Bertram 630 Sportfish Sinks?

My favorite show is back on!!!

Just to stay on topic...

I still don't think anyone has said anything about the statements made from the crew of the F/V Pacifics that was first on scene (I believe).

I'd love to know the condition the Bert was in when the Captain and "mate" were rescued.

I understand. I posted said link so readers wouldn't have to google his site as per his instructions to get to his purely speculative conclusion as to how this 630 ended up on the bottom. For those who missed it his reasoning for the catastrophic failure included the wayward #7 train that somehow lost it's way from Manhattan to Queens and some "cosmetic delamination" involving the yacht "Certifiable"

Right, thanks for that. As you can see in the site owners post regarding the matter and mine above, the explanation is rather clear.

nothing in the court docket as of this morning, i would have expected a response to the amended complaint; the plaintiff has probably granted the defendants more time to respond (not uncommon) and it could be a sign that they are working things out (i.e. settlement). i would be extremely surprised, nay shocked, if the litigation proceeds. i just dont see an upside for bertram in having this dispute played out in public.

which leads me to another comment. given the high stakes involved, i would think that bertram and marine max would have binding arbitration provisions in their contracts in order to keep disputes out of the public light. does anybody know whether a provision of this kind is common in purchase contracts?

That's actually a good question which has occurred to me when people shriek the product liability alarm. So many other manufacturers in other industries (and same industries) produce service bulletins, running product upgrades, product safety inspections, parts recalls, and full product recalls without a mountain of lawsuits coming their way. Why would Bertram be such a special case in this regard?

This seems like a good topic for a separate thread, hopefully with the inclusion of brokers who have more experience in new boat sales contracts, or maritime attorneys with purchase and sale contract law knowledge.

Retardo has posted on THT as "RickiRetardo".

He claims TS Ida caused much of the damage. I googled Ida, and it was a Gulf Coast storm that indeed crossed Florida, but the last reported NOAA position was more than 600 miles from the Bill Perry Reef.

I have not only fished this reef, I took my scuba certification dives there. Yes, there is a bit of current, and a boat with some bouyancy can certainly be dragged around, but I have a hard time seeing how it was "tumbled" like a washing machine and destroyed.

I certainly don't know what happened, but there sure seems to be a lot of smoke screens being thrown around.

I didn't insult you personally in any way shape or form..

and I DO feel my questions were legitimate and on topic

I don't think 40 years on the sticks makes me a troll..

JH

Curious to know if there are any environmental obligations to bring this vessel up since its whereabouts are known?

would already be up, if it were in lake erie.

I have heard that there was a firm from Charleston hired to remove fuel. It may already have been done.

actually when Certifi delaminated a friend of mine who was purchasing a 630 was shown delaminated photos of a Hatteras 60 apparently there is some rumours about this online but I have never seen anything. In his views the photos shown matters much worse to the 630...
But then again a friend of myn who has a Hatteras 60 Convertible 2006 bought new and he keeps it in Rome, says that compared to the previous Azimut 55 which he owned when is tough it is a train, excellent boat, and he would not change it for anything else. This is an opinion of an owner.
But then again another friend of mine bought a used 510 from 2002 and he is very happy with it too. I helmed this boat too in moderate 4 foot seas and did handle among the best in its class.

But going back to what you say I think with technology improving and being tempting there should be more certification applied to the builders. Most standards in yachts are design based, like the CE certification for example. I don't know anything about USCG rules, so someone can say more of this...
For example many of the Ferretti Yachts are also Cross of Malta A1 Classed by BV but this is only done for the design. Which means the certification is not done during construction, this confirming what is told in the design and build schedule is actually applied.

The term is "obfuscation".

Not a lawyer, but my observation is, even if purshase contract does not contain anything like that, the other side (in our case, owner) is rarely much interested in making the affair loud public unless he cannot achieve satisfactory settlement and up until it is 100% clear such a thing is not possible. This, in turn, means that the majority of settlements that are achieved end up containing non-disclosure provisions even if initial contracts didnt.
Bottom line is, unless they go into open war, we won't be hearing much.

Again, what do you expect? Their position is obviously not rock-solid, hence it makes perfect sence to create as much confusion as possible, because at least they can always keep any questions under doubt. This is actually such an easy thing, professionals do it on auto-pilot (you can also enjoy a very artistic example in the screen version of "Thank you for smoking". The book is good, too).
- There are some facts that are... undesirable? Doubt the source, doubt the time, doubt the method, present a number of "alternate facts", reject everything as a "baseless speculation" (After all, nobody was able to disprove solipsism, so the very notion of "fact" is a questionable one). Just be bold, and soon, nobody will be able to understand anything without a disproportionate effort.
- There is someone saying or asking something they clearly shouldn't? Question aloud what his interest is. Bring his own sins to the light and wonder how can he be asking anyone anything after that. Label him something ugly, prosecuting the light of truth that is you (when in doubt, use Hitler). Exert subtle pressure ("we know you" and "we hope you're prepared to deal with consequences" are all a good start). All he says won't matter if nobody wants to listen to him.
- You're cornered and the amount of ill will is overwhelming? Be adamant in what you saym and you want them to listen to you: you did not have sexual relations with that woman. You never told anybody to lie, not a single time. These allegations are false. And you need to go back to work, thanks everybody.

The funniest part is, the drill is so natural and universally used that is often employed even from the position of being right! Just "cuz how else can it be done at all, eh?"

Ninja edit:

Wow that ups the stakes for them. At the same time I can speculate this probably means they found enough evidence in their defence to feel prepared for the story to unfold live and loud all the way.
Seems like this thread still got potential. Hope we'll be able to keep it up from, eh, assorted pitfalls)

I think this is the exact reason the boat came apart. Too much MEKP in the resin causing it to be too rigid and brittle.

McCarthyism meets Godwin. Conversational terrorism. Tools of hacks and flakes. Flimsy, transparent, and self-defeating.

Professional public relations does not rely on such cheap tricks to present truth in the most flattering light possible for the client, but yes it is partly about presenting the most beneficial facts most emphatically.

FYI

i understand from previous posts that the boat in question was advertised for sale in ************** for $2,149,000 and that the link to the boat appears here http://www.**************/boats/2006/Bertram-630-2073929/Lindenhurst/NY/United-States.

according to the amended complaint, the owner paid $1,375,00, a discount of $774,000 or about 36%.

is this a discount common for this type of boat and in these economic conditions? was the boat already priced "well"?

Ideally, yes, just like you say.
But, guess, these "professionals" are too few and far between. Because this same BS survives since ancient times through "executive letters" of our days right into the brave new world.
Besides, calling it "flimsy, transparent, and self-defeating" is quite a wishful thinking. These things are natural: most of every sufficently prolonged discussion I ever took part in involved some measure of those, and not necessarily with conscious intent to obscure the matter - just the way people think and talk. Works just fine a good deal of times, too.

That's not to say I'm not just a little surprised about the way Bertram handles this. They could've done it much smoother even within the limit of press releases and other purely verbal component. Especially considering they are, evidently, monitoring this thread and other ones about the story.

Also a common cause of the lamination failures I see in the pics which is why I brought up the batch mix right after I saw the pics. Occasionally bad batches of compounds leave the plant as well, or get degraded by poor or excessive length storage.

I've dealt with a lot of accidents over the years, and no accident has a single point of causation. There is typically a 6 link accident chain, and the errors and omissions can be made by multiple people over long periods of time. This is why accidents get a "root cause analysis". If we find all the links in the chain, we can find the easiest links to remove to prevent the accident from reoccurring.

This might be a little off topic, but I would also appreciate knowledge on the above questions. If a 36% discount from list is current market conditions, I should expand my search for boats. Also, the Bertram listing linked, shows a last revised date of Nov.24/09, and still shows as a current listing. Is that just MarineMax using it for ongoing advertising?

Does it say "as is where is" ?