Continued liability discussion from Area D thread

There was alot of info regarding insurance and liability buried in that thread that I wanted to discuss further. I have been involved in several situations that went various ways. I have seen a consistent resistance from race organizers to hear protests in my area. This leaves it up to the sailors to work out which is fine if they are both honest, quality people. This is not always the case! What can I do if the race committee will not hear my protest, the other skipper says he doesn't have insurance and feels it wasn't completely his fault and offers me nothing. I have had a boat destroyed by a skipper that in the water said he never saw me but in front of the race committee said I turned in his path. I hit a boat starting on port after hailing repeatedly and adjusting course to avoid, he told me that he didn't care I wasn't getting his insurance info. Again no support from race organizers( I did meet Eric and Joleen who tried to help) and my boat damage was repaired on my dime. If insurance is required to race why is it not checked or at least the racers should provide the policy number to the race committee. I am currently in contact with a new sailor in this same situation right now, his boat was damaged, the race organizer didn't want to hear the protest, the other skipper is one of the regulars, the at fault skipper stated he had no insurance and has now faded into the woodwork. I know this is a rant but this is one of the reasons that newbies quit racing or never start all together. If you enter a race without the proper insurance then you are just an butt, and this is happening more than it should and it s being allowed. I have insurance on my boat and additional insurance thru my homeowners, if I wreck your boat it will be taken care of. Whether its really my fault or not! Why do others not take this responsibility seriously?

This is the question. It is also one that will not be solved by insurance. Having insurance will not make anyone more honest and it will not solve any of the issue you bring up in the above post.

Most major races require liability insurance which does not cover collision or damages, that is separate. Even if you have collision, most people will avoid making any claim to keep their rates low, so the unscrupulous will continue to lie and or avoid any responsability. It falls back on the racers to police their attendance to weed out the cheats, but attendance at most events is so low now most do not want to press the issue. Very few cases are so black and white anyway as to be able to black ball someone.

In theory everyone should be responsable for their own actions, but this is not how it works in our society. Manadatory insurance is just a tax to try and make people feel better. Forcing insurance will not make anyone more responsable to their actions and it will not curb poor behavior.

That being said, today not carrying liabilty is just risking bankrupcy with the way the laws work, but that goes for racing a sailboat or just owning property of any type.

Whoa! The P&I (Protection & Indemnity) section of your "marine" insurance covers damage from collision. Usually there is a separate deductible for racing claims. Maybe it is a case of not having the right insurance and why it is so important to go with a US Sailing endorsed or similar underwriter.

Whatever the case, if there is not mutual agreement on fault when paint is traded, you'll most likely have to pay for your boat because the claim would be too small for the the insurance company to start litigation proceedings.

When Gertie ate the butt out of an A Classer a few years ago, my insurance company didn't even flinch, repair estimated, insurance payment sent AND I paid NO Deductable. And And, my rate didn't go up. I've had several claims without my rates going up.

US Sailings insurance is NOT competitive and they don't cover sails the last time I got a quote from them.

Who is your carrier?

State Farm. I pointed out I would be racing and at first they didn't understand that or that I didn't have a motor. Once we got over those hurdles with the help of the underwritters all has been good.

I guess you already understand this one is a can of worms. If I assume the legal situation is the same as in the UK this is my understanding/experience.
Forget the race committee. They may be able to preside over a race/regatta result but even a favourable protest decision carries no weight in a court of law. Also if the insurance certificates are inspected and a competitor allowed to race the race committee/ organising club/authority could be taking on a liability.
Get the competitors information from the race organisers. It is in their interest to not be involved in legal action. If you instruct your insurance to persue the other party they may decide it is not financially in their interest to do so and you will take the hit. Start procedings against the other party. In the UK this needs to be done through a court with admiralty juristiction. If he is insured and doesn't inform the insurance company they will wipe their hands of him and he will personally take any hit.
You will have to put your case to the court. It is little different to putting it to a protest committee but it is not just a breach of racing rules you must prove but his negligence and breach of duty of care (UK-possibly dated).
The whole process is a big PITA. I have been through it after another competitor reneged on his agreement to cover repairs. It cost the other guy three times the repair bill and after the process was told the same guy had hit several other members of his club with the same attitude to his personal responsibility to other competitors. I am sure that some people use this 'you're insured get them to pay attitude' knowing what a pain it is to go through the courts.
I understand that future insurance premiums for the at fault are affected.
The above is a brief account of my own experience. Check to see if the above is applicable in your own area.

I hope this helps give some insight into one possible course of action.

Cheshirecatman

Glad the NASCATs have such a good policy ! Since the F-16s enjoy racing with you guys & gals! I'll ignore that fact that you've had several claims...I think.

No deductible! Wow! So when your crew goes through the main sail (not that it ever happens...) or the rear beam pulls out, is that covered? I'll need to find out with whom you have coverage.

USSAILING Prescription 68 (b):
A protest committee shall find facts and make decisions only in compliance with the rules. No protest committee or US SAILING appeal authority shall adjudicate any claim for damages. Such a claim is subject to the jurisdiction of the courts.

Whether or not a protest is heard can be based on a number of things, including procedures for notification, etc. This should never be confused with actual liability.

I'm not a lawyer, so I'm going to stop there. I would say take the guy to small claims court.

I agree, if the attitude is pervasive, it definitely isn't good for the sport. But, there is only so much you can put on the RC (even if "proof" is provided, who's to say it wasn't cancelled, etc.).

Mike

no deductable for liability claim, comprehesive claim deductable applies. When you break someone else stuff no $$$, when you break your own then $$$.

Liability varies from country to country. RRS 68 states:

This is one area of the rules that is different in the US than the UK. US Sailing prescription 68(c) states (in part):

Therefore, it is vitally important that a protest hearing determine the facts and interpret the rules in incidents involving damage. Otherwise, you are depending on the insurance carrier and/or court to understand the racing rules (which is not a good bet). Dick Rose recently began a series of articles in Sailing World magazine on the subject of damage. I expect to see some good advice on what to do when hit.

If a race committee or organizing authority won't hold a protest hearing, refer them to RRS 63.1, which says (in part):

The protest MUST be heard. It is not optional. If the OA refuses to follow the rules, request (in writing) a copy (again, in writing) of the facts and conclusions (or of their refusal to hear the protest). Submit an appeal under RRS 70.1 (failure to hold a hearing is an appealable procedural error). US Sailing can direct an OA to hold a hearing. If they still fail to do so, US Sailing may impose sanctions on them.

That may sound harsh, but hearing protests is a mandatory part of the sport. If a club can't do that, then it shouldn't be running races.

I hope that helps,
Eric
US Sailing Certified Judge,
member Area D Appeals Committee

In my last post I wrote:

"Whether or not a protest is heard can be based on a number of things, including procedures for notification, etc."

After reading Eric's post, what I meant to say is:

"Whether or not a protest is determined to be valid can be based on a number of things, including procedures for notification, etc."

Eric is right, if you file you must be given a hearing.

Mike

If you are still denied a hearing, what then?

fugly... See Eric's comments...

Protest validity requirements are relaxed for incidents involving serious damage. RRS 61.1(a)(3) states:

If she cannot reasonably protest within the time limit, RRS 61.3 states (in part):

Furthermore, protest committee themselves can step in. RRS 60.3(a)(1) states:

The purpose of these rules is to make sure damaged boats or injured crew get every chance possible for a protest hearing. It's much, much better for a PC on site to determine the facts (and apply the rules) when everybody is present and the incident is fresh in people's minds, than for a court of law to try later.

Regards,
Eric

Similar to what Cheshirecatman said in the UK... US insurance companies are not interested in what the RRS or protest committees say. They are only concerned in the legal authority for boating laws in the body of water where the accident occurred. In Ohio for example, the Ohio Revised Code governs all bodies of water except the great lakes and Ohio river which are governed by Federal laws and Coast Guard requirements. The RRS/protest committee can DSQ the sailor, and potentially prevent them from future racing, but they cannot do anything about your claims.

If there is significant damage, you should immediately contact your governing body... DNR, sheriff, police, etc. just as you would an automotive incident. Do so before witnesses leave the scene and definitely before the offending party leaves the scene.

It makes no sense for one set of rules (the Racing Rules of Sailing) to govern the racing, and another set (COLREGS, IRPCS, or state law) to govern liability for a collision. There would be irreconcilable conflicts of right-of-way. That's why US Sailing prescribes:

Now, I don't claim that insurance companies behave rationally, but since you agree that the rules determine liability, they should honor that. If they refuse, I'd recommend finding a different carrier. There are insurance companies that understand maritime law and the implications of racing.

A US insurance claims adjuster should give weight to the report of a protest committee, just as they would to a police report of an auto accident.

Sincerely,
Eric

f there is significant damage, you should immediately contact your governing body... DNR, sheriff, police, etc. just as you would an automotive incident. Do so before witnesses leave the scene and definitely before the offending party leaves the scene.

You are kidding! ... right?.... you want to call the police for a collision on the race course?

Eric

I don't believe that there is any way you can force a sailor to appear at a protest hearing and present a case.

...even in the case of major damage.

Mark, I am not kidding if there is significant damage and the offending party is not immediately taking responsibility for their actions. The point I am making is that protest results has nothing to do with payment for damages in the eyes of the insurance industry. update in later post... US courts have upheld RRS trump COLREGS Your insurance company may even require a police report before paying regardless of who is at fault and/or your state and local laws may require filing a report if the damages exceed a certain dollar amount.

I am not talking about trading gelcoat at the start line... talking about something like a destroyed hull, mast or something that may cost thousands to repair or replace.

I have seen it multiple times in 30 years of racing that the damaged boat owner thinks that the protest committee is the recourse in resolving payment of damages. They leave the scene thinking that it will be resolved in a club protest room. Only later do they find the at-fault party had no intention of paying or exchanging insurance information.

True, but that does not prevent the hearing from proceding:

(emphasis mine)

<sorry, didn't get the quoting right... this was in reply to Eric's insurance company rationality post>
It may be that some carriers understand maritime law and will give some weight to the protest... but I have never seen that. I have seen ODNR officers explicitly tell two parties that his report based on state law was all that was relevant in an incident report (they agreed who was at fault, the officer just happened to walk by as they were pulling their damaged boats on the beach). I have had insurance companies require a police/sheriff report prior to paying damages.

BTW, I believe I read somewhere that a recent change was passed such that COLREGS do not apply between racing boats. Unfortunately, I doubt that all state and local laws follow the same policy.

Here is a relevant article... pointing out that Eric is probably legally correct: http://www.sailingscuttlebutt.com/news/04/0111pera/ It is an older article but I assume the recent colreg change helps clarify that.

Also for Canadian sailors: http://www.sailing.ca/files/racing/regatta_organization/Collisionsfinal12_31_07.pdf

So, given my experience with multiple insurance companies, and local law enforcement, and the number of discussion threads and articles... this is clearly not clear

This is the heart of the matter. The question to ask your insurance provider is not... do you cover me while racing? ...

But, do you use the RRS to decide claims?

Windy....Organizing Authorities are behaving stupidly when they ask for liability insurance proof and or coverage. See this doc for info
http://www.sailregattas.com/crac/uploads/Insurance%20and%20Cat%20Racing.pdf

In doing so... they simply open the door for you to include them in the dispute between you and the other guy. As you have experienced, they usually don't have any insurance information OR interest in getting involved. They will have heartburn in even handing you a copy of the individuals entry form should he refuse to give you contact information.

Now what they HAVE promised you is that they will appoint a protest committee (Its part of the statement in the NOR that this regatta follows the RRS statement and any other rules in the NOR. If you file the protest they have to hear it. If they don't you appeal to the regional authority of US Sailing who can take action against the OA for not doing their job.

So assuming you have a PC hearing and facts found and decision made...
What are your options. 1) report this PC facts found and findings info and your story to your insurance company and let them deal with the problem. After all, It's what you paid them for.

2) Take the guy to small claims court.
However, in doing so, you will violate rule three where you agreed to NOT resort to any court of law or tribunal.

Now... the real crux of your problem is responsibility and how this get's enforced.
It seems to me that you need to request the PC file a gross misconduct charge against the individual.
Rule 69.1 f allows you to file the protest with the OA well down the road when this damage /responsibility issue comes to a head. The OA will have to form a new protest committee to hear your misconduct charge, bad sportsmanship and or refusing to be responsible for his actions on the race course charge.

Should the PC find such misconduct, they will take action appropriate to the event (dsq's) and they have to send the report on the individual to US Sailing. (69.1 b 2 c)

US Sailing could then investigate further and suspend or ban the sailor from all further competition. Yacht Clubs/OA's that allow this individual to compete would then be held responsible and other sailors who compete at this same YC would also suffer penalties and not be allowed to compete.

An example from Ohio Revised Code on requirements for notifying ODNR. It does state though that it is not for use in liability (last sentence).

"In the case of collision, accident, or other casualty involving a vessel, the operator thereof, if the collision, accident, or other casualty results in loss of life, personal injury requiring medical treatment beyond first aid, or damage to property in excess of five hundred dollars, shall file with the chief of the division of watercraft a full description of the collision, accident, or other casualty on a form prescribed by the chief. The report so filed shall be used for statistical purposes only and shall not be admissible for any purpose in any civil, criminal, or administrative action at law."

Hi Mike

Sorry, posts crossed in the ether... Yes, I agree with you about how misunderstood the process is by sailors.

I agree with your point about insurance doing their own thing (colregs vers RRS) If they want a police report... then the RRS are irrelevant because you are most certainly being judged under the colregs.... and you should know this when you buy the policy.

Yes... no matter how clear the US Prescriptions can be that that the PC does not decide liability issues.... sailors don't get it.

My post to Windy presents his options as I understand the system.

I don't think you can call the police for a collision on the race course after you agree to rule three of the RRS.

The standard used.... responsible under the RRS is problematic. For instance, your insurance company uses the colregs to assign liability and not the RRS. For the sake of argument, the other sailor decides that the insurance companies decision that he was 50% responsible under the colregs is unacceptable. He holds you responsible for the damage under the RRS and wants the money from you for his 50% of the judgment ....

It's going to get ugly ...

The citation you give that would suggest that the court follow the RRS and not colregs suffers because EACH STINKING STATE has their own liablity laws and laws on waivers etc.

So, again we agree... it's simply not clear and varies state to state.


IMO, the concept of "responsible" extends no further then my insurance company. Moreover, my agreement to be responsible suggests that I must purchase insurance that honors the RRS standard... choosing to purchase insurance that only covers me under colregs would be irresponsible on my part. (Your mileage may vary)

This applies to rulings governing the racing under the juristiction of the race committee/MNA under RRS. They do not have the authority to rule over the actions/legal responsibilities of an individual. Can you imagine, one guy murders a port tacker, but because they were racing the RC/MNA deal with it under unsportsmanlike conduct!

What is important here is that the competitors are aware of the 'applicable navigation rules'. This is not aways clear. Port areas often have more specific navigation rules. Lakes/inland waterways could be anything (COLREGS = sea.) RRS do not conflict with COLREGS merely provide more detailed prescriptions for racing.

One thing I have not seen mentioned is that I was advised the insurance company of the defendant could limit their liability in terms of 'damage compensation' to a scale used for International shipping. This is based on tonnage, and if used for lightweight racing cats is a pittance.

Cheshirecatman

As Mike pointed out, RRS 63.3(b) allows the hearing to proceed even if a party does not attend. If a competitor refuses to attend a Rule 69 hearing, the committee may conduct it anyway, but probably should pass the information to the national authority (under RRS 69.1(e)) instead.

Regards,
Eric

I disagree. As I read RRS 3(c):

It applies to RRS 3(b):

Which means that competitors (and boat owners) agree to use the protest and appeal process set out under the rules (rather than court) to adjudicate rules infractions, and to abide by their outcomes.

I've heard that in some countries, protest committees do award damages - but that is not so in the US. US Sailing Prescription 68(b) states:


So, you can't sue someone for breaking rule 10 (On Opposite Tacks). You have to protest them. You can, however, sue them for damages arising from damage or injury caused by a collision where they broke rule 10.


Well, I don't think that simply refusing to settle out of court rises (or should it be "sinks"?) to the level of "gross misconduct". I believe you'd have a hard time convincing a protest committee to open a hearing under RRS 69. Most likely, they'd tell you that awards for damages are the jurisdiction of the courts and you should sue.

Sincerely,
Eric

Excellent point!

I'm going to step a little outside my area of expertise here for a moment. When you race in the US under the Racing Rules of Sailing, you enter into a legally binding contract in which you agree to be responsible for damages according to the application of the rules. You are personally liable for those damages. When you buy insurance, you are contracting with somebody else to pay the expense of the damages. If you buy insurance that doesn't cover you under the RRS contract, then you are mis-insured and potentially uninsured. Your insurance carrier may refuse to pay in full, but that doesn't change your liability. You are simply left to pay the balance out of pocket (should the other party refuse a settlement). If you are 100% at fault under the rules, then you are 100% responsible for damages - and that's how a court of law should rule.

Ok, I'm going to try to stick to the rules, and not the law from now on.

Regards,
Eric

I agree that sailors should be aware of government right-of-way regulations. They apply when the Racing Rules of Sailing do not (e.g. when going to and from the racing area, and with boat(s) in the area that are not racing). However, the RRS do conflict with the COLREGS (they are often similar, but are not the same). It's important to realize that when the RRS apply, COLREGS do not.


I don't believe that argument will hold up. Sailboat racing is not international shipping. I'd mistrust any insurance agent that told me my liability was limited by weight.

Sincerely,
Eric

This is excellent discussion. I am not concerned over my past experiences, I have learned from them and will not be caught with my pants down again. At this point I have enough knowledge of the rules to defend and protect myself. However, when I started racing I did not know the rules well. In my first accident I had no idea what to do and no one bothered to talk with me or help me. My wife overheard the other skipper talking with another competitor about filing a protest to get some insurance money. I'm the new guy, my boat is destroyed, my wife was nearly seriously injured and no one from the RC even came to see if we were ok. Much less offer any guidance on what to do next. I remember asking another participant what should be done and his statement was " if you were on port you better have insurance".
It would seem to me that the first thing a RC would do when a collision occurs is speak with both partys and help them with a protest or whatever else should be done. This collision had to be reported to local authorities as well. My insurance company paid the other sailors claim as they stated the dollar amount wasn't sufficient to take him to court to disprove the race committees findings.

It would appear that you are on your own if you choose to enter a race. If your boat gets damaged and the other skipper denies his liability you have no recourse other than small claims court. Yet every race I have entered required me to sign an entry stating I have proper insurance, whether I do or not. My insurance will pay for the damage regardless how it occurs but its still not right! When the rules are not enforced it opens the door for dishonest people. Like it or not, if you don't follow the rules you are dishonest!

Earlier I said this: "Whether or not a protest is determined to be valid can be based on a number of things, including procedures for notification, etc."

I stand by this statement, as it can be true, sometimes PCs (and OAs) act strangely. In addition, there are still lots of events that ADD protest requirements (notify RC at the end of a race, etc.), raising the bar even higher for protest validity.

However, as Eric and Matt pointed out, there are plenty of provisions in the RRS to allow (require) PCs to hear and decide protests, even if some validity requirements are not met. In my opinion, and many others here agree, this is very important, we need to get away from the old days when the first thing a PC did was sit down and find a reason to chuck the protest altogether. I see this happening less and less at the events I attend, so it's definitely a good trend.

In any event, lots of good posts here. In the case of the original post of this thread, the victim probably has a good court case against not only the offending sailor, but potentially against the OA. Especially here in the lawyer-intense US...

Mike

Sailors assume that this issue is black and white. If on starboard... they are always in the right.

Actually, just because you violated a rule... does not mean that you will be crushed in a collision and must pay for everything.

The starboard boat could also be dsq'd for failing to avoid the collision. Thus your insurance company could easily decide responsiblity is 51% vs 49 %. or even decide 100% for starboard boats liability.

I would love to see you try to argue in court that COLREGS no longer apply because a boat is racing. COLREGS are law,RRS is a sporting code!

It is not your liability that is limited by weight, but a compensation scale that could be used in argueing the value of any settlement by the at-fault party. In practise we normally advise our insurers to act as they cover ourselves and sometimes we just have have to take the excess(deductable)and future premium hit just to be pragmatic.

Cheshirecatman

And that is where it gets sticky. Without a protest hearing it is very hard to prove one way or the other. The inexperienced racer is really left to defend themselves with limited knowledge of how to do it. If its not the responsibility of the organizing group to assist with the proper protest procedure then who is responsible? The uninformed newbie?

I'm not about starting protests for the sake of protests but when a boat is damaged there must be a proper procedure for placing liability. It should be handled right then and there and both parties should be treated equally. If insurance is required to play all competitors must have some form of coverage, at a minimum liability. When an accident occurs the details should be recorded, a protest heard, fault assigned and then it goes to the insurance company for payment. Either a separate liability policy or homeowners liability coverage must be enforced to protect the competitors. I have enough to think about on the race course, I certainly don't want to be worrying about who has insurance and who does not in tight quarters at the line or rounding a mark!

I agree... You can't walk off the water, call the police, and file charges. You agreed to the process of a PC hearing etc. Your civil process can not be taken away in the US... details vary state to state.

That was my point.... don't get off the water and call the police.



Sorry, I think you have your head in the sand. I agree that the courts are where the issues of dollars are sorted out. But Windy is pointing the finger at the OA and PC for NOT dealing with larger issue of responsibility and how it is dealt with in the framework of the sport.

Yes,PC have training to collect the facts and evaluate the rules and render a decision on the RRS. BUT they also need judgment to address the other issues of responsibility and sportsmanship that they are tasked with.
Its the UGLY HALF of the RULES ADMINISTRATION.

Competitors have an expectation for the game spelled out by the contract that they
signed up for. The OA and PC simply CANNOT wash their hands of this kind of responsibility/sportsmanship dispute after they manage the rules issue.

Look at Windy's bottom line. He felt that the sports administration did not hold up their part of the deal. He was on his own with no recourse...I am surprised he keeps racing in such a dysfunctional organization.

The integrity of the sport of sailing depends on self policing backed up by race administration. The PC has two jobs... rules application and responsibility/sportsmanship enforcement redress.

Not being a lawyer, I wouldn't argue it in US court (all my discussion so far being limited to the US). If I had to make a legal argument, I'd be sure to cite Juno srl v. The Endeavour, 58 F.3d 1 (1st Cir. 1995), in which the US First Circuit Court of Appeals ruled:

and

The court held that yacht racing damages be based on a determination of fault by application of the International Yacht Racing Rules, which is now called the Racing Rules of Sailing.

TeamTeets posted a link earlier in this thread to a scuttlebutt article discussing this case (thanks Mike for researching your posts by the way). I've looked for the "recent COLREGS change" that has been mentioned, but was not successful in finding it. I'd appreciate a reference if anybody has one. I did come across a piece of Australian legislation that specifically states that the RRS supercedes the COLREGS, but that's AU, not US.

Sincerely,
Eric

This is how I thought it should work but here in the land of EMSA it doesn't. I specifically avoid one of the largest races in the SE because of this very issue. I'm not trying to call anyone out either, I appreciate the efforts of the volunteers that make my racing possible. But when something happens, turning the other way is wrong and apparently I'm not the only one that thinks this way. I am not a huge racer but do like it every now and then.

My current mindset is to avoid getting in any situation that might turn out poorly. I don't ask for rights where I could or crowd in at the line or marks, its not worth the risk and hassle.

Can you be more specific? What issue(s) do you feel I'm refusing to see? I'm trying to be helpful and responsive, so please let me know what you think I've left unaddressed.


I'm not going to draw conclusions on specific incidents here. I have no personal knowledge of what transpired that day and it would be wrong to make assumptions and place blame based on what has been written so far. Can race committee (and protest committee) be helpful? Yes. Can they be polite and friendly? Yes. Can they show concern for the safety and wellbeing of the competitors? Yes. Should they? I believe so.


I agree that the protest committee needs to use good judgement. I don't see anybody here disputing that.


Who said anything about "washing their hands"? I've been quite firm on the necessity of holding a protest hearing whenever damage or injury occurs. Even if there is no disupte about fault, the hearing yields a documented application of the rules from a (presumably) authoritative source regarding the incident -- which is needed for any later claim for damages.

The adjudication of damages is the jurisdiction of the courts. Protest committee finds facts and applies the rules, but does not get involved in monetary claims (at least in the US). Just because sailors seek damages in court, or defend themselves against these claims does not in any way imply poor sportsmanship. They're doing exacty what the US SAILING Prescriptions to rule 68 tell them to do.

Picture this scenerio: Sailors A and B collide while racing and A's boat is damaged. A protests and B is disqualified by the protest committee. A says to B "you owe me X dollars for the damage". B replies "That's more than I think is fair, even if I were completely to blame which I don't believe. I'll give you Y dollars, but if you want more, you'll have to sue me." So, A takes B to court. Has either one acted in an unsportsmanlike manner? I don't think so. If, absent any other evidence, A went back to protest committee and requested B be punished for a "Gross Breach of Sportsmanship" just because he refused to meet A's demand, then I think PC would (and should) refer A to the courts. I think it takes a lot more than a disagreement over cost to constitute gross misconduct. Now, if B (in front of witnesses) said "**** you *******, I broke the rules but there's no way I'm ever going to give you a ******* dime. I'll keep you tied up in court forever. If you ever want to race again you'll have to fix it yourself and you'd better stay away from me or I'll hit you even harder next time.", then that's an entirely different matter. In that scenerio, A should take the witnesses to PC, protest B under Rule 2, and request that the committee call a hearing under rule 69 (as well as sue).


I'm glad WindyHillF20 is still sailing. A negative experience such as he described would drive most people away from the sport.


The integrity of the sport of sailing depends primarily on self-policing by the competitors ourselves. We (the sailors) should not expect RC or PC to step in and enforce rules if we do not. Be careful when you point the finger of blame, because it can wind up pointing right back at us. In the situation WindyHillF20 described, did any of the other sailors come over, ask how they were doing, and give advice about what to do next? I don't want to see incidents like his, but if I do, I hope that I'll go offer assistance whether I'm representing the organizing authority, race committee, protest committee, or just sailing myself.

Sincerely,
Eric

Windy wrote


Sorry... Liability assignment will not happen.
That's up to your insurance or civil court to assign $$$. It is explicitly ruled out by the RRS.



No question! And that is the process the sport has in place. the PC should be formed, testimony taken and the RRS applied. The PC must deal with misconduct and sportsmanship issues as well.



Sorry, the RRS do not require a competitor to have insurance or the PC to assign liability.

See the document on liability coverage for why OA's probably don't want to collect this info or require liability coverage.

I think you have the insurance coverage idea backwards... YOU purchase insurance for YOUR peace of mind and to cover YOUR assets when some bozo hits you and your liability when you screw up or an act of god zaps you. It only matters to your insurance company if the other guy has insurance.

You have coverage... you should be able to race hard because you KNOW you are covered.

Without getting into blame or recrimination, what would it take to change your opinion of EMSA? I haven't personally done any race management within EMSA, but everybody I know who's involved wants to hold high-quality regattas. I'm sure they're open to suggestions for improvement. I'm willing to be part of the solution. I hope you know that if Joleen or I am at a sailing event and you need assistance or advice, you can always come to us. We're happy to give whatever help we can.

Regards,
Eric

The case you cite only proves my point about the COLREGS(IRPCAS).

After a lively and mostly unnecessary round of discovery, the matter went to trial on the admiralty side of the bench. The district court found that because the IYRRs are the rules of a private racing organization, they "do not and cannot preempt the application of the COLREGS which have been adopted by treaty to govern worldwide." Juno, 865 F.Supp. at 17. The court thus ignored the findings of the International Jury and concluded that, under COLREGS Rule 13, 33 U.S.C. foll. Sec. 1602,4 CHARLES JOURDAN was an overtaking vessel required to keep clear of ENDEAVOUR. Pursuant to the "Pennsylvania Rule"5 the CHARLES JOURDAN was presumed at fault. Nevertheless, the court found that, under COLREGS Rule 8, 33 U.S.C. foll. Sec. 1602,6 the ENDEAVOUR's failure to take action to avoid the collision "was a significant cause of the accident," and found it 40% at fault. Juno, 865 F.Supp. at 18.

Cheshirecatman

Thanks Eric! I'm good with it now because I know what to expect, whether it be right or not it is consistent. At just about every skippers meeting something is said about not having protests and working it out on the water. It is obvious that they do not wish to hear protests or take the time to put together a protest committee. As long as nothing happens its a mute point.

And Mark you are correct, I can push as hard as I choose because my boat is insured but the arguments and bad feelings afterward are certainly not worth it. Its not like there is money to be won! I would rather be cautious and stay out of the way.

Well, there's definitely something to be said for that.

All of the most respected cat racers that I know avoid protests and entanglements on the water at all costs. If they find themseleves in a tough spot, they do their best to avoid it, even if that means sailing a longer distance and not pushing their rights. Doesn't work all of the time, but for the vast majority, they still manage to win.

Generally speaking, any time spent fighting for rights or position is lost to the rest of the fleet. Except on the finish line, it rarely pays.

Mike

Do you really want to start this here? I don't know who your wife overheard, but I never, ever, said anything even remotely approaching the phrase "to get some insurance money". It was the furthest thing from my mind. I was too glad to be alive and happily shocked that nobody was hurt. I wasn't going to file a protest but was urged to do so my certified PRO friend who was not involved with the organization of the regatta (I was new at this game too - it was my first ever protest and my first ever incident on the water). I had very little information about the protest process either but I don't think it was the race committee's duty to inform us about it...it's quite simple actually.

I also take issue with your "at fault" insinuation...but I'm not going to start to debate this.

Good stuff guys.

Best advise is have your own insurance. The insurance company will deal with the other party. Protest information and results will help. Are they the bottomline for insurance companies? NO. However that is their game, you have done all you can do as a sailor and the Insurance Company will appreciate it.

I have been on the other side of this issue. Protests should be heard. One of the most frustrating things I have seen is the tendancy to avoid protests. Yes I too hate them. However without them, the same bad sailors will continue to sail badly. As mentioned in this thread, it is best to sail and avoid the situations that would lead to questionable situations and decisions. That said if it happens, a protest must be held for everyone's sake, or the situation will happen over and over again. Self policing means just that. That means all of us. We all need to follow through with protests. This is not the other guys problem, it is our problem. Everyone needs to step up to the plate. I serve as a PRO for several regattas a year. I can not tell you how many times I get notified at the finish line of a protest. I put together the protest committee, only to learn the sailor had with-drawn the protest or simply did not file the protest by the dead line, to avoid it.
If you are on the race committee, be ready to follow through with protests. They are easy to do, it is spelled out step by step in the rule book. Just do what the rule book says...that is why we have a "rule book". One of the major reasons that racing is viewed negatively is people will not man up to the job at hand. They sail badly (meaning, breaking rules) and everyone looks the other way so they don't have to get involved.
Racing sailboats is like playing any other game. It is no fun unless all of the players go by the same rules. I have seen the rules pushed most by those viewed as the best sailors. All the more reason to strenghten the rules. This can only be done by all of us "the sailors".
That said, use you head. In the old days, I did serve on one protest committee where we had to hear 8 protests from one sailor. (Not a good way to try and win a regatta).
Also, the best way to learn the rules is to serve on a protest committee (it forces you to read the rule book and actually learn the rules before you end up on the wrong side of a protest committee).

Sorry Jake, not trying to start anything with you. But your response does bring the issue to light even stronger. If your friend had not been present how would you have known how to proceed? Would you have found it fair to have the situation reversed, my friend being a PRO and advising me only? In this instance a protest was heard and a decision was made which I abided by. This is how it should be settled but it would seem both parties should have access to experienced council in order to properly address the protest committee.

Keep reading. The District Court's decision was reversed by the First Circut Court of Appeals. The Appellate Court found that having two different sets of rules made absolutely no sense, and since all the parties involved had contractually agreed to use the racing rules, that those were the ones in force.

Sincerely,
Eric

It's not ok to be wrong, even if one is consistently wrong. When you attend a regatta, you should have confidence that protests will be heard. If you feel that hearings are being scuttled, let's fix that.

What I hear at skippers' meetings, is not that protests won't be heard, but that RC encourages competitors to 1) sail cleanly, and 2) exonerate themselves on the water. This is similar to when a boxing referee says "...no butting, no low blows, let's have a clean fight..." He's asking the competitors to abide by the rules, but he's there to respond if somebody doesn't.

Putting together a protest committee and holding hearings takes time and effort that regatta organizers and/or race committee would rather not spend. I don't deny that. Nevertheless, when a protest is filed, they are duty-bound to hear it.

Would it help for the larger EMSA regattas to have a jury (a protest committee separate from race committee)? That way, the competitors would know that is someone present to hear protests. If so, I'm willing to try to fit some EMSA events into my judging schedule for next year.

Regards,
Eric

Ummm, can I make some observations without opening a can of worms? It appears to me that in this instance, both parties:
1) were relatively inexperienced and did not know what the proper procedure was or how to go about following it, and
2) had just been through a harrowing experience and were shaken up, and
3) have a much better understanding of how to handle such a situation now.

Also, I know personally that both of you are nice people and would much rather not see others (including each other) in this situation. Therefore, I have a proposal. Let the three of us agree that, in the future, should we be at a regatta where a boat is damaged, or crew injured, to seek out the people involved, ask them if they are ok, and offer them help if needed and guidance on the process if they want it. Offer it to both sides if need be.

That way, we are all working to make it better. What do you say?

Regards,
Eric

Kaos nicely summarizes the consequences of cat sailor's overwhelming resistance to carrying through with protests .

Not only do sailors continually make the same errors... but clearly when the boats go crunch... the feelings of bad sportsmanship and irresponsibility persist for much longer then the boat repair or rule confusion lasted.
(see this EMSA example... and my fleet... we had two A cats go crunch in June and I don't think either sailor has raced the rest of the year... boats are all back together long ago.)

I know crewing on big boats on beer can wed's how amped up you can get over a dispute and then your complete non interest in following through on the protest when you hit the dock ... AND I also know that XXX was and is an idiot and will be wrong forever more.
I won't have a mechanism to resolve the issue either. but even though i can't remember the details... I KNOW that XXX can't be trusted.
Not good!

The PC hearing will resolve the rules dispute. AND a fair process will go along way to addressing the responsibility and sportsmanship issues that underlie the dispute.

I stand by my position that the PC must explicitly focus on this responsibility and sportsmanship stuff (and the rules admin) because the effect on the fleet will be corrosive in the end.

One of the purposes of a protest hearing is to help defuse emotionally explosive situations. When all parties are given a fair chance to tell their stories, then no matter what the final outcome, at least everybody can feel that they've been heard. This purpose isn't spelled out in the rulebook, but it is still important. Once the protest is over, people can move on. A hearing can go a long way towards eliminating this kind of ongoing recrimination.

But, if you don't protest, I can't help you.

Sincerely,
Eric
US Sailing Certified Judge,
Member, Area D Appeals Committee