In my feeble mind, ABYC is trying to establish itself as the 'go to' authority but all it has accomplished is confuse the issues.
Elaborate please...what specifically do you find confusing?
In my feeble mind, ABYC is trying to establish itself as the 'go to' authority but all it has accomplished is confuse the issues.
I don't see ABYC as a problem for new boat manufacture....
It's when the boating industry in general wants vessels brought to those standards when upgraded (not sure if even major repairs are included). As long as meeting the spirit is acceptable I can see that, it's when surveyors or insurers expect 100% compliance that things start to go south when 90% 0r better of the safety issues are addressed but the lesser percent ranks equally.
My point was ABYC should recommend safety issues, yet surveyors and insurance companies treat it as 'law.' The USCG has the only authority to enforce safety issues, not ABYC. They recommend. This may rub some of you guys but in my opinion it's a scam between ABYC and the insurance companies. I also agree the it makes no sense to bring a 1988 trawler to 2022 standards.Point taken and I hear this often. Here's the challenge, a surveyor inspects a boat, he find defects that can lead to electrocution, fire, flooding, explosion, loss of control, etc. If the vessel is 1 year or 10 years old, it doesn't matter, those aboard are still subject to these dangers, and they make the vessel a greater risk to an insurer. So what are we as professionals to do, ignore clear ABYC violations, which make the vessel potentially dangerous, just because it is used? At the very least, the owner, and buyer needs to be made aware of these issues.
ASDMy point was ABYC should recommend safety issues, yet surveyors and insurance companies treat it as 'law.' The USCG has the only authority to enforce safety issues, not ABYC. They recommend. This may rub some of you guys but in my opinion it's a scam between ABYC and the insurance companies. I also agree the it makes no sense to bring a 1988 trawler to 2022 standards.
Point taken and I hear this often. Here's the challenge, a surveyor inspects a boat, he find defects that can lead to electrocution, fire, flooding, explosion, loss of control, etc. If the vessel is 1 year or 10 years old, it doesn't matter, those aboard are still subject to these dangers, and they make the vessel a greater risk to an insurer. So what are we as professionals to do, ignore clear ABYC violations, which make the vessel potentially dangerous, just because it is used? At the very least, the owner, and buyer needs to be made aware of these issues.
I've given this quite a bit of thought. Here's my take as a west coast boater on a heavily built older boat with lots of flamable materials in the engine room......
One of the problems with automatic engine shut downs is that the loss of power and maneuverability if it occurs at the wrong time can theoretically be more hazardous than a contained fire. It’s hard to figure but the USCG believes fire first.
.....
Point taken and I hear this often. Here's the challenge, a surveyor inspects a boat, he find defects that can lead to electrocution, fire, flooding, explosion, loss of control, etc. If the vessel is 1 year or 10 years old, it doesn't matter, those aboard are still subject to these dangers, and they make the vessel a greater risk to an insurer. So what are we as professionals to do, ignore clear ABYC violations, which make the vessel potentially dangerous, just because it is used? At the very least, the owner, and buyer needs to be made aware of these issues.
Former chief of Aviation Safety for the USCG got a few quals too.
.... I see a lot of ABCY points and complied where I could with my boats/commercial boats too....there were a few that just were non-economical or very mechanically difficult to comply with. Funny how the insurance companies agreed that my slight mods, considering them acceptable even though not fully ABYC compliant or what the surveyors thought.
I have no problem with surveyors pointing out non compliance.... fortunately I usually get my way convincing the insurance companies of my risk management solutions, but a lot of other boaters can't make the arguments on risk management I could and are spending way more than they should have to to get that extra 5% of compliance that presents a 0.0001 percent risk.
Sometimes risks can't be eliminated as desired by best practice, but can be mitigated that the ABYC does not address.
My point was ABYC should recommend safety issues, yet surveyors and insurance companies treat it as 'law.' The USCG has the only authority to enforce safety issues, not ABYC. They recommend. This may rub some of you guys but in my opinion it's a scam between ABYC and the insurance companies. I also agree the it makes no sense to bring a 1988 trawler to 2022 standards.
In my mind, there are some things that are enough of a safety improvement to be well worth upgrading to newer standards (such as propane systems). But there's plenty of other stuff that could be nit-picked if desired and is a much smaller improvement (and potentially much harder to retrofit on an older boat). I can't imagine a surveyor actually getting fussy about wiring colors, for example, but I bet if one did, at least some insurance companies would want the whole boat re-wired.
In my experience this isn't happening, at least not often, not for something like wire colors. One man's nit picking is another's compliance.
One of the biggest problems are new surveyors or those with little technical depth or experience that approach a job defensively and figuring the best and safest approach is to do everything by the book, period. With experience either working in a yard or running vessels for years a smart surveyor knows two things, (1) they don’t know everything and (2) there is always more than one way to do a job safely. Rick
A "scam"? You think insurers are paying off ABYC?
I work closely with ABYC, i help write some of the standards, while it may be imperfect, I assure there is no collusion between insurers and ABYC. Insurers want to minimize risk, ABYC compliance is one of the ways they achieve this. In fact, ABYC routinely rejects industry and boat owner suggestions for the addition of new or expanded standards, their criteria being, 'is this really needed, are people getting hurt or dying because of it?" If not, then the answer is no, we are not adding to the standards.
Former chief of Aviation Safety for the USCG got a few quals too.
.... I see a lot of ABCY points and complied where I could with my boats/commercial boats too....there were a few that just were non-economical or very mechanically difficult to comply with. Funny how the insurance companies agreed that my slight mods, considering them acceptable even though not fully ABYC compliant or what the surveyors thought.
I have no problem with surveyors pointing out non compliance.... fortunately I usually get my way convincing the insurance companies of my risk management solutions, but a lot of other boaters can't make the arguments on risk management I could and are spending way more than they should have to to get that extra 5% of compliance that presents a 0.0001 percent risk.
Sometimes risks can't be eliminated as desired by best practice, but can be mitigated that the ABYC does not address.
ASD
Again I ask What are you proposing as an alternative?
Many places where the organization developing standards had no role in enforcement. Municipalities and other authorities are charged with enforcement. What do they enforce to? Would you be happier if USCG required recreational vessels that are documented to be inspected and comply with ABYC rather than insurance Cos?
I dont believe there is any collusion between ABYC and Ins Co's as you insinuate. If not ABYC what standards could / should Ins Co's expect vessels to meet? Or are you in favor of no expectation of a vessels meeting any standards to secure insurance?
Your point of bringing a 1980s vessel up to modern stds... that is exactly why Ins Co's refuse vessels over a certain age. I find it reasonable that as a class or group older vessels have a higher risk of a claim... maybe marine Ins could take the stand of auto where the is a "high risk" pool and premiums are increased based on age of vessel - no ABYC inspection reqd... would that avoid your perception of collusion?
BTW the ABYC standards are written not just for insurance but for builders to comply with. So it’s up to the company to follow the rules though many barely do and more and more are guilty of burying critical components under built-ins, pans and liners, tanks etc. I guess one interpretation builders use is that everything is accessible if you don’t mind the cost of tearing a boat apart but that is not following the spirit of the ABYC standards.
The USCG is no different regarding recreational small craft. Inspected vessels are a different proposition since they carry passengers, tankers and now some other carriers are coming under their preview. Generally construction specs and scantlings are the meat and potatoes of the classification societies such as ABS, Lloyds, Veritas or Norske and you do it their way or forget it. These classification societies require incremental construction inspections and depending who you are are paid by either them or the owner. I have even done several ferro cement hulls for Lloyds odd as it may seem
So what Government law, rule or government regulation sets ABYC as a regulatory agency? Builders are not "required" as you would allude here. Same for Lloyds, ABS, Veritas and others. They make their own rules, preference it as "Safety" requirements to set standards that are then pushed on to boat owners to comply with as if the standard are a government regulation. So long as I have complied with federal and/or State law, then it should no matter if it is in compliance with ABYC standards. Nor should insurance companies be able to force you to comply with anything oter that Government/State safety requirements.
So again where is the requirement in Federal/State law that states these societies have the power to regulate. Their "meat and potatoes" are just that, money, control and profit.
My word this last post has to stand on its own cause I have enough of a life that I can’t afford the hours to refute your assertions. All I can say is that this post has the faint scent of conspiracy at many levels and generally I find this trait can’t be addressed in a conventional manner. I hope I’m wrong. Apparently you feel no safety standards are valid if not applied by the original builder. That your vessel or other older vessels are immune to new standards despite the fact that you have probably upgraded your vessel many many times with new technology. Safety is not static as every year accidents, fires, and casualties are investigated and new sources are discovered and prevention methods addressed. I admire those that can break out and play by their on rules but then don’t reach back for financial help if you don’t want to play by the rules.
Rick
So what Government law, rule or government regulation sets ABYC as a regulatory agency?
NONE HOW MANY TIMES DO OTHERS HAVE TO POINT OUT ABYC IS NOT MANDATORY AND THEY HAVE NO ENFORCEMENT AUTHORITY.
NO MORE THAN ANY APPLIANCE MFG IS REQD TO OBTAIN (AND PAY FOR) UL APPROVAL. MAYBE YOU ARE THE TYPE TO PURCHASE NON APPROVED APPLIACES TO SAVE A DIME... THATS YOUR PEROGATIVE.
Builders are not "required" as you would allude here. Same for Lloyds, ABS, Veritas and others. They make their own rules, preference it as "Safety" requirements to set standards that are then pushed on to boat owners to comply with as if the standard are a government regulation. So long as I have complied with federal and/or State law, then it should no matter if it is in compliance with ABYC standards.
Nor should insurance companies be able to force you to comply with anything oter that Government/State safety requirements.
ASD... NO BODY CAN FORCE YOU TO COMPLY WITH ABYC. NEITHER CAN YOU FORCE AN INSURANCE CO TO INSURE YOU IF THEY CHOOSE NOT TO AND FOR ANY REASON
So again where is the requirement in Federal/State law that states these societies have the power to regulate. NONE... NOT APPLICABLE - STOP REPEATING YOURSELF
Their "meat and potatoes" are just that, money, control and profit.
NEWS FLASH! INSURANCE COS ARE FOR-PROFIT.
IF YOU THINK NON-PROFIT INSURANCE IS A GOOD BUSINESS PROPOSITION START ONE - I'M PRETTY SURE THERE ARE OTHERS THAT AGREE AND WOULD ENROLL... GREAT ADVERTISING TAG LINE WE ENSURE ANYTHING / EVERYTHING REGARDLESS OF AGE OR CONDITION... NO SURVEY OR INSPECTION REQUIRED,
Well take a deep breath. I wanted to know how ABYC has the authority to push regulations on boat owners.
PLEASE SEE ABOVE - AGAIN REPEATING YOURSELF -THEY CAN'T - ONLY YOU MAKE THAT DECISION... BUT YOU THEN DONT GET TO DEMAND THEY INSURE YOU AT A RATE YOU FEEL IS REASONABLE. SORRY... IT DOESNT WORK THAT WAY
It would be similar to a requirement from AAA to install catalytic converters on ALl cars, even ones manufactured in 1965.
YOUR ANALOGIES BORDER ON ABSURD... AAA IS NOT A STANDARDS DEVELOPMENT ORGANIZATION LIKE ABYC, NEC, NFPA, UL ETC, ETC. THOSE ORGS ARE THE ONES ANALOGOUS TO ABYC AND THEY ALSO HAVE NO ENFORCEMENT AUTHORITY BUT WORK THE SAME WAY.
WHILE YOU HAVENT OFFERED AN ALTERNATE SOLUTION YOU HAVE INSINUATED YOU MIGHT.... JUST MIGHT BE OK WITH SURVEYING A VESSEL AGAINST AN OUTDATED ABYC STD THAT THE VESSEL WAS SUPPOSEDLY BUILD TO. IF SO - ANY OBJECTION TO AN INSURANCE CO APPLYING AN AGE OR ABYC REVISION FACTOR THAT MULTIPLIES THEIR "CURRENT" LOWEST COST RATE AND THEY INCREASE RATES BASED ON VESSEL /ABYC BUILD/COMPLIANCE DATE ?
Well take a deep breath. I wanted to know how ABYC has the authority to push regulations on boat owners.
I'm not against added safety, I'm against just being forced to add safety items by an agency that has no authority to do so. USCG has that authority. If it were that important the USCG would issue a regulation.
It would be similar to a requirement from AAA to install catalytic converters on ALl cars, even ones manufactured in 1965.
Sorry my intent was not to piss you off, rather to have a meaningful discussion about how ABYC and insurance companies have a hold on the industry. Granted I don't need to meet these standards if I chose not to be covered by insurance. Most folks I know are starting to not carry insurance for a variety of reasons. Not my choice but if I want financing, dock space etc, then I am REQUIRED to carry insurance. Insurance companies require ABYC compliance. Didn’t mean to poke the bear, but reality is reality. Still a good conversation.I see, hear, read a lot of whining but little offered as a viable alternative.
I suspect there are few, possibly no for profit industries you feel are under charging or even pricing their goods fairly. I get the idea you would be in the camp where "all business are crooks! Over charge, under deliver and reap unjust profits!"
If not, please elaborate on which industries you believe under charge or are pricing fairly.
You make some valid points. Some I agree with.I guess this is as good a place as any to speak up. I think you are pretty seriously misinterpreting/misunderstanding a lot of things.
Meeting ABYC standards is not required in the US. Period, end of statement. Meeting the standards is voluntary by boat builders, by repair and service companies, and by boat owners. Your boat doesn't need to meet ABYC standards to be operated in any US waters, nor to be bought or sold.
It's the market that demands meeting the standards. Boat builders and service people do it because it gives them an advantage, and because it's requested by owners/buyers.
And insurance companies DO NOT require that a boat full meet current ABYC standards. It's simply ridiculous to say they do. What they do seem to care about is that certain boat systems are up to snuff. That's their prerogative. They can set whatever requirements they want to insure your boat. Some don't accept boats over a certain age, or wooden boats, or boats that don't have certain system meeting ABYC standards. Some won't insure if you have LFP batteries.
It's a free market, and what you are asking is that insurers be required to insure your boat no matter what condition it's in, or what safety issues might exist. The issue you have is with Insurance companies, so you should take issue with them, not with ABYC. It's the insurance company that requires you to meet certain standards, not ABYC or any government entity.
Again, ABYC isn't requiring it, so don't keep says that they are. Your insurance company is requiring it, so grind your axe on them.
That's a pretty silly comparison, and really like saying that Active Captain is requiring you to modify your boat. There is no parallel at all with ABYC + your insurance company.
I think a more meaningful comparison would be UL. There is no legal requirement that products be UL listed to see, buy, or use them in the US. Yet the market expects it, so companies all do it.
Also consider NEC or NFPA. Electric wiring standards have evolved, yet there are lots of old houses built when there were no standards or different standards than what we have today. New work is required to be carried out to new standards. That's by law is most areas, so much more demanding than ABYC. And building inspections often cite what is now considered to be deficient work, and insurance companies require that things be corrected or upgraded. Law doesn't require those upgrades, but nobody will insure you without addressing the issues.