Safety Boats - Should they be coded?

[Poly]

Originally Posted by Jon Brooks

I am in the "should be coded" camp. I can see why "club" boats maybe excluded but is a private boat is used on behalf of a club then what?

then it will probably fall within the definition of a "pleasure vessel".

Is it correctly insured? Have the crew got the right skills and or quals?

why jump to the conclusion that because the boat is not coded the crew must be incompetent and the boat uninsured. I would expect most club boats will be insured and the majority of people here are insured. Does that cover the risk involved? I would suggest IF the regulations accept it is pleasure use then the insurer will too. A number of people here inform their insurers when they are doing safety/marshal work for powerboat races and I haven't heard of any objections/premium hikes. As for competence - I have experienced good and bad at sailing clubs but I am sure the same applies in the commercial sector.

A club boat and or crew are not being paid. If it is a private boat and the fuel is paid for in what ever means its finacial gain then coded.

You want to speak to your accountant about financial gain, supply of fuel is only meeting one expense and certainly not putting you in profit/gain.

We carry £5mill public liabilty cover, how many private boats have that?

well I think most leisure users do have 3rd party cover (albeit probably not to that extent). I also think most clubs and event organisers will actually have a similar level of cover to that you suggest.

It all well and good to do it un coded until it all goes wrong and they find that the camera kit was not insured and nor were the "passengers"

if that is the case! I would suggest the "value proposition" for using your coded boats for this type of work would need to be stronger than "our insurers might be more likely to pay up".

All IMHO of course

I notice that those posting "should be coded" are predominantly coded operators... ...the more cynical might suggest this is protectionism! Seriously though - surely the whole point of the coding not applying to club boats was to encourage water sports. If it applies to big events it surely applies to smaller events such as dinghy class championships - all the costs rack up, no one necessarily gets any better service and the result is decreased participation/loss of sport.

[Dirk Diggler]

Originally Posted by polwart

i notice that those posting "should be coded" are predominantly coded operators... ...the more cynical might suggest this is protectionism!

:d

[codprawn]

What about smaller events? I have acted as a safety boat on a few occasions where none of the boats were coded. If it hadn't been for us then the events wouldn't have gone ahead.

There may be loads of coded boats on the South Coast but they are few and far between in some areas.

[DGR]

The confusion seems to be over the use of club boats for club activities, or if you use it for gain (commercial).

In Jono's case, using the club safety boats for any club related activity is exempt, even if it's a national event - club members running their own club boats as safety cover (IMHO). If you stick a camera man on it - it isn't a safety boat any more - and so would need to be coded.

If the club is being paid to allow cameramen on the safety boats - they need coding. If the club is being funded/sponsored/paid to run a national event, but they are using their boats purely as safety boats, then they aren't doing anything different and so I think that they would be exempt (again IMHO).

ANYWAY - that seems to be the way that most clubs/people operate. If all clubs had to code their safety boats, then it would be a big financial burden on clubs all over the country!!

The RYA might also have a view on it - from memory, I think that RYA training centres/clubs have an exemption from the coding regs for teaching purposes (don't see many training boats with liferafts), which might apply to safety boats too.

D...

[Doug Stormforce]

Totally agree that Club Safety boats driven for members, safety etc do not need to be coded. The regs specifically exempt them.

Likewise I agree that it would kill of Club sailing etc and be detrimental to the safety of club members if they had to comply with such inappropriate regs for their safety boats.

I can not comment on the protectionism opinion; however I think most operators recognise a club safety boat in Wales providing safety cover for its own members is a good thing and not competition to their business.

All that said however the original post suggested the RIB Crew were being paid to carry a film crew. If that is the case then coding is required. There was no mention of providing safety cover for a dinghy event. It was filming work for the Honda F1 powerboat series. You can call it protectionism if you want but charging to carry a professional film crew is not providing cover for dinghy members it is commercial work.

[Poly]

Originally Posted by Doug Stormforce

All that said however the original post suggested the RIB Crew were being paid to carry a film crew. If that is the case then coding is required.

no it didn't it suggested the club were paid to provide boats for safety and taking out film crews as part of their hosting of an event. Nowhere did it suggest the crew being paid.

There was no mention of providing safety cover for a dinghy event. It was filming work for the Honda F1 powerboat series.

No but rules have to be applied consistently. If it applied the Honda Formula 4 Stroke events it would presumbably apply to all events including dinghy racing.

You can call it protectionism if you want but charging to carry a professional film crew is not providing cover for dinghy members it is commercial work.

But my point is the regulations make no distinction between the actual use of the boat - they make the distinction on the basis of ownership, who recieves any payment, and that it is being used for the sport or pleasure of the club/club member.

Would the situation be different if the "professional film crew" were filming only for coaching purposes, or were an "amatuer crew" filming only for the club website? I'm not seeing the distinction - nor has anyone cited an actual rule that is being broken. Lots of people who are much closer to the commercial side of powerboat use than me are saying it is unnaceptable - but none have actually said where the rules say so; I have cited rules, which to my interpretation say the opposite - although as I noted at the time the "grey area" was whether film crews were there for the sport/pleasure of the club/member.

[Heart-trouble]

maybe the vessel is coded

[Jono Garton]

Originally Posted by Heart-trouble

maybe the vessel is coded

Its not

Jono

[DGR]

Originally Posted by Polwart

But my point is the regulations make no distinction between the actual use of the boat - they make the distinction on the basis of ownership, who recieves any payment, and that it is being used for the sport or pleasure of the club/club member.

Would the situation be different if the "professional film crew" were filming only for coaching purposes, or were an "amatuer crew" filming only for the club website? I'm not seeing the distinction - nor has anyone cited an actual rule that is being broken. Lots of people who are much closer to the commercial side of powerboat use than me are saying it is unnaceptable - but none have actually said where the rules say so; I have cited rules, which to my interpretation say the opposite - although as I noted at the time the "grey area" was whether film crews were there for the sport/pleasure of the club/member.

I think it does. The RYA exemption specifies what you can do and how you do it. The MCA coding specifies that anything done specifically 'for gain' should be covered by the relevant code.

If a yacht club is engaged/sponsored to run a national competition - then as long as the boat is doing stuff regarded by RYA as being in the scope (or the spirit) of their exemption, then that's fine (i.e. safety).

Stick a professional, paid cameraman on the boat, it's a media boat - not a safety boat, so the RYA exemption doesn't cover it - so you'd then need to go to the MCA, and go the coding route.

I understand that coaching videos are included in the RYA exemption (i.e. doing RYA stuff) - so that's fine. If it appears on TV, and is done for gain - then it isn't.

I ran the boat that did the coverage of the harbour and the start for the 3 Peaks Yacht Race (the Barmouth end) in 07 for the C4 TV programme - with a coded boat. I WOULD have been hacked off if someone uncoded had rocked up and taken that work away from me. I also did safety boat cover (unpaid) for a number of regattas for the yacht club along with half-a-dozen other uncoded RIB owners who are yacht club members - which is great - no problem.

As always - IMHO, of course.

D...

[Poly]

Originally Posted by DGR

I think it does. The RYA exemption specifies what you can do and how you do it.

but the RYA training centres "exemption" is completely separate from the "members clubs exemption", so is irrelevant.

The MCA coding specifies that anything done specifically 'for gain' should be covered by the relevant code.

does it? can you show me where?

If a yacht club is engaged/sponsored to run a national competition - then as long as the boat is doing stuff regarded by RYA as being in the scope (or the spirit) of their exemption, then that's fine (i.e. safety).

not all clubs are RYA affiliated, not all RYA affiliated clubs are RYA approved training centres. BUT all members clubs (meeting the MCAs fairly relaxed criteria) are excluded from the coding

[Heart-trouble]

Originally Posted by Jono Garton

Its not

Jono

i thought not, just a joke!

[DGR]

First paragraph of the harmonised code:

Originally Posted by Section 1.1 of MGN 280

The Code has been developed for application to United Kingdom (UK) vessels of up to 24 metres Load Line length which are engaged at sea in activities on a commercial basis, which carry cargo and/or not more than 12 passengers, or provide a service in which neither cargo nor passengers are carried, or are UK pilot boats of whatever size.

The new harmonised codes say that for an organisations boats to qualify as pleasure vessels under the regulations (i.e. to get the exemption):

Originally Posted by Section 1.20 of MGN 280

The code says in Section 1.20:
.1 The vessel or vessels must be in the ownership of the club as a legal entity, or in the joint ownership of all the members evidenced by documentation that is legally binding on parties.

.2 The major and valuable items of equipment for these vessels must be similarly owned, and evidenced.

.3 The members club should be able to produce it’s own constitution, membership list and accounts to an officer of the MCA as ships documents under the provisions of section 257 of the Merchant Shipping Act 1995.

So according to 1 & 2, a members boat doing safety cover as a favour isn't permitted - so that boat should be coded. If it's the clubs own boat, then that's OK.

The following definitions are interesting - from The MS (Small Commercial Vessels and Pilot Boats) Regs 2004:

- “small commercial vessel” means a small vessel which is not a pleasure vessel;

- In these Regulations, “pleasure vessel” means—

(a) a vessel which—
(i) is owned by an individual, and
(ii) at the time it is being used —
(aa) is used only for the sport or pleasure of the owner or the immediate family or friends of the owner, and
(bb) is on a free voyage or excursion;

(b) a vessel which—
(i) is owned by a body corporate, and
(ii) at the time it is being used—
(aa) is used only for the sport or pleasure of the employees or officers of the body corporate, or their immediate family or friends, and
(bb) is on a free voyage or excursion;

(c) a vessel —
(i) which is owned by or on behalf of the members of a members’ club,
(ii) which, at the time it is being used, is used only for the sport or pleasure of a member of that club, his immediate family or his guest, and
(iii) for the use of which no payment is made other than a payment into the funds of the members club which funds are applied for the general use of the members club.

(2) In this regulation, “free voyage or excursion” means a voyage or excursion in respect of which—
(a) no money is paid and no goods or services are provided to any person other than the owner of the vessel engaged in the voyage or excursion; and
(b) the owner of a vessel engaged in the voyage or excursion does not receive–
(i) money for, or in connection with, the operation of the vessel or the carrying of any person in the vessel other than as a contribution to the direct expenses of the operation of the vessel incurred during the voyage or excursion, or
(ii) goods or services other than goods or services which are used or provided on the vessel during the voyage or excursion.

Hmm...so it is quite confusing...

Originally Posted by Polwart

Not all clubs are RYA affiliated, not all RYA affiliated clubs are RYA approved training centres. BUT all members clubs (meeting the MCAs fairly relaxed criteria) are excluded from the coding

But if 1c (above) is the basis of the exemption - than that means that clubs are OK to supply safety cover as pleasure vessels - so surely then the same applies for 1a or b - so that I should be able to use my own boat for club safety purposes in the same way.

However, part 2a probably means that taking a photographer out means that you are providing a service, therefore not a pleasure vessel, and so would need to be coded.

BUT - having said that, it isn't very clear, and I think that it could be argued either way. Looking at the last bit - being given stuff (food & drink) for use by the owner during the 'excursion' is also fine. And as it's all related to the owner, if the safety crew get given food, then that isn't relevant.

Hope this helps - I've now got a headache...

[Poly]

DGR I think we are in agreement! Except for this bit:

Originally Posted by DGR

So according to 1 & 2, a members boat doing safety cover as a favour isn't permitted - so that boat should be coded. If it's the clubs own boat, then that's OK.

Because if I provide my boat for safety cover I am still a "pleasure boat" - I don't need to fall into club's exclusion because I am exempt anyway. However I couldn't charter the boat to the club and try to fall within the clubs exemption.

[Jono Garton]

Just for extra info the drivers get paid £30 per day fro driving the ribs.

Jono

[Poly]

Originally Posted by Jono Garton

Just for extra info the drivers get paid £30 per day fro driving the ribs.

I was obviously in the wrong Sailing Clubs! However if you pay the driver I can't see how you argue it is for his sport/pleasure, and so must be commercial (and therefore coded) - unless there is any RYA training centre exemption - but I assume you would know the ins and outs of that.

I wonder if they are "employees" of the club for tax purposes?

[Jono Garton]

I think the £30 is for "Expenses".

As far as I know the RYA Training Centre Exemption is just for RYA Training and is 3nm from a NDP. Not for events / club activities, this was a discussion point in this maib investigation - http://www.dft.gov.uk/press/releases/secmaib/plasmenai

Jono

[Poly]

Originally Posted by Jono Garton

I think the £30 is for "Expenses".

mmm... But I'll bet theres still been a few people ranting about MPs allowances in the club bar

[Doug Stormforce]

The regs state

(ii) which, at the time it is being used, is used only for the sport or pleasure of a member of that club, his immediate family or his guest, and...

I cant see how hiring out a Club boat with a paid driver to a film crew can be classed as "only for the sport and pleasure" or can be regarded as for a member, his family an guest.

Paying customers are not guests for these purposes

[andyxs]

They dont get paid £30, the club in question, Last summer at least paid £20 onto the sailing club card that can only be used in the club bar.

[BravoRib]

Originally Posted by chewy

Yep of course they should.
Wasn't it Earth Race that got bollocked for taking some people out who gave them some sandwiches?

They DO NOT need to be coded...