Bertram 630 Sportfish Sinks?

It means just what the owner's attorney said ... the owner did not have insurance for the voyage, some other entity might have insured the project but as of 20 November the attorney had not discovered one.

Well said. IMHO, it’s very easy when the judge, jury, all in one. I frequent many boat forums and never have I seen a Mod/ owner (of the web page) voice their opinion as much as here.

on another note:

Now as for the insurance issue, lets think this out…..If I was purchasing a new vessel and my intentions were to use it and/or have it delivered to a destination other then the location of the dealer from witch it was purchased from, why would I want to pay and/or take responsibility for this (the delivery of the vessel to such a location)? I would want to take delivery of the vessel where I intended to use it.

No broker in his right mind would send a boat across the pond until full payment was made and no buyer in his right mind would make full payment without taking delivery. As for insurance, In 21 years of doing this full time I have never checked an insurance policy beyond whatever is with the ship's papers although I will caution owners to make sure they are covered for the trip. Life is too short to read 100 pages of legaleze to try and understand something that has no relevance to what I'm doing. If I'm negligent it doesn't matter if I owe the owner or an insurance company and if an owner is foolish enough not to insure a million dollar asset that's his problem.

You’re probably missing the essence of YF.
The administrator has his own opinion on things just like you and other members here.
He has no duty to any party or company line.

But ya, there are members here that could write a book from a simple headline.

I have been the Capt for several new purchases. Regardless of where “the contract to build” was done and regardless of where the broker/builder was located, the delivery point/ acceptance of the vessel(s) were always where the buyer wanted it to be. I understand most likely that no broker/dealer would get involved delivering/acceptance of a vessel overseas (unless they have representation at that location). But surly they would up or down the east coast. All of the major brokers/dealers practice this all the time.

So long as I have a current dec page, I will assume it is active. If the owner decides to run it uninsured (liability is what I am concerned with, hull I'm not worried about him self insuring) it won't be by me, and yes, I check every vessel. As far as no legal requirement for insurance, that would depend on where you are operating. Many ports require liability insurance as well as pollution insurance (but I don't think this vessel counts for the latter) as do many flag states (anyone know what the flag was?). There are ways to cover these requirements in a self insured fashion, but the instruments must be in place.

As I said before, I am basing on what information was given here, and in multiple posts it's said that the vessel was uninsured for the trip it took due to an oversight when the destination was changed from Newport to Ft Lauderdale. That sounds like a pretty realistic scenario. It may have been an honest oversight, but when it goes to court, an honest oversight is deemed as negligence. If the captain doesn't have evidence that shows he advised the owner that the vessel was uninsured for the trip he will be shown to be negligent.

The 630 has become Bertrams Ford Pinto. They've had problems with lamination since 630 #1 (that boats port engine stringers ripped off and sent the engine into the hull side), I would be scared ****less to run any ferretti bertram considering these problems that have surfaced over the past few years. I was told by a bertram employee that worked in the factory test center that the 70' Bertram that replaced the 63' Certifiable had serious lamination issues (pre delivery) that were hidden as well.

is it just me, or does that buoy really not look like it has been hit by a 630?

According to the CURD site a bouy that seems similar (can't get a good perspective from the pics) has a " Heavy Duty steel internal frame and weighs 200 lbs. Hit at 25 or 30 kts that could do some damage. This one evidently took a hit, but I'd be hard pressed to say it was hit hard enough to sink a Bertram. The "evaluation" of the video should be interesting.

Considering how many "new" 630's are in Ferretti groups inventory, you would think giving the owner of this boat a replacement would be a no brainer. Why the owner would want another one is a different story...

I would surely hope that the damage on that bouy would not be indicative of what it would take to sink a new Bertram 630.

impact with *that* buoy sunk a 63' boat?
someone's got some 'splanin to do......

Not only can speculation hurt the value, It can make obtaining insurance difficult. As a previous owner of a 1989 63' sportfisher that had a 28 knot cruise we had difficulty getting insurance because of the reputation of this US builder. It wasn't Bertram and the problems were supposedly with the 55' models, but the 63' took the rap. Even though I never saw any evidence of any of this manufactures boats having problems. My only problem was the fuel it sucked with 16V92's

Adventure, maybe 'FEB' need to start taking these 'Speculations' more seriously, eg post #230. that could be just a pissed off ex worker from Bertram that SHAZAM! is talking about, or that could be a real problem...?

far

Which does not apply to this vessel, yet still interesting.

You are bashing "cowboys" and you choose the name "on the pins"? Please keep the flame suit on. No one here is trying to drive Bertram out of business- but on the other hand no one wants to be the subject of the next sinking either.

does this really look like a buoy that was hit at high speed and hit by a pretty large prop? since there is running gear damage, we can ASSume the prop hit the buoy... i'd expected some deeper cuts on that buoy...