"MCA seize lifeboat from Hope Cove"?

Nos4r2 · 20 August 2008, 13:09

Anyone know anything about this? I'm refraining from commenting because I'm assuming these don't tell the full story.
Daily Mail story
Times story

MIRO Stewart · 20 August 2008, 15:05

I can sympatise with both sides on this one. The MCA presumably couldnt allow a boat that they had not deemed seaworthy to take part in rescue work.

However, it would be very hard for the coasties to stand on the shore and wait for another boat with members of the public asking why they were standing there and not launching.

Very difficult situation to which I dont think there is a right answer.

PeterM · 20 August 2008, 15:30

Saw it & wondered the same - what made made it not seaworthy ? If it was a major structural problem I can see it , but I would guess ( & hope ) that it was something minor that deasn't affect the basic worth of the boat . Its impossible to tell what sort of hull it is from the pic ( if its the right pic ! ) . as has been said these breif stories never really give all the info.

To be fair my 4m avon wont tick all the boxes to be classed as a rescue boat , but if its that or nothing - well no choice at all ! For the crew, especailly if they had been using it before without a problem , I cant see they would ever just stand & watch

Maximus · 20 August 2008, 16:53

Quote:

Originally Posted by Blackroady

Saw it & wondered the same - what made made it not seaworthy ? If it was a major structural problem I can see it , but I would guess ( & hope ) that it was something minor that deasn't affect the basic worth of the boat . Its impossible to tell what sort of hull it is from the pic ( if its the right pic ! ) . as has been said these breif stories never really give all the info.

To be fair my 4m avon wont tick all the boxes to be classed as a rescue boat , but if its that or nothing - well no choice at all ! For the crew, especailly if they had been using it before without a problem , I cant see they would ever just stand & watch

No doubt the guys on the ground at the time [qualified rescue crew] made the right call,and I am equaly sure if it was one of the Horray Henrys of the Health and safety brigades loved ones in trouble they would have comended thier decision also!
Forgoing the lack of integrity almost universily displayed by our sewer press[they sank from the gutter years ago] and agreeing with Nosr,it may not be the whole story...
This type of B.S and P.C B.S is,Im affraid a symptom of the downward plunge of our once great and looked up to nation!
THAT FEELS BETTER! In short the rescuers in my opinion should be commended for showing the type of initiative,and bravery,so valued in the past,and often so lacking in the present!! perhaps the pendulem is begining to swing back.I Hope so!
Roll on the sunhine!!

MikeCC · 20 August 2008, 17:08

Another article here, but essentially the same story.

Seems it was repaired and ready but just awaiting MCA inspection. Why they then have to take yet another 8 weeks to think about it I don't know. As Nos says, perhaps there's more to it than meets the eye.

PeterM · 20 August 2008, 17:48

Very well said Matthew ! Does sound like there was nothing 'wrong' with the boat , just didn't have the right paperwork to be able to save someones life ! _ i'd still like to get the full story just so I can bristle some more about stupid H&S rules made up by muppets who have never stepped out of the office in more than a light shower ( while getting paid - unlike the majority of rescue boat crews be it RNLI / local etc )

PeterR · 20 August 2008, 19:53

I have resently joined the inshore rescue patrol at felixstowe called Voluntere and being a charity we are blessed by not having to abide by the same H&S rules.Although it has to be both safe and Proffessional.(i guess safe is the wrong word)But you know what i mean.i,m sure John Creswell may have heard the true story if it hasnt been posted by sunday I,m sure i will be able to throw some light on the matter

m chappelow · 20 August 2008, 20:32

from what i hear its some of the draconian rules and regulations that have been put in place by the m.c.a. themselves ie, coding
that have made some of there own boats unusable , the boat in question was classed as a general purpose boat which could be used as a rescue boat at times , the casualty was rescued by a surfer as the available rnli life boat would have taken 10 to15 mins to arrive from down the coast,i can well sympathise with the crew to see something unfolding right in front of you ,i would have done the same myself, and not only that the m.c.a if they were that bothered the boat should not have been anywhere near water if there was a risk that someone would be tempted to use it before been checked out . there was an incident in north yorkshire a while ago when a young girl fell down a cliff and was in danger of falling even further to her death ,the local volounter coastie was on scene first and proceded to climb down and attend to her and he saved her life but he was sacked because he should have waited for the rest of the team ,even though he was a local and probely knew the cliffs better than his own back yard .

havener · 21 August 2008, 09:04

Quote:

Originally Posted by PeterR

I have resently joined the inshore rescue patrol at felixstowe called Voluntere and being a charity we are blessed by not having to abide by the same H&S rules.Although it has to be both safe and Proffessional.(i guess safe is the wrong word)But you know what i mean.i,m sure John Creswell may have heard the true story if it hasnt been posted by sunday I,m sure i will be able to throw some light on the matter

Sorry, you're wrong there.

The MCA have been consulting for years on the Rescue Boat Code - this is close to full implementation, and when brought in will cause problems for many of the independent boats around the country. One of the drivers I believe for Cowes going RNLI was the fact that their boat wouldn't comply with the Code.

As for being a charity, in law you are still considered an "employer" in terms of your obligation to undertake a duty of care towards your "employees", whether paid or voluntary. Trust me, we went through all that years ago when with another indie service and the result was a 120 page Standard Ops Procedure.

Drop me a PM if you need chapter and verse.

Poly · 21 August 2008, 14:28

the MCA's version here:

http://www.mcga.gov.uk/c4mca/mcga07-...6F0&m=8&y=2008

as I understand it GP boats can be used for rescues but were never intended to be the first line of response to distress situations.

how can the mca expect/demand high standards of maintainence etc from its partner organisations and the public if it doesn't practice what it preaches itself.

given that the boat had been removed from service and not officially put back in service the MCA chain of command was broken. I can see the the MCA management would see it had no choice other than to take more draconian steps to enforce its management decisions.

the press said "the CG officers lost radio contact with their controllers" that sounds to me like they intentionally stopped listening! Again - that is not the approach of a supposedly highly disciplined/structured organisation.

Finally - whilst the press imply that they rescued the girl - they did not - they simply launched and she was already rescued by the public.

MIRO Stewart · 21 August 2008, 14:29

Quote:

Originally Posted by Blackroady

Very well said Matthew ! Does sound like there was nothing 'wrong' with the boat , just didn't have the right paperwork to be able to save someones life ! _ i'd still like to get the full story just so I can bristle some more about stupid H&S rules made up by muppets who have never stepped out of the office in more than a light shower ( while getting paid - unlike the majority of rescue boat crews be it RNLI / local etc )

I just noticed this post, I agree with Havener, and am surprised that you do not have to follow any H&S rules! I am a member of my local indie rescue service and we have to follow the rescue boat code to the letter just the same as any other life/rescue boat. Are you a declared asset? This is the only thing i can think of that might exempt you from some parts of the rescue boat code as its possible the boat may not need coded!

All declared assets in the UK have to (or will have to when it comes into full effect) adhere to the rescue boat code and fall under the authority of the coastguard. Essentially, if for whatever reason they say you cant launch then you cant launch.

In this incident it appears that a coded boat which was likely a declared asset was presumably taken of station as it was deemed by the MCA to be unfit for its purpose. The repairs had been carried out but it had not been inspected to ensure that it was once again fit for its purpose and was therefore still of station. Remember this boat is coastguard and would therefore have to have any repairs signed of by the MCA rather that checked locally

If you took your car for an MOT and it failed, then you went outside and did the repairs yourself, the car wouldnt have a valid MOT until it had be retested would it? Do you think broken ambulances and fire engines would be on the road? Would a faulty aircraft be allowed to fly? The answer is no so why would you expect any different of a rescue boat? This is why the RNLI have relief boats because if one breaks then they cant use it so while its being fixed they put a relief boat on station

I know it seems like H&S gone mad but unfortunately thats just the way of it these days. Imagine what the articles would have said if the boat had picked the girl up and then sunk and the girl had drowned. The three crew who took the boat would have been sued to kingdom come! This unfortunately is the way the MCA have to look at these things.

All that being said I do sympathise with the boat crew, it would be hard standing there watching knowing there was a boat at the top of the slip that they could use to rescue the girl. Like i said in my first post, there is no right answer. I hope these guys are cleared of any kind of wrong doing and are allowed to comtinue saving lives.

In the end though, the important thing is that the girl is safe!!

Sorry for the rant but it seems like people are unhappy with the MCA because they have rules which have to be adhered to and they are there for the safety of the public and rescue crews. The MCA and its aux coastguard teams do a sterling job imo and they should have our gratitude for it. Unfortunately, somtimes their hands are tied as a result of the where theres blame theres a claim culture we have adopted from th US.

Simon B · 21 August 2008, 16:09

Is the intention of the MCA to have all of it's boats up to the new rescue spec? (Forgive me if I've not noticed this earlier in the thread) If they are not they may be softening the organisation up to have this option removed for their GP boats and devolve all rescues to boat deemed fit for purpose.

This does has echoes of the furore that erupted when that poor kid drowned within sight of two PCSOs

rickuk3 · 21 August 2008, 17:56

The MCGA have been trying to remove the boat from Hope Cove for ages, there is a lot more to this than we are being told.
If you think the boat should be returned to Hope Cove then please sign the pettion at http://www.ipetitions.com/petition/h...coastguardboat
Richard

PeterR · 21 August 2008, 19:09

Thankyou i will take on board what you have pointed out.I cannot say you are right or wrong i have only been a member of this team for a couple of months and have never been envolved in the Rescue boat code before and am spending a lot of time learning things.I shall however look into it in more detail and post again

Quote:

Originally Posted by havener

Sorry, you're wrong there.

The MCA have been consulting for years on the Rescue Boat Code - this is close to full implementation, and when brought in will cause problems for many of the independent boats around the country. One of the drivers I believe for Cowes going RNLI was the fact that their boat wouldn't comply with the Code.

As for being a charity, in law you are still considered an "employer" in terms of your obligation to undertake a duty of care towards your "employees", whether paid or voluntary. Trust me, we went through all that years ago when with another indie service and the result was a 120 page Standard Ops Procedure.

Drop me a PM if you need chapter and verse.

Maximus · 21 August 2008, 20:38

You do agree then? "the important thing is the girl is safe"
The rest is so much government indoctronated B.S.
I rest my case.

Jono · 22 August 2008, 07:31

Quote:

Originally Posted by Matthew Allen

You do agree then? "the important thing is the girl is safe"
The rest is so much government indoctronated B.S.
I rest my case.

Nope..it's litigation driven bullshit.

Nos4r2 · 22 August 2008, 09:44

Quote:

Originally Posted by Matthew Allen

The rest is so much government indoctronated B.S.

Quote:

Originally Posted by Jono

Nope..it's litigation driven bullshit.

Makes no odds if it's from a Friesian or a Jersey. It's still bullshit. Whatever happened to common sense and letting the guys on the ground make the call?

Simon B · 22 August 2008, 11:38

Quote:

Originally Posted by rickuk3

The MCGA have been trying to remove the boat from Hope Cove for ages, there is a lot more to this than we are being told.
If you think the boat should be returned to Hope Cove then please sign the pettion at http://www.ipetitions.com/petition/h...coastguardboat
Richard

This has the whiff of something personal about it!? Do the MCA have relief boats? I could not imagine a national agency operating like this surely!