New Posts New Posts RSS Feed: 62.1A Requesting redress
  FAQ FAQ  Forum Search   Register Register  Login Login

62.1A Requesting redress

 Post Reply Post Reply Page  12>
Author
ClubRacer View Drop Down
Groupie
Groupie


Joined: 26 Sep 15
Online Status: Offline
Posts: 60
Post Options Post Options   Quote ClubRacer Quote  Post ReplyReply Direct Link To This Post Topic: 62.1A Requesting redress
    Posted: 12 May 17 at 9:59am
62 REDRESS
 62.1 A request for redress or a protest committee’s decision to consider redress shall be based on a claim or possibility that a boat’s score or place in a race or series has been or may be, through no fault of her own, made significantly worse by
 (a) an improper action or omission of the race committee, protest committee, organizing authority or technical committee for the event, but not by a protest committee decision when the boat was a party to the hearing;

Scenario

Mornings racing run no issues with a dropping tide. As the tide goes out it leaves a big sandbank which goes out a long way. The sailors go onto the water and sit bobbing about expecting the course to be moved out to sea. It is, course is laid and they go into sequence the boats make their way to the start line back inshore un-aware of insufficient water until the sequence is already half way in. Boat 1 runs aground and his rudder comes clean off the back of the boat and Boat 2 has to sail with the board half up to prevent running aground, this is over the full distance of the start line. Because of the issues with bottoming out boat 2 who has the biggest draft's start is compromised and every subsequent lap as the tide was continuing to drop would have to sail with the board up to prevent running aground,

Is this an omission by the race committee to not lay the course with sufficient water for all boats to pass without grounding when sufficient water is readily available (the open sea) and would all effected boats have grounds for a redress under 62.1A 


Edited by ClubRacer - 12 May 17 at 10:01am
Back to Top
Brass View Drop Down
Really should get out more
Really should get out more


Joined: 24 Mar 08
Location: Australia
Online Status: Offline
Posts: 804
Post Options Post Options   Quote Brass Quote  Post ReplyReply Direct Link To This Post Posted: 12 May 17 at 12:54pm
RYA Appeal 2016/3
Rule 62.1(a) Redress
Setting a course within a race area that includes known
shallow area(s) is not normally an improper action of
the race committee.
SUMMARY OF THE FACTS
In race 3 of the Fast 40+ class in the Vice Admiral’s
Cup, the race committee set a course which included a
leg which would take the fleet over the East Knoll
Bank. Whilst on this leg, Otra Vez, Jubilee and Invictus
all ran aground before continuing in the race and
finishing.
Otra Vez requested redress, asserting that the course
passed over a shallow that the deeper draft boats could
not clear but which the boats with lesser draft could
pass over. The request was upheld, and the race
committee then requested redress for Jubilee and
Invictus which was also granted. These boats were
given average points for all races for the first two days
of racing excluding race 3.
The race committee appealed the decision because they
believed that the boats concerned would have had
sufficient electronic navigation aids, including depth
sounders, and were able to avoid a known navigational
hazard.
DECISION
The appeal is upheld. Otra Vez, Jubilee and Invictus are
not entitled to redress and are to be scored in their
original finishing places in race 3.
Rule 62 has three non-exclusive requirements for
redress to be granted: the possibility that a boat’s score
has been or may be made significantly worse; and,
through no fault of her own; and, in this case, by an
improper action or omission of the race committee.
There is no evidence to suggest that the boats could not
have sailed the course without going aground, as did
other boats, and therefore they cannot claim their
groundings to have been through no fault of their own.
Setting a race course that runs across or alongside a
known shallow area to which some boats will be able to
sail closer than others because of their shallower draft is
not normally an improper action of the race committee.


Edited by Brass - 12 May 17 at 12:55pm
Back to Top
jeffers View Drop Down
Really should get out more
Really should get out more
Avatar

Joined: 29 Mar 04
Location: United Kingdom
Online Status: Offline
Posts: 2643
Post Options Post Options   Quote jeffers Quote  Post ReplyReply Direct Link To This Post Posted: 12 May 17 at 3:11pm
Agreed for boats that have depth sounders Brass but this sounds like a dinghy race to me. Not many dinghies have depth sounding equipment on board so may not have known about the depth issue until they hit bottom.

The question would hinge on if all the boats were aware of the local under water geography. If an Open or a Nationals people might not know about the depth at the current state of the tide. If a local club race then everyone should be aware.
Paul
---------------------------
D-Zero GBR188
Ex Rooster 8.1 '11'
Ex Laser 167534
Ex Blaze 655
Back to Top
ClubRacer View Drop Down
Groupie
Groupie


Joined: 26 Sep 15
Online Status: Offline
Posts: 60
Post Options Post Options   Quote ClubRacer Quote  Post ReplyReply Direct Link To This Post Posted: 12 May 17 at 4:11pm
All were aware but the issue was the course was laid in such a way that you couldn't avoid the shallow waters without missing a mark out

I would also say the 3 criteria were met:

the possibility that a boat’s score
has been or may be made significantly worse; and,
through no fault of her own; and, in this case, by an
improper action or omission of the race committee


Edited by ClubRacer - 12 May 17 at 5:29pm
Back to Top
Rupert View Drop Down
Really should get out more
Really should get out more


Joined: 11 Aug 04
Location: Whitefriars sc
Online Status: Offline
Posts: 7643
Post Options Post Options   Quote Rupert Quote  Post ReplyReply Direct Link To This Post Posted: 12 May 17 at 9:24pm
Did no about redress, sounds like the RO is a complete pillock.
Firefly 2324, Lightning 130, Puffin 229, Leader, Topper 44496, yellow Minisail
Back to Top
JimC View Drop Down
Really should get out more
Really should get out more
Avatar

Joined: 17 May 04
Location: United Kingdom
Online Status: Online
Posts: 5414
Post Options Post Options   Quote JimC Quote  Post ReplyReply Direct Link To This Post Posted: 12 May 17 at 9:41pm
Its harsh, but there is a general principle that the skipper is in charge of the boat and is his fault if he/she runs aground. Consider, if you change that at all you could get insurance companies coming after the RC.

In that circumstance perhaps the best thing to do would be to write politely to the RC to the effect that the fairness of the racing was severely affected, and would they like to consider abandoning the race.
Back to Top
ClubRacer View Drop Down
Groupie
Groupie


Joined: 26 Sep 15
Online Status: Offline
Posts: 60
Post Options Post Options   Quote ClubRacer Quote  Post ReplyReply Direct Link To This Post Posted: 12 May 17 at 10:41pm
Being it a club race the RO was going by the safety boats decision to lay the course there and after telling the safety boat with a minute to go im on the bottom and with another boat missing a rudder they did nothing to communicate  that with the RO so I wouldn't go as far as call him the pillock

As far as abandoning the race, I was under the impression its the PC's decision to do that based on my request for redress to stop the RO from being influenced by certain individuals?

I do like that it actually prevents insurance from chasing RC's. Im no expert on insurance claims using protest information but surely they're completely final as to who's to blame as anyone could see from my protest that any damage would have been solely my fault for knowing there is insufficient water and going there anyway but from a fair racing point of view i had no choice and took the chance
Back to Top
Brass View Drop Down
Really should get out more
Really should get out more


Joined: 24 Mar 08
Location: Australia
Online Status: Offline
Posts: 804
Post Options Post Options   Quote Brass Quote  Post ReplyReply Direct Link To This Post Posted: 12 May 17 at 10:55pm
Originally posted by ClubRacer

I would also say the 3 criteria were met:
  • the possibility that a boat’s score has been or may be made significantly worse; and,
  • through no fault of her own; and, in this case, by an
  • improper action or omission of the race committee

Pretty much.

I'd be inclined to say that it depends on whether or not the action of the race committee was improper.

I wouldn't be too harsh about fault of her own.  Maybe actually hitting the bank was fault of her own, but having to sail over the bank with board up gives rise to the possibility or actuality of a boat's score being worsened, and there's no fault of hers in that.

Originally posted by jeffers

Agreed for boats that have depth sounders Brass but this sounds like a dinghy race to me. Not many dinghies have depth sounding equipment on board so may not have known about the depth issue until they hit bottom.

The question would hinge on if all the boats were aware of the local under water geography. If an Open or a Nationals people might not know about the depth at the current state of the tide. If a local club race then everyone should be aware.

I agree that the Appeal mentions depth sounders, but on a dinghy you should be able to look over the side and see whether you are on a bank or not.

I'm not sure that knowledge of the competitors is relevant to whether the action of the race committee was improper.  In general I'd say a race committee has no business relying on 'what everybody around her knows'.

Originally posted by ClubRacer

All were aware but the issue was the course was laid in such a way that you couldn't avoid the shallow waters without missing a mark out

OK, here's where we can start distinguishing this scenario from Appeal 2016/3

I think it's that boats entitled to redress:  race abandoned.  In this case there's nothing that can be done to save the race.

Rather than let this go to the protest committee, the race committee:
  1. shouldn't have set the course in that manner;  and
  2. once they saw what had happened, could have, and should have abandoned the race under rule 32.1.
If I was requesting redress, I'd be conveniently forgetting Appeal 2016/3, and citing Appeal 1989/10.
Back to Top
Brass View Drop Down
Really should get out more
Really should get out more


Joined: 24 Mar 08
Location: Australia
Online Status: Offline
Posts: 804
Post Options Post Options   Quote Brass Quote  Post ReplyReply Direct Link To This Post Posted: 12 May 17 at 11:23pm
Originally posted by ClubRacer

Being it a club race the RO was going by the safety boats decision to lay the course there and after telling the safety boat with a minute to go im on the bottom and with another boat missing a rudder they did nothing to communicate  that with the RO so I wouldn't go as far as call him the pillock
C'mon:  the race officer is responsible for all the actions of various race officials on the day.  If the race officer couldn't rely on the mark-boat to lay a sensible line, then the race officer should have given more detailed instructions and supervised more closely.

If the first groundings happened about the start, the race officer should have quickly postponed or abandoned and reset the course.  And the race officer damn well should have seen the problems happening.

Originally posted by ClubRacer

As far as abandoning the race, I was under the impression its the PC's decision to do that based on my request for redress to stop the RO from being influenced by certain individuals?

See my previous post.

Protest committee can abandon a race by way of redress once they conclude that a boat is entitled to redress (rules 62.1 and 64.2).

Race committee can abandon a race, without going near the protest committee under rule 32.1.

Originally posted by ClubRacer

I do like that it actually prevents insurance from chasing RC's. Im no expert on insurance claims using protest information but surely they're completely final as to who's to blame

Protest hearings do nothing more than decide what boats broke what rules (plus exoneration).  They are about Places in Races.  They do NOT address what 'caused' an incident or who was to 'blame'

Rule 67 is designed to keep protest committees away from these problems

67 DAMAGES
The question of damages arising from a breach of any rule shall be governed by the prescriptions, if any, of the national authority.

RYA Prescription to rule 67
67 Damages
 1. Any issue of liability or claim for damages arising from an incident while a boat is bound by The Racing Rules of Sailing shall be subject to the jurisdiction of the courts and not considered by a protest committee.
 2. A boat that takes a penalty or retires does not thereby admit liability for damages or that she has broken a rule.





Back to Top
ClubRacer View Drop Down
Groupie
Groupie


Joined: 26 Sep 15
Online Status: Offline
Posts: 60
Post Options Post Options   Quote ClubRacer Quote  Post ReplyReply Direct Link To This Post Posted: 12 May 17 at 11:28pm
perfect cheers Brass
Back to Top
 Post Reply Post Reply Page  12>

Forum Jump Forum Permissions View Drop Down

Bulletin Board Software by Web Wiz Forums® version 9.665y
Copyright ©2001-2010 Web Wiz