Ship's owner and operator should be banned from US ports until there is restitution.

@Shiv_Lund_pujari

Ай бұрын

Exactly ..it can be seen in video that the ship turn right while sailing and deliberately hitting bridge. Both owners and crew should be held accountable!!!

Imagine your UPS or Amazon delivery truck damaged something and they ask you to foot the bill.

@simpleminded5215

Ай бұрын

Imagine you driving the neighborhood kids to school. You run into another car. Then you ask the children’s parents to pay for the accident.

@Look_What_You_Did

Ай бұрын

Well losers.... I have news for you. There is maritime law to back this up. it is called General Averages. Just because you clowns know nothing of it, does not mean the entire industry does not.

The ships owner better be getting his bank book out quickly. First, he owes the families of the men lost. Then he owes the American taxpayers for all costs response/rescue, clean up and rebuilding. Then the salvaging cost can be considered!!

@ferdburful6352

Ай бұрын

The amount of damages is rising quickly

@charlesstockford6003

Ай бұрын

They pay pennies on the dollar. As usual big business/ big money have bought real relaxed laws on responsibility.

@kpdvw

Ай бұрын

then they can fight it out with their insurance company....!

@PKerusso

Ай бұрын

That what a deductible is for. The insurance will have to pay the rest up to the amount covered. Probably not enough to cover everything

The fucken cheek of the shipping company 😂😂

@neilkurzman4907

Ай бұрын

It’s exactly what the law says is supposed to happen

@mikegaskin5542

Ай бұрын

General Average is a long-established practice in shipping

If the ship was maintained it wouldn't be in this position !

@mohdrohmansakimin8952

Ай бұрын

Poor management, vessel master, chief officer, chief engineer and harbor pilot is fully responsible for accident.

@ferdburful6352

Ай бұрын

@@mohdrohmansakimin8952I don’t see how the harbor pilot is to blame. He was handed a POS to steer.

@nspro931

Ай бұрын

@@ferdburful6352 He wasn't even steering, he was giving the commands to the helmsman where to steer. If the ship cannot maintain a straight line when commanded, not the pilot's fault.

@ferdburful6352

Ай бұрын

@@nspro931 “ Go Left !!! No !! The other Left !!!”

@crabbyhayes1076

Ай бұрын

@@ferdburful6352 As I understand it, the pilot (or pilots) are on board because of their knowledge of the shipping channel and specifics of the port. I doubt they are responsible for the operation of the ship itself. In the Baltimore accident, I believe the pilot was the one who sent out the urgent call for tugs, and warned the authorities to clear the bridge - sounds like he did his job.

Why don’t the owner ask insurance company?

@donh8833

Ай бұрын

They are well past their coverage limits already. The declared limit of the insurance was the cost of the ship.

@Shipspotting_Vietnam

Ай бұрын

@@donh8833 Thank you for your information!! Appreciate that!

@bgregg55

Ай бұрын

@@donh8833 So presumably the taxpayers are going to get the bill for everything else?

@donh8833

Ай бұрын

@@bgregg55 the company can still be sued and barred entry in us ports until they pay. But 10:1 they will declare bankruptcy and reform under a new name.

yep... if they are making money, they dont care. if they are loosing money. help me! the freaking problem with this, all of this cost will be eventually transferred to the general consumer

@neilkurzman4907

Ай бұрын

No, the class is going to be transferred to the American taxpayer.

@captglenn100

Ай бұрын

@@neilkurzman4907 Yep, everything Biden does is costing the American taxpayer.

The shipowner has declared ‘General Average’ and will hold the cargo effectively ransom until the owners of the cargo contributes to the salvage on a proportional basis. It’s an ancient legal salvage principle but in modern law, it a sign that the shipowner is trying to limit legal and cost liability as already evidenced by the shipowners court application to limit their liability to $46 million. Disgusting. If they had of properly maintained the vessel, and Maersk had not applied constant scheduling pressure, this would never have happened.

@organicvids

Ай бұрын

This wont stop the liability for failure to maintain ship properly. Its going to be interesting.

@donh8833

Ай бұрын

Insurance companies will write it off as a loss.

@juliaweber212

Ай бұрын

I see the owners of the cargo suing the shipping

The Dali's owner has claimed "General Average" which, under maritime law, allows for the cost of salvage to be spread among all of the owners of the shipping containers onboard at the time of the accident. This is actually quite normal in this sort of situation.

his ship, his responsibility

@OrioleBeagle

Ай бұрын

Maritime law is NOTHING like regular law. It favors the ship owners. The cargo owners by law will have to pay for part of the ship salvage. Taxpayers are going to pay most of the cost of the bridge rebuild. I recommend watching the You Tube Channel "What's Going On With Shipping".

@neilkurzman4907

Ай бұрын

You would think so, but that’s not what the law says.

@bend8353

Ай бұрын

Yeah. Not how maritime shipping law works. Your cargo, your responsibility. Is well known to anyone in ocean shipping

@johnp139

Ай бұрын

General average

Other companies didn’t hit the bridge

@paulprigge1209

Ай бұрын

I don’t think of the companies Had mechanical failure especially had a crucial point. It can happen to anybody just like heart attacks cancer etc.

@johnp139

Ай бұрын

It’s in their contract.

F' EM !!! Pay us !

It’s called insurance.

Good luck with that. That company is going out of business.

@mohdrohmansakimin8952

Ай бұрын

Bankruptcy...

ITS MY MONEY AND I WANT IT NOOWWW

To this Date,,,WE only saw that Yellow container being removed,,,,ONE

Maritime Law actually demands this of Cargo Owners and its in the contract of lading. This is why Cargo Owners buy Maritime Insurance to cover those costs of the loss of the ship and related damages to damage to port facilities. Its been like this since 1688.

@user-mr3ct1dm9p

Ай бұрын

So then, the ins. companies should have enough money to cover this, RIGHT??

This is like when fedex truck crashes, everybody who has package on board need to pay up. 🤣

This news broadcast knows little. It is "general average" (look it up) not "general declaration" and every shipper who used this ship knew it is a remote possibility on every voyage.

This not unusual and part of maritime law. The Dali has a capacity of 10,000 TEU, so each shipper with a container will be liable for 1/10000 of the loss. Shippers understand this, and it's why cargo insurance exists.

Every one ask for help, who is helping Americans.

There is a criminal case open on their negligence……

All this time and only seen one container removed.

Make sense some containers where damaged, quite sure the cargo companies have there own insurance Policy’s for transporting their goods

The idea of having the owners of the items being shipped help pay for the salvage of the vessel is standard in the shipping industry. The reporters need to do a little research if they think that is a surprise. But that won't help pay for replacing the bridge.

They may say it was just the ships folk for the ship just took off by itself and hit the bridge

If I wreck my truck, my customers aren't responsible for salvage. After all, the customer had no blame in the accident. This is ridiculous.

Yup, it is all about the billable hours now.

"Can you please pay to get your own goods out of the ship we wrecked, that is once we get the bridge off it that we made collapse?" Um, No?

Not shocking. Usual shipping financial processes. Just that most people dont understand the processes involved

You have insurance...right?

@johnp139

Ай бұрын

All of the entities involved do, which is why they have declared general average.

Maritime Law is grandfathered in and generally trumps all laws that came later. The US railroads are similar -especially in regards to commerce.

As I understand it, Maersk was leasing/chartering the ship from the Dali's owner. Under the terms of their contract, I wonder which company was responsible for the crew, operations, and maintenance. I also wonder who has liability, and what insurance coverage was required by law, and by the contract. It sure seems like this one will take a lot of litigation before it is finally settled. Recall that cruise ship a number of years ago that sunk off the coast of Italy, with a number of passengers lost. In that incident, the captain was charged, and sentenced to prison time - which I believe he is still serving.

As agreed and ratified by .. a term "General Average" a part of the Paramount clause , in a commercial law under the "carriage of Goods and passengers by Sea Act.

Ship owners will try to make others pay.

How does one set up a ship management company like Synergy? A captain, a chief engineer and an office.

I wondering if asking for funding , or wondering what % the big guy needs as a kick back .

I just love reading all the comments from people who know nothing about maritime law and shipping contracts. This is standard practice in the event of a major shipping accident. The cargo owners are in it with the ship owners. The idea is the ship wouldn't have even been there in the first place if it wasn't for the cargo.

@NicR-up7ex

Ай бұрын

Maritime law is the worst, with each new disaster I follow I'm seeing how bad it is and one sided it is against anyone but the ship owners.

Why isn’t the ships owner insurance co paying for the bridge?

Will the shipping company pay for the lost goods, aren't people paying for their goods safe passage?

The ship owner should be 100% liable not the people with the containers. The people with the containers are paying the ship to move their goods.

The owner is asking his customers to pitch in for *his* accident when his customers are already taking a loss because their cargo is held up? The balls on the owner must be hugemongous!

I think people are going to be amazed how many start working on this project once it "gets moving" #hoover_dam as there are so many positive aspects from having this done and done not just the stakeholders (shipping companies, Railroads) but the City of Baltimore has a real chance here to have something truly World Class #Brooklyn_Bridge result from this either way once the channel is opened shipping through that will basically become unlimited as there is zero Bridge to worry about in the meantime. I know there is a massive tunnel project in Downtown Baltimore that is "underway" but don't know the specifics and also there is an old Rail Line which used to travel direct down the Delmarva all the way to Norfolk Virginia which would be of immense value today for the likes of Amtrak to bypass the Northeast population Centers to go direct to both Spaceport Virgina and Coastal Carolina for high speed direct rail connecting New York City to population Centers along the Eastern Seaboard. Air Travel in the United States is a case study in not being able to enjoy the journey at all going on forever now worse than ever seemingly.

Certainly, the shipper has an INSURANCE POLICY for such events! Where is that money?

Not my ship not my problem. What I always say.

Who’s paying for the new bridge ?

Why did the captain hit full throttle while someone was trying to cut power. Or was it a pirate not the captain ! If im wrong then why did the captain hit full throttle when a ahip that size needs tug boats to maneuver in tight spaces like the key bridge!

lmfao there’s no way right now

Why should the company's that ship with them pay anything?

@johnp139

Ай бұрын

Because that’s common practice and is in their contract.

Are they joking. Stake holders or cargo companies couldnt control that. Thats all on the ships crew and boat owner for negelt

Take the damn bridge off the ship.

@johnp139

Ай бұрын

Then how will it sail???

So they want to ransom the cargo they should have already delivered. This has all been their fault.

Socialised shipping, post contract adjustments after the fact. Lol no chance.

😂😂😂😂 This is like a bus driver is asking passengers to pay his trafic tickets.

Asking the cargo companies to “chip in” on the salvage costs is like the post office asking you to help pay for a mail truck that got into an accident. Insurance companies need to step up, the certainty like receiving premiums, and love to tell you that you need to be protected.

@johnp139

Ай бұрын

Only it’s not. This is common maritime practice and you can bet that it is in the contracts with the cargo companies.

Get rid of the outdated neck band. Thanks

It doesn't cost a penny to salvage anything. The salvage company pays for the scrap. The owner of the vessel should be held 💯 responsible for replacing the bridge. Even if it puts them out of business.

WHAT!!! The boat owner wants to be paid? Unbelievable.

@johnp139

Ай бұрын

This is common practice

thatt is the usual MO, try to place the costs onto the cargo owners/the clients.... When a USPS plane crashes carrying my mail do I have to bear the costs?

@johnp139

Ай бұрын

Not the same thing.

Nope!

So the shipping company has come to the conclusion that they should not be held accountable for the operations of their vessles.

@johnp139

Ай бұрын

No

Ships fault, but cargo Shippers pay🤣😂

@johnp139

Ай бұрын

ALL PAY!!!

Sina, come back to Cincinnati, lol.

Imagine you send a package with FedEx and the driver causes an accidence. And now FedEx would ask you to pay a Part of the repair Bill... really ??? how could some one even get this idea?

@johnp139

Ай бұрын

It’s based on centuries of maritime practice since a ship carries much more than a FedEx truck and can literally disappear at sea, losing everything on board. And it’s in the contract.

That’s the Sam pictures from week ago, get new ones or just stop.

@robertpalmer3166

Ай бұрын

I didn't even know Sam was there.

@nomenclature9373

Ай бұрын

Sam ???

Last i checked biden said the american people are going to pay for it

Ha! This fuggin guy

Bad bridge design, and no protection of vulnerable piers. I think this is completely on the people that approved it and ran it.

@ferdburful6352

Ай бұрын

The bridge was fine. For a 1977 model. It should have been protected.

Pay your pwn bills. Are you not insured? Your driver rammed the pillar, not your customers.

Maryland built a bridge that was helpless against the foreseeable hazard of errant ship strikes. Before the bridge was built shipping posed no risk to a Maryland asset. Maryland created the hazard. It's Maryland's bridge and their problem. Mostly.

@willfriar8054

Ай бұрын

when that ship was built there was no such thing as a container! the biggest ships before that time were one quarter of the size. in 1977 Baltimore was a minor port

@donh8833

Ай бұрын

Would you claim different if a car drove off the road and hit your car in the opposing lane? Maryland's fault because they didn't design the road correctly?

Lololol…wat?

Can you imagine asking the people that are paying you to make deliveries to help pay for your mess up they should be paying the customers

@johnp139

Ай бұрын

False equivalency

Stupid shipping laws of the seas. Those who’s cargo was booked on this ship:were not to blame and should not pay one red cent. As a matter of fact the Baltimore port authority should be held liable for not upgrading the protective zone around the bridge piers. With the increase in size of bulk carrier ships the port should have made effort to improve the structures that held up the bridge. Another case in point, this took place in American waters and not the open sea. Those booking on that boat should sue the operator of the boat for delays caused by the issues that boat had with its electrical systems.

If the owner is doing that he must have money problems, he's already facing being sued also.

@johnp139

Ай бұрын

No, this is standard practice.

Americans u say nothing, u get nothing.

The ship is seize after clean up and dock.the ship got problems just before leaving that red flag.the ship need repair so need send drydock for repair,re inspect,re certification on ship safety.the us gov't must sit with lloy'd of london make a deal before ship left port so good chance owner will go under pure simple the damage bill too much.😮

@johnp139

Ай бұрын

What?

The ships owner should pay it all. They moved the ship even though they were having electrical problems while in port. That was irresponsible.

@johnp139

Ай бұрын

That’s not how it works.

So let me get this right the ship owner now wants the people who used his services to pay for the cleanup? That is like killing someone with your car and asking the manufacturer to help pay all legal fees and costs associated with the accident. WOW

@johnp139

Ай бұрын

No.

No way ….if its the ships fault they should pay ALL OF THE COSTS ! 😊

This would be laughable were it not so stupid. They have already made the shippers 3 weeks late with certainly more time to come. Where do they think a shipper will pay for their negligence in vessel maintenance? Facepalm 🤦‍♂️ 😆😆😆😆😆😆😳😳😳🤦‍♂️

@johnp139

Ай бұрын

Because that is maritime law

it was a rental ship! it was being rented by Mayersk shipping company. they have plenty of money. there's no reason that they can't maintain their rental car and not be responsible for the actions of the crew that they hired from India the cheapest possible labor! and then we have diversity inclusion and equity otherwise known as the d i e policy.

The Port and the Federal Government are liable as they did not follow due diligence in protecting the bridge. They knew it was not up to code. They knew it was not protected. They did not follow all the proper safety protocols by letting the tugs go too early. The pilots knew the risk and did not make sur the ship was sea worthy before taking it out. The pilots caused the collision not the ship.

@rixxroxxk1620

Ай бұрын

Wrong. The federal laws for dolphins protecting bridge pylons and support weren’t put into place until the mid ‘80’s after the Sunshine Skyway bridge collapse in Tampa. Any bridge, including the Key Bridge, constructed before that was grandfathered and the law didn’t apply. Still doesn’t. Place blame where it’s due. The ship lost power for whatever reason and struck the bridge. Their fault 100%. If you were driving your car and your brakes “failed” and you hit another car, who is responsible? Not the other car for being in the wrong place at the wrong time. You are for failing to inspect and /or fix your vehicle.

@paullong3036

Ай бұрын

What about the pre-sailing checklists,where any defects electrical/mechanical,navigational,must be noted,I believe the ship lost power about 4 times when it was alongside the quayside,therefore it had a known problem and shouldnt have sailed until it wasput right.

@justinfufun5483

Ай бұрын

So either it was put right in which case the ship wasnt at fault and if the Port authority weren't satisfied why did they release the tugs before the bridge. Or it was not put right in which case rhe port is at fault anyway.

@rixxroxxk1620

Ай бұрын

@@paullong3036 not the feds problem at that point. If it passed the Coast Guard inspection, it’s on the crew if there is a problem after that.

@rixxroxxk1620

Ай бұрын

@@justinfufun5483 if the ship was found satisfactory to sail during the Coast Guard inspection, it’s good to go. If there is a problem after their inspection, it’s on the crew. As soon as that ship hits the main channel, the tugs are gone. At that point, it is the harbor and bay pilots who advise the captain. It’s still the captains ship. He makes the final say. If he had an inkling that his ship wasn’t seaworthy, he should’ve never left port. Problems arise in anything mechanical. You drive a car, at least I think. Have there been times your gauges or idiot lights told you something was wrong and you still drove it? Same thing.

Don’t see that happening they are struggling because of there wreck .

Why, is u.s. taxpayers responsible for paying for new bridge?

Who owns the ship? Who pays for the insurance? Who failed to maintain the ship systems which voids the insurance? The owners of the DALI. Sorry, they are at fault.

@johnp139

Ай бұрын

You don’t know that.

Don't worry, Joe Biden said the taxpayers of the USA would pay the entire bill for clean up and bridge rebuilding.

@Macarena22279

Ай бұрын

Lie

Why doesn't the money come from Biden's $1 Trillion Infrastructure Bill (which already was passed)? The bill included "over $110 billion in additional funding to repair our roads and bridges and support major, transformational projects." The money has already been appropriated for this type of project.

@johnp139

Ай бұрын

Because that wasn’t part of the bill and Congress passes bills, not the President.

Why didn't they drag the ship back to the dock and ship it another way