The Lulworth Cove "cowboy"

[codprawn]

Originally Posted by Biggles

Sorry,

But for the length of time it takes to put a life jacket on then this is the minimum that should be done.

And if you don't agree with that then fine, but then tell me why you fine fellows always wear one when your on your own RIB.

We know it doesn't happen every time but it might and thats why we wear the life jackets. No different to a seatbelt. You've got it so use it.

Now if people were ranting and raving about the fact he didn't have a life raft or everyone didn't have their own VHF or flare then that would be daft. But lifejackets have just got to be the most basic thing you wear on a small boat. As I said before just like a seatbelt in a car or a helmet on a motorbike. the bare minimum.

They aren't made for fun. They are a serious item and made to save lives.

Next person step forward please !!!!

Have you noticed how all coaches etc must now have seatbelts fitted - of course how many people actually WEAR them? None going by the crash of the National Express coach a few months ago.

Same with school buses - how many kids will actually wear them?

[Biggles]

Originally Posted by codprawn

Have you noticed how all coaches etc must now have seatbelts fitted - of course how many people actually WEAR them? None going by the crash of the National Express coach a few months ago.

Good idea, badly implemented.

[codprawn]

Originally Posted by Biggles

Good idea, badly implemented.

How many people want to be trussed up like a chicken when they are kipping on a coach trip or watching a film?

Then again I HATE coach travel - they always make me sick. Never been air sick or sea sick but coaches get me everytime. What gets me is when they say "Executive Travel" - how many executives travel by coach - unless the learjet pilot has a day off of course!!!

[Milo72]

With all due respect, and with attention to codders post #71 and JK's #75, the coding says: you must carry life jackets for each person on board and 2 [two] extra if you are using CO2 inflating type life jackets.

nothing is said about making each passenger wearing a life jacket on each voyage.

THEY DO NOT HAVE TO WEAR THEM BY LAW

there are enough of you who write on here who are coded and licensed to know the laws.

yes, it takes longer to issue and fit a jacket to each and every person,
yes, time is money,
yes, what price on a life......

But....

even though this person might not be doing it how YOU would do it...

is he breaking his coding and the MCA's requierments...

NO

are the MCA aware of him

YES

does he know about the slagg1ng off he's getting ...?

NO


If it was me on the recieving end of this I'd be pretty p1ssed off....


like I said before... it's a lively debate.

[John Kennett]

Originally Posted by Biggles

But lifejackets have just got to be the most basic thing you wear on a small boat. As I said before just like a seatbelt in a car or a helmet on a motorbike. the bare minimum.

Would you apply this to all trip boat operators, or just RIBs?

John

[Hugh Jardon]

if he is operating withing the law/guidelines then i guess he is fine in that respect, i certainly would not put my kids/wife on a fast rib/boat ride with no lifejacket,, if it was just me then i think i would be ok with it but not the kids.

i have looked at these boat trips in the past and if i dont like the look of the skipper and how he goes about things or how he treats the passengers or the condition of the boat and equipment then i just walk away. i apply the same sort of logic to any rides

i guess we are mostly lucky in knowing better and are perhaps better informed to make a careful decision as we have experience of using boats whereas many of his passengers may not.

i guess what most people and a good many at least would say on here is that they would not go on a trip with this operator unless they could wear a proper fitting lifejacket or maybe not atall.

[Poly]

Originally Posted by Hugh Jardon

i guess what most people and a good many at least would say on here is that they would not go on a trip with this operator unless they could wear a proper fitting lifejacket or maybe not atall.

You can... there is a sign on the back of the seats telling you exactly that.

[Hugh Jardon]

Originally Posted by Polwart

You can... there is a sign on the back of the seats telling you exactly that.

i dont think it says they are proper fitting lifejackets, just life jackets! and unless you can see what they look like first they may not be confidence inspiring.

[Poly]

Originally Posted by havener

Also, a simple risk assessment for the operator's business should show something like :

Risk - Passenger falls overboard and drowns
Mitigation - Insist passengers wear lifejackets.

Risk assesments are subjective.

I would suggest that you could equally well assess the risk as follows:

RISK - passenger falls overboard.

LIKLIHOOD - low: provided responsible driving style employed, and reasonable wave heights being encountered. All passengers are seated on jockey seats in the centre of a large boat (not on tubes). No previous history (I assume) of MoB from this vessel. MoB's not perceived as actually being a common occurance on commercial RIBs with jockey seats opperated responsibly.

IMPACT - potential loss of life especially for non swimmer (therefore ensure lifejackets are available and signage clear to that effect). Given the high manouverability of the craft, and the location of all passengers in front of the crew it is likely that any MoB could be quickly and successfully recovered without serious consequences.


I am not saying that this is the correct analysis of risk - but it if I was on the jury I could be convinced!

[Phil]

the only jury I would worry about is the one where the ribnet police are defending themselves against defamatory remarks

come on, lets ruin the guy; we know best even if the MCA won't act, we will in our capacity of babysitters for all things rib related

[wavecrosschris]

Originally Posted by Phil

the only jury I would worry about is the one where the ribnet police are defending themselves against defamatory remarks

come on, lets ruin the guy; we know best even if the MCA won't act, we will in our capacity of babysitters for all things rib related

Ok, meet you in lulworth cove tomorrow morning...

we'll sneak up behind him, you throw a fishing net over him and i'll club him round the head with a canister from an auto-inflate life jacket.

that'll teach him.

[Poly]

Originally Posted by Hugh Jardon

i dont think it says they are proper fitting lifejackets, just life jackets! and unless you can see what they look like first they may not be confidence inspiring.

Are you saying that his lifejackets are not properly fitting or safe? Unless you have knowledge of this operation you haven't shared here - then I think you just jumped to a massive and probably grossly unfair assumption.

[Hugh Jardon]

Originally Posted by Polwart

Are you saying that his lifejackets are not properly fitting or safe? Unless you have knowledge of this operation you haven't shared here - then I think you just jumped to a massive and probably grossly unfair assumption.

errrrr no

if you cant see em and see folks wearing em cos they are tucked away in a box it is difficult to know if they are ok....thats all.

my concern on properly fitting life jackets is for my 4 and 6 year old and would a boat have sufficient jackets of the right size for the little ones especially if a few families went on one trip....possibly not

so to wrap up ....... i would probably not pay someone to go for a trip on their rib anyway....whats the point when you have one anyway....and if i did i would probably prefer my kids wear their own lifejackets as i know they are the right size and fitment.

i do not know the guy or operation and have nothing against him and wish him all the luck.

[richyrich]

1. If the chap who runs the boat employed someone to go on the boat with him they would have to wear a life jacket. If they helmed, they (and maybe he), would have to wear a kill cord. Why? Because employer would be obliged to do risk assessment and inevitably risk of employee being thrown from boat would be highest risk factor, reduced to minimum by these steps.
2. In many situations criminal law is driven by civil law - eg passenger injured and not wearing seatbelt got reduced damages long before it was obligatory to wear seat belts. Cycling helmets is current battleground of "choice v nanny state". So where is civil law likely to stand on this?
3. Common law would consider in event of passenger injury whether failure to insist on passengers wearing them was negligent on basis of what reasonable commercial operators would do. If vast majority of other operators of ribs insist passengers wear them he would probably be negligent (small consolation if serious/fatal injury). Interestingly (?) it isn't to my knowledge criminal offence not to insure your boat against third party risks to passengers, even for commercial operators (I might be wrong). Maybe local trading standards on South coast insist on insurance if there are local by-laws etc.
4 My observation of many rib users (especially under parenting age) is they don't wear jackets.
5 I think he is criminally negligent in not insisting all children wear them but if adults/parents are made aware of risks and offered use of them and decline, I don't think the law is against him. I would like him to confirm he has third party insurance if anyone has the bottle to ring him.
6 Maybe RIbnet should promote Private Members Bill to get wearing life jackets obligatory, as well as testing/licensing for all powerboat drivers.
That's enough for one post!

[Pete7]

Originally Posted by richyrich

6 Maybe RIbnet should promote Private Members Bill to get wearing life jackets obligatory, as well as testing/licensing for all powerboat drivers.

Oh feck thats gone and done it

Actually the govening body for the sport is in favour of education rather than legislation, if this was applied across other areas then we could have more teachers and less lawyers, something most on here would approve of I suspect. Oh I have just seen your profile

Originally Posted by richyrich

4 My observation of many rib users (especially under parenting age) is they don't wear jackets.

My observation of many rib users is they do wear life jackets. In the early days we didn't even own them, let alone use them. The early rules for BIBOA never mentioned them. Over the past few years there has been an acceptance that since things can go pear shaped rather quickly on a rib its a good idea to wear one. I am sure if you look through the galley forum you would find many more photos of peeps with than without.

Pete

[Limey Linda]

Originally Posted by richyrich

1. If the chap who runs the boat employed someone to go on the boat with him they would have to wear a life jacket. If they helmed, they (and maybe he), would have to wear a kill cord. Why? Because employer would be obliged to do risk assessment and inevitably risk of employee being thrown from boat would be highest risk factor, reduced to minimum by these steps.
2. In many situations criminal law is driven by civil law - eg passenger injured and not wearing seatbelt got reduced damages long before it was obligatory to wear seat belts. Cycling helmets is current battleground of "choice v nanny state". So where is civil law likely to stand on this?
3. Common law would consider in event of passenger injury whether failure to insist on passengers wearing them was negligent on basis of what reasonable commercial operators would do. If vast majority of other operators of ribs insist passengers wear them he would probably be negligent (small consolation if serious/fatal injury). Interestingly (?) it isn't to my knowledge criminal offence not to insure your boat against third party risks to passengers, even for commercial operators (I might be wrong). Maybe local trading standards on South coast insist on insurance if there are local by-laws etc.
4 My observation of many rib users (especially under parenting age) is they don't wear jackets.
5 I think he is criminally negligent in not insisting all children wear them but if adults/parents are made aware of risks and offered use of them and decline, I don't think the law is against him. I would like him to confirm he has third party insurance if anyone has the bottle to ring him.
6 Maybe RIbnet should promote Private Members Bill to get wearing life jackets obligatory, as well as testing/licensing for all powerboat drivers.
That's enough for one post!

WHY ?

[Poly]

Originally Posted by richyrich

1. If the chap who runs the boat employed someone to go on the boat with him they would have to wear a life jacket. If they helmed, they (and maybe he), would have to wear a kill cord. Why? Because employer would be obliged to do risk assessment and inevitably risk of employee being thrown from boat would be highest risk factor, reduced to minimum by these steps.

No thats a typical lawyers approach to risk assesment!

In reality he is only required to take "action" to address any 'real' risk - not every possible eventuality. There are thousands and thousands of commerical rib trips made every year. I doubt that if the boat is being driven in a "controlled" fashion that the "skipper" has ever been ejected from a large boat like this fitted with jockey seats - when opperating in sheltered waters.

5 I think he is criminally negligent in not insisting all children wear them but if adults/parents are made aware of risks and offered use of them and decline, I don't think the law is against him. I would like him to confirm he has third party insurance if anyone has the bottle to ring him.

I am amazed that with your occupation you would make such a statement - especially based on limited evidence. You are implying that he doesn't have 3rd party insurance (which I think is unlikely). You are suggesting that he has primary responsibility for the children in his "care" but not the "adults". I assume children don't come unaccompanied.

His phone number is in the thread if you want to discuss it with him. in fact - you could potentially offer him your professional services - but I suspect he won't really want legal representation from someone taking such a partial position.

[Poly]

Originally Posted by richyrich

4 My observation of many rib users (especially under parenting age) is they don't wear jackets.

I'm not sure what you meant by under parenting age?

but if you meant under 16 (round here they start younger than that!) then can't say I have seen many ribs used by under 16s unless supervised in some way (even if "remotely") and can't think of ever seeing a teenager without a l/jacket driving a rib.

[DGR]

Whether you think he is a cowboy or not isn't the point - and it's just your opinion.

I run a commercial RIB, all my passengers wear life-jackets. According to my coding, I just have to carry them - but if I lost someone over the side during a trip, the chances of them pausing long enough to put one on is quite small - - so I make all passengers wear them. My decision.

The guy isn't breaking the law - if he was, the MCA would shut him down - it isn't in their interest to let him continue to operate illegally.

Is he operating responsibly - well, it would appear perhaps not (from 3 grainy photos) - but I'm aware of operators that have been asked to move away from the boarding area to kit up allow other traffic to embark passengers - so without knowing the full picture (pardon the pun) - it's a difficult call.

Incidentally - before the correct fitting debate goes too far - the coding states that Lifejackets have to conform to EN396 - which I seem to remember means that they are adjustable to fit all shapes/sizes, or are sized for a particular build (small/med/large etc) - so the correct fitting debate isn't relevant if he doesn't make people wear them. If he has jackets, they can be fitted correctly.

And if I was him, I probably wouldn't appear on here to defend myself - as many appear to have already decided what they think. I'd probably read it, and then if I thought that any of the advice was worth listening to, implement it.

(Is anyone going back to Lulworth soon to see if anything changes?!? )

D...

[nikster]

""when opperating in sheltered waters""

That is certainly not lulworthy...!!