Open Letter: RE: BoondoggleBy Al Johnson
July 07, 2019
As to the boat title issue. I thank you for common sense. I understand the issue from the Harbor Master's position, however if you think about it this action serves little in the way of improving abandon boat ownership in terms of handling disposition. One would believe the same legal steps have to be taken in any instance of attempting to locate ownership. It is assumed that the hull will have AK numbers, the registration for those numbers will confirm the last owner.
A better, idea would be a local harbor requirement that liability insurance be a requirement for mooring in public harbors (Including visiting boats or a local fiscal visiting temporary waiver). This is an in effect requirement within the greater number of private and government harbors in the lower 48.
Safe to say Dan, those that espouse raise the cost of insurance as a determent cost to owners, are involved with local harbor matters. Can't do better than that
Requirement of liability insurance would also give peace of mind to fellow boat owners knowing that the boat alongside in the adjacent float is providing coverage in case of a mishap, not the case now. As an example. I provide said insurance, which would cover the piece of crap twin engine glass boat that barely made the annual proof of movability, which is a question. who has no insurance I fear would blow up given the effort to start the one good engine of two. Were that owner to have a issue, I am not covered, I lose my boat, that owner goes scot free unless I take civil action.The harbor carries the cost of any dock/float damage. If that owner were required to have current insurance on file it is solid bet that boat would not be in the harbor.
This is all subjectable Dan, as it would be up to individual communities to address harbor required insurance, I only point this avenue out as a methodology to reduce the number of abandoned boats in the long runs, while providing a solution of reduction of the potential and at the same time create a harbor where incidents are addressed by insurance companies rather than individua civil action at personal cost.(Small boat owners of which are the majority) Too pollution cost are more readily mediated when known funds are identified reducing local community legal cost.
In closing- Boats that are financed are required to maintain full coverage during the contract period, so those participants are at the same disadvantage as we owners caring liability only insurance. If a commercial boat, insurance is a write off leaving the non-insured boater and potential abandonment to the bad guy. .
Given this, the majority are insured to one degree or another, leaving the solution by the Harbor Masters looking towards the boating community that is not providing them with the issue, it is the minority that prevails which is contrary to the cause.
The suggestion of insurance places the minority that cause the issue to deal within or allow the issue to be dealt with in the position of legal or legislative action to be taken.
Again, thank you for the correct vote.
Received July 06, 2019 - Published July 07, 2019
Viewpoints - Opinion Letters:
E-mail your letters
& opinions to firstname.lastname@example.org
Published letters become the property of SitNews.