few locals do when at moorings.Try that in Malasia and the Cops are there in no time. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Lupatria Posted December 19, 2015 Share Posted December 19, 2015 I salute the French Captain for not fleeing the scene! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
dopenhagen Posted December 19, 2015 Share Posted December 19, 2015 clear cut case ! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Traveling Sailor Posted December 19, 2015 Share Posted December 19, 2015 I've been "close" to an incident like this. It would help to know what time this happened. If it was night time, i'd put money on the Thai vessel having no navigation aids, and the captain was probably enjoying a few jars. The super yacht would have had a manned bridge, and radar i guess. Paying for compensation would be normal practise, and a nice gesture from the captain, as this would be the Thai subsistence method. Daytime, apparently there is no doubt the yacht was at fault. Was it unser sail in which case it is unlikely to be at fault as others give way to sail The other boat WAS AT ANCHOR. Don't you read before you post? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
callaway Posted December 19, 2015 Share Posted December 19, 2015 I like the comment " we were just here to help". Yes help the fishing boat negotiate a bigger fee. Then help relieve the said fishing boat owner of such a heavy load of 1000 baht notes to the value of about 40%. The only thing those blokes like to help is themselves to other peoples money. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
cloudhopper Posted December 19, 2015 Share Posted December 19, 2015 (edited) “The owner of the superyacht agreed to pay full compensation to the fishing boat, so there was no need for us to charge anyone,” Lt Col Panya said. “We were just there to help.” That's one of the problems here. Pay a bit of money and nothing goes on your record. You're free to cause problems again. If a law was broken, the offending party needs to be charged. It sounds like it would be just about impossible for marine police to establish a violation of law that could be proven with evidence. Why should an accident like this result in criminal charges? In the west, payment of compensation through insurance would probably be the outcome. Here, the yacht owner didn't want to dispute fault and took care of the damages which weren't that significant as there were no injuries. He may not have been at fault, but given that he is the farang and obviously has the financial ability to take care of the property damage, he took care of the only thing that may have been in dispute - payment of compensation for damages. If there had been alcohol or injuries involved, the result might have been different. According to maritime law, a moving vessel that hits a stationary object, especially an anchored vessel, is presumed to have caused the casualty. The reason for a charge is to make sure this is logged against the captain's license. Which can potentially be revoked due to this accident. Letting them go allows a potential repeat of the accident...or worse. According to maritime law during daylight hours the anchored vessel is required to display a day shape (black ball). If the 'superyacht' is registered as a sailing vessel it also must fly a day shape (black inverted cone) while motoring underway. Of course this could have all been avoided with AIS lol Edited December 19, 2015 by cloudhopper Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Varangkul Posted December 19, 2015 Share Posted December 19, 2015 Some confusion amongst the readers - as always! The owner is not necessarily THE captain. A vessel of this size would, in most circumstances, have a permanent captain who would be responsible for the vessel, even though the owner was aboard. The fact that the owner was onboard helped sort out the problem, being able to make the decision to pay compensation on the spot! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
SunsetT Posted December 19, 2015 Share Posted December 19, 2015 I've been "close" to an incident like this. It would help to know what time this happened. If it was night time, i'd put money on the Thai vessel having no navigation aids, and the captain was probably enjoying a few jars. The super yacht would have had a manned bridge, and radar i guess. Paying for compensation would be normal practise, and a nice gesture from the captain, as this would be the Thai subsistence method. Daytime, apparently there is no doubt the yacht was at fault. Was it unser sail in which case it is unlikely to be at fault as others give way to sail How can it give way when anchored!?! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Ace of Pop Posted December 19, 2015 Share Posted December 19, 2015 The Yacht Lamina had Lamina 80 % Film on the Windscreen, so like Thai car drivers, and Dumb Ferangs the Skipper couldn't see F/A. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Tassie Norm Posted December 19, 2015 Share Posted December 19, 2015 Give way to starboard (right) Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
gemguy Posted December 19, 2015 Share Posted December 19, 2015 Good thing the fishing vessels was not manned by Ethiopian pirates. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Alwyn Posted December 19, 2015 Share Posted December 19, 2015 I've been "close" to an incident like this. It would help to know what time this happened. If it was night time, i'd put money on the Thai vessel having no navigation aids, and the captain was probably enjoying a few jars. The super yacht would have had a manned bridge, and radar i guess. Paying for compensation would be normal practise, and a nice gesture from the captain, as this would be the Thai subsistence method. Daytime, apparently there is no doubt the yacht was at fault. As I understand it, small makes way for big and motor makes way for sail? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Alration Posted December 19, 2015 Share Posted December 19, 2015 “The owner of the superyacht agreed to pay full compensation to the fishing boat, so there was no need for us to charge anyone,” Lt Col Panya said. “We were just there to help.” That's one of the problems here. Pay a bit of money and nothing goes on your record. You're free to cause problems again. If a law was broken, the offending party needs to be charged. And if no laws were broken no-one needs to be charged. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Tchooptip Posted December 19, 2015 Share Posted December 19, 2015 I've been "close" to an incident like this. It would help to know what time this happened. If it was night time, i'd put money on the Thai vessel having no navigation aids, and the captain was probably enjoying a few jars. The super yacht would have had a manned bridge, and radar i guess. Paying for compensation would be normal practise, and a nice gesture from the captain, as this would be the Thai subsistence method. Daytime, apparently there is no doubt the yacht was at fault. Was it unser sail in which case it is unlikely to be at fault as others give way to sail Wy you did not looked at the picture, the yacht is clearly not under sail, secondly the fishing boat was anchored. I will add, what is really scary is a 200 feet vessel navigating carelessly without any one having an eye on the radar since they believed putting the radar's alarm on was unnecessary Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
SOTIRIOS Posted December 19, 2015 Share Posted December 19, 2015 ...wonder how the fishing boat 'happened by' .......the yacht is immense...hard to miss... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
stevenl Posted December 19, 2015 Share Posted December 19, 2015 ...wonder how the fishing boat 'happened by' .......the yacht is immense...hard to miss...If you read the link or even the posts here you can stop wondering. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
connda Posted December 19, 2015 Share Posted December 19, 2015 Nice toy for the super-riche. "Of course sir, no problem. We can shoo this little issue away and make it disappear. Poof, gone! Ha ha ha." Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
.png.3b3332cc2256ad0edbc2fe9404feeef0.png)
Recommended Posts
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 accountSign in
Already have an account? Sign in here.
Sign In Now