‘Conception’ Diving Boat Accident- Findings, Observations and Learnings from a Liability Perspective

Author
Recent Posts

Ashish Chaturvedi

Ashish is a seasoned insurance industry professional. Starting his career with an insurance company, he learned the ropes and then moved on to insurance software consulting and implementation side. Having worked in the property and casualty insurance space for more than 15 years now, he has sharpened his knowledge by attaining globally acclaimed professional certifications like CPCU, RPLU and FIII.
An avid follower of all insurtech startups and a critical thinker, he has also contributed several papers in organization wide technical paper contests.

Latest posts by Ashish Chaturvedi (see all)

Bank Reconciliation - November 29, 2022
London Bridge Risk:A Protected Cell Company - January 2, 2022
Side Pockets in (Re) Insurance investments - July 20, 2021

What happened– On Labor Day, Sep 2^nd 2019, a diving boat named ‘Conception’ was gutted in a fire killing 34 people on board heading for a diving expedition to Santa Cruz island off the coast of Santa Barbara California. To be remembered as one of the worst maritime accidents in US history, this accident is also one of the worst-case scenarios that anyone can think of for a maritime disaster.

The ill-fated boat had 33 passengers and 6 crew members on the diving expedition. 34 people, all sleeping below deck died and 5 of the crew jumped off the top deck, where they were sleeping, and were rescued by another vessel. In the words of Santa Barbara County Sheriff Bill Brown “It’s a vessel on the open sea in the middle of the night; it’s 3:30 in the morning … The sleeping compartment is on the bottom of the ship and they would be sound asleep … You couldn’t ask for a worse situation.”

Findings and Observations- It has been said that the boat, built in 1981, had all standard safety clearances and had a stellar safety track record in liveboard scuba diving vessel expedition tours. It was incident-free until the ill-fated day. It was 75 feet long and had enough room for 46 people to eat and sleep between diving excursions. It was owned by a company called ‘Truth Aquatics’, owned by Glen Fritzler. The investigations into the accident are still ongoing but the preliminary reports suggest the following

All victims died of smoke inhalation
Safety lapses on board
Missing night watchman (mandatorily awake throughout the night and who alerts people of any dangers, as per Coast Guard rules)
Untrained staff (as alleged in a new lawsuit filed against the owning company by one of the surviving crew members)
No safety precautions informed to the passengers
Only one entry/exit for top deck
Single Charging tower right at the entry/exit (this is where all camera batteries, mobile phones used to be charged)
Presence of long extension cords
Mismatch of Lithium-Ion batteries
Ineffective smoke detectors

All high ranking agencies such as National Transportation Safety Board (NTSB), Coast Guard (who has launched a Marine Board Investigation, the highest level of marine casualty investigation), County Fire Department (who had the first responders to the accident), Bureau of Alcohol, Tobacco, Firearms and Explosives (ATF), Private investigators, marine surveyors and Lawyers are now looking into the details of the accident to figure out how did the fire start and resulted in death of all passengers

Liabilities: The affected families have lost their loved ones (there was a 17-year-old with both her parents too- none survived) who will never be back from the expedition. No one sleeping below deck survived the deadly fire. They will certainly seek compensation from boat owners for funeral costs, compensation, counseling, and other related services. This could be assessed as a crime and therefore the boat owner could be asked to pay state penalties and federal fines

Limitation of Liability Act: Boat owner company ‘Truth aquatics’ has, just after 3 days of the accident, filed a lawsuit in LA district court to protect them from liability (Several people have called this as a shameful step). The lawsuit seeks to limit the damage amount they might have to pay even if they are found partially at fault.

This lawsuit is based on the Limitation of Liability Act which was enacted in 1856 to encourage investment in the shipping industry. During that time, hull insurance or marine liability insurance availability was scarce, and very expensive when available. The purpose of the Act was to promote investment. Though more than a century has passed since the act was passed and several insurance companies now offer marine insurance, still, the act is not repealed giving boat owners and their insurance carriers freedom to use it in their favor. Due to this lawsuit, each affected family now has a deadline to file their responses. If they don’t, their claims will be barred forever. In this time of despair and such tragedy for the families, they will have to look out for a law firm and get into legal intricacies. A sorry state of affairs.

References:

Share this:

You may like these too...