Newsbot Posted October 20, 2008 Share Posted October 20, 2008 A date is set for the inquest verdicts into the death of a trawler's crew who died off the Manx coast. Source : http://news.bbc.co.uk/go/rss/-/1/hi/world/...man/7679914.stm Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Silentbob Posted October 20, 2008 Share Posted October 20, 2008 Hopefully we can then put the whole tragedy behind us, and the boat into a final resting place. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
bluemonday Posted October 20, 2008 Share Posted October 20, 2008 Agreed, not before time. Hopefully the relatives will at last get some degree of closure after all this time. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Lee54 Posted October 20, 2008 Share Posted October 20, 2008 Hopefully we can then put the whole tragedy behind us, and the boat into a final resting place. So a scrap yard in Scotland is a final resting place. The boat should be sunk at the spot it went down, its my belief that the ownership of the boat has been taken over by an insurance company, if I'm right this is another case of Government losing touch with reality. the boat was raised by the Manx taxpayer not the insurers. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Albert Tatlock Posted October 21, 2008 Share Posted October 21, 2008 Better to scrap the boat IMO, but maybe use some of the materials to create two small identical memorials on land - one here the other at their home town. That will tie the two places together and give a focus for those left behind. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
bluemonday Posted October 21, 2008 Share Posted October 21, 2008 A good idea. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Lonan3 Posted October 21, 2008 Share Posted October 21, 2008 Better to scrap the boat IMO, but maybe use some of the materials to create two small identical memorials on land - one here the other at their home town. That will tie the two places together and give a focus for those left behind. That appears to be an excellent idea. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Lee54 Posted October 21, 2008 Share Posted October 21, 2008 Better to scrap the boat IMO, but maybe use some of the materials to create two small identical memorials on land - one here the other at their home town. That will tie the two places together and give a focus for those left behind. Whats that on Douglas head and also at the Isle of Whithorn. The boat has to go back to the sea bed, not for some insurance company to get a few quid in scrap for something that they never paid for. The families of the seven men want the boat sunk. http://www.manxscenes.com/01&2/Mar/Sol...20Harvester.htm http://www.flickr.com/photos/rockartwolfy/2361597877/ Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Gladys Posted October 22, 2008 Share Posted October 22, 2008 Pitiful memorial on Douglas Head, I have to say. In any case, it is a recognition to the IOM from the people of Whithorn, not a memorial to those lost. I like Albert's idea, but it isn't really up to us is it? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Lee54 Posted October 22, 2008 Share Posted October 22, 2008 Pitiful memorial on Douglas Head, I have to say. In any case, it is a recognition to the IOM from the people of Whithorn, not a memorial to those lost. I like Albert's idea, but it isn't really up to us is it? Having spoken to those concerned in Whithorn, they are pleased with the simple memorial at Douglas Head and still want the boat put back where it was lifted. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Skeddan Posted October 22, 2008 Share Posted October 22, 2008 The boat has to go back to the sea bed, not for some insurance company to get a few quid in scrap for something that they never paid for. The families of the seven men want the boat sunk. Lee54 - do you know how the insurance company laid claim to this? If they never paid for it, how did they get their hands on it? Has a Manx court of admiralty settled this? (or whichever judicial body now has responsibility for what was the role of the 'water bailiff') IMO it would be the smallest thing that could do for the families to respect their wishes on this. As you describe it, it all sounds insensitive and mercenary - which might be understandable for an insurance company, but not so if comes down to IoMG trying to make a few quid out of it. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Sebrof Posted October 22, 2008 Share Posted October 22, 2008 The boat has to go back to the sea bed, not for some insurance company to get a few quid in scrap for something that they never paid for. The families of the seven men want the boat sunk. Lee54 - do you know how the insurance company laid claim to this? If they never paid for it, how did they get their hands on it? Has a Manx court of admiralty settled this? (or whichever judicial body now has responsibility for what was the role of the 'water bailiff') IMO it would be the smallest thing that could do for the families to respect their wishes on this. As you describe it, it all sounds insensitive and mercenary - which might be understandable for an insurance company, but not so if comes down to IoMG trying to make a few quid out of it. The boat would presumably have been insured, and the insurance company would have paid out for another boat. In return, they are entitled to the old boat (once the coroner or whoever has finished with it). As you say, I am sure it is not worth very much, so perhaps they would donate it, if approached correctly. S Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Skeddan Posted October 22, 2008 Share Posted October 22, 2008 The boat would presumably have been insured, and the insurance company would have paid out for another boat. In return, they are entitled to the old boat (once the coroner or whoever has finished with it). I don't get your reasoning of why paying out on the insurance claim for the old boat would entitle them to ownership of the wreck. A wreck of the sea belonged to the Manx Crown by royal prerogative - UK sold rights to territorial sea to IoMG, so it would seem IOMG would have ownership of the wreck (Presumably the Harbours Division of Department of Transport). If that is indeed Manx law, and the wreck was in Manx waters, then the insurance company's contract with the shipowner doesn't give them any right to the vessel per se. (is there perhaps some other maritime convention that IoM is party to, or which is now ergo omnes and binding principle of international law? If so what?) The insurance company can't simply walk off with property belonging to IoMG - if that is indeed what the law is. Don't get me wrong - I'm not saying it does belong to IoMG - but that there seems reason to believe so. I'd also think that the wreck ought not to be released to anyone until the question of its ownership has been properly settled by the appropriate judicial body (court of admiralty or whatever its modern equivalent). You shouldn't just assume the insurance company have rights to a ship that has been wrecked, salvaged at the expense of IoMG etc. I would assume that if proper course were followed, then the status of the wreck should currently be considered as 'under administration', with its ownership yet to be decided by the court of admiralty or equivalent. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Sebrof Posted October 22, 2008 Share Posted October 22, 2008 The boat would presumably have been insured, and the insurance company would have paid out for another boat. In return, they are entitled to the old boat (once the coroner or whoever has finished with it). I don't get your reasoning of why paying out on the insurance claim for the old boat would entitle them to ownership of the wreck. A wreck of the sea belonged to the Manx Crown by royal prerogative - UK sold rights to territorial sea to IoMG, so it would seem IOMG would have ownership of the wreck (Presumably the Harbours Division of Department of Transport). If that is indeed Manx law, and the wreck was in Manx waters, then the insurance company's contract with the shipowner doesn't give them any right to the vessel per se. (is there perhaps some other maritime convention that IoM is party to, or which is now ergo omnes and binding principle of international law? If so what?) The insurance company can't simply walk off with property belonging to IoMG - if that is indeed what the law is. Don't get me wrong - I'm not saying it does belong to IoMG - but that there seems reason to believe so. I'd also think that the wreck ought not to be released to anyone until the question of its ownership has been properly settled by the appropriate judicial body (court of admiralty or whatever its modern equivalent). You shouldn't just assume the insurance company have rights to a ship that has been wrecked, salvaged at the expense of IoMG etc. I would assume that if proper course were followed, then the status of the wreck should currently be considered as 'under administration', with its ownership yet to be decided by the court of admiralty or equivalent. It has been stated that the boat belongs to the insurance company. If that is so, then no doubt everything is as it should be. I have no intention of being drawn into a discussion on the finer points of maritime law when there are so many more significant things going on. S Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Skeddan Posted October 22, 2008 Share Posted October 22, 2008 It has been stated that the boat belongs to the insurance company. If that is so, then no doubt everything is as it should be. Depends who stated this. Who said this? - source/link please. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Archived
This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.