Progressive: "Okay Mr. Strebe, I'm going to recommend one of our preferred repair shops, 'Speedzone Paint & Autobody' in Santee."
Me: "Yeah, no. There's no paint or body damage, and this is not a car."
Progressive: "Is there a repair shop you would prefer to use?"
Me: "No, there's not. I'd prefer to use a boatyard, because this is a boat. Maybe somebody who's seen a mast before, and knows how to rig one."
Progressive: "Okay, we can certainly work with any boatyard you prefer."
You see, this is why I insure with BoatUS. They understand boats. It's not always about the premiums you pay, but the service when you have a claim.
BTW, State Farm is the worst. My dad's boat was damaged in Sandy and the horror stories with that company.
It might be overkill but I have a Commercial Vessel policy on 'boat' with Berkshire Hathaway as the underwriter. I'm not smart I just am doing what I was taught; My dad was an agent for a large insurance company and he always used Commercial Vessel and Charter Boat insurance underwriters because maritime law is important in a sailboat - it's often that you may hit another boat but still be in the right of way so you need the people to pay based on maritime law.
We tested it one time when we rammed a 21 foot sailboat that was barging us in a regatta. There was no damage to our boat but we put a three foot hole in the side of the other boat and removed some of his transom for him too. Maritime law said we had the right of way and we called right of way and blasted a stand on from our horns but the 21 footer though he was fast enough to slip ahead of us. It was obvious to us at the final 15 feet before impact that the only way to avoid the other boat was to come about but Dad refused and continued to blow the stand on right of way signal on the horn yelling at the other captain to give way and run his boat immediately but the guy never broadened his reach - he just kept trying to point higher and higher.
I can still see three people in the other cockpit all getting knocked to the floor when we hit their boat. Our boat was VERY heavy and went through them like they were paper.
The 21 footer had auto type insurance and their adjuster said it was our fault because we "were not sailing safely" (no where in the law! - he was quoting the Vehicle Code!). When the other boat sued our insurance company they lost in court because they litigated the case like an automobile accident. The court found the 21 foot boat was close hauled on a port tack and liable for the ramming accident for not giving right of way to a sailboat that was close hauled on a starboard tack based on maritime law.
In a regular civil court the finding would have made us liable because we removed the rear right quarter of the 21 foot boat and they were litigating it like a rear end accident. If we both had auto type policies we probably would have been found at fault. But we were not at fault - not under maritime law, and dad knew it. The owner of the 21 foot boat had to pay for everything.
Way I understand it is, you were on a Starboard Tack, other boat was on a Port Tack and crossed your Bow.
That would have his Starboard side on your Nose.
You have the right of way since He was on the give way side (Dead ahead to two points 22 degrees abaft the Starboard side).
That right?
Rules of the Road apply when both boats are tacking to windward under Sail only.
Dave
BOAT wrote:It might be overkill but I have a Commercial Vessel policy on 'boat' with Berkshire Hathaway as the underwriter. I'm not smart I just am doing what I was taught; My dad was an agent for a large insurance company and he always used Commercial Vessel and Charter Boat insurance underwriters because maritime law is important in a sailboat - it's often that you may hit another boat but still be in the right of way so you need the people to pay based on maritime law.
We tested it one time when we rammed a 21 foot sailboat that was barging us in a regatta. There was no damage to our boat but we put a three foot hole in the side of the other boat and removed some of his transom for him too. Maritime law said we had the right of way and we called right of way and blasted a stand on from our horns but the 21 footer though he was fast enough to slip ahead of us. It was obvious to us at the final 15 feet before impact that the only way to avoid the other boat was to come about but Dad refused and continued to blow the stand on right of way signal on the horn yelling at the other captain to give way and run his boat immediately but the guy never broadened his reach - he just kept trying to point higher and higher.
I can still see three people in the other cockpit all getting knocked to the floor when we hit their boat. Our boat was VERY heavy and went through them like they were paper.
The 21 footer had auto type insurance and their adjuster said it was our fault because we "were not sailing safely" (no where in the law! - he was quoting the Vehicle Code!). When the other boat sued our insurance company they lost in court because they litigated the case like an automobile accident. The court found the 21 foot boat was close hauled on a port tack and liable for the ramming accident for not giving right of way to a sailboat that was close hauled on a starboard tack based on maritime law.
In a regular civil court the finding would have made us liable because we removed the rear right quarter of the 21 foot boat and they were litigating it like a rear end accident. If we both had auto type policies we probably would have been found at fault. But we were not at fault - not under maritime law, and dad knew it. The owner of the 21 foot boat had to pay for everything.
But we were not at fault - not under maritime law, and dad knew it.
Actually under maritime law you were likely to be found liable if it were pursued under correctly, since you had a clear chance to prevent the accident and failed to use it.
Commonly called the General Prudential Rule, COLREGS PART A, Number 2.
Plain language version - everyone has to do everything possible to avoid collision, regardless of the rules.
Yes, that was the intent of the car insurance lawyer too, but the Hathaway guy was already on top of that - he said in almost 100% of the cases where port and starboard right of way rules are involved all captains always cite diminished rudder control on a close haul because the boats are leaning so hard. He said all the maritime lawyers cite diminished control as a defense against the prudent rules (you can use weather too, but it was a clear windy day). That is why the port and starboard rules were put into effect in the first place - both sides would always argue who was "safe" and who was "not safe" so the prudence rule always boiled down to who still had control. Cases from 100 years ago show it where they would go in circles - that's why "left and right"/ "Port and Starboard" was created. It's the only way to settle the dispute in regards to sailboats - it's common for sailboats (especially in the old days) to have diminished rudder control when close hauled because (in the case of small boats) the rudder is out of the water OR (in the case of large boats) the rudder is just too hard to turn. In both cases the boats can still turn but their control is diminished.
It always comes back to the port starboard tie breaker when it goes to court if the lawyers know what they are doing.
The stock mast is 30'. Is it all drilled up and mounted with hardware? What's the profile dimensions?
Insurance is going to pay for my mast (and shipping dominates the cost) but I imagine you'll find other takers on this board. The X mast is 27' long I believe.
It's all drilled up....it's missing the spreaders and the spreader mount/sockets. i stole them for another boat but the holes are there and you could use your spreader sockets and just replace the spreaders with new ones.
Otherwise it is complete....has a stainless lewmar winch at the bottom, and some kind of locking pin type rail I am assuming is for setting different sail lengths? The Halyard is there and in excellent shape. Boom is complete. No bends or damage whatsoever...
Nothing I need....I try to stick to smaller boats than what this mast is for (a 27' boat)
This is all true and if both boats are at a collision course you can tell as the bearing remains the same and if so the prudent captain will make a quick 30-45 degree turn to show the attention to other boat to avoid collision. (you can't assume other boat knows the rule of the roads)
To bad the Andra Dora and Stockholm had not found this out.(Dora did but wrong direction)
Rules may be right or dead right. Avoid collision even if you have right of way.
Dave
BOAT wrote:Yes, that was the intent of the car insurance lawyer too, but the Hathaway guy was already on top of that - he said in almost 100% of the cases where port and starboard right of way rules are involved all captains always cite diminished rudder control on a close haul because the boats are leaning so hard. He said all the maritime lawyers cite diminished control as a defense against the prudent rules (you can use weather too, but it was a clear windy day). That is why the port and starboard rules were put into effect in the first place - both sides would always argue who was "safe" and who was "not safe" so the prudence rule always boiled down to who still had control. Cases from 100 years ago show it where they would go in circles - that's why "left and right"/ "Port and Starboard" was created. It's the only way to settle the dispute in regards to sailboats - it's common for sailboats (especially in the old days) to have diminished rudder control when close hauled because (in the case of small boats) the rudder is out of the water OR (in the case of large boats) the rudder is just too hard to turn. In both cases the boats can still turn but their control is diminished.
It always comes back to the port starboard tie breaker when it goes to court if the lawyers know what they are doing.
I agree Dave - if it were me I would have come about and just filed a protest at the committee meeting but my Dad could be pretty strict at times. We was not going to alter course and lose position in the regatta because the other guy was breaking the rules. He was pretty hard core. I'm not like that at all.
but the holes are there and you could use your spreader sockets and just replace the spreaders with new ones.