Claim for bad stowage rejected

Leghorn, 25^th July, 20 . . .

Messrs. Saghelti & Tuena, Agents & Brokers.

Piazza Corvetto, 16.

Leghorn, Italy.

Dear Sirs,

Referring to your tale of July 14, 20… regarding damaged to the shipment of the machinery in crates delivered to you under the B/L 81 on voyage 2/92 please be advised of the following.

The damaged cargo was first noticed by the Cargo Officer on June 17, at about 10.00 when he was making daily rounds inspecting lashing of the cargo in the Holds. He found some of the braces securing the crates gone, and the wire, with which he had been lashed, broken. Immediate additional lashing of the crates was impossible, owing to heavy rolling and pitching of the vessel. Any work in the hold would be endangered lives of the crew. Neither it was possible at time to evaluate the scope of the damage. The fact and extent of damage was ascertained by a P&I surveyor immediately upon the ship's arrival in Montreal.

I can not agree with you that damage was caused by improper stowage or lack of due care on the part of the ship's crew. As you can see from the enclosed documents, that the stowage had been approved by an official cargo surveyor at the port of loading and the security of lashing was regularly checked by the ship's crew on passage to the port of destination. As soon as it became possible, we made additional lashing in order to prevent further damage. Therefore, in my view, the crew has done everything that can be reasonable expected to safeguard the cargo and the damage occurred due to exceptionally

severe storm with which the ship met on that voyage.

In view of the above, I reject your claim as groundless.

Yours faithfully,

M. J. Kiselev

Master of the m/v "Donbass"

Rejecting a claim about contract

Gothenburg, 18th October, 20 . . .

Messrs. Larson, Bersen & Oldingen, Stevedoring C.,

c/o Messrs. Sandstrom & Hans son, Ship Agents, Kustgatan, 27.

Gothenburg, Sweden.

Dear Sirs,

With reference to your claim for damage to your vessel caused by us as a result of contact with you vessel while mooring astern of your vessel to Berth 18 of Camden Terminal, Port of Philadelphia at 02. 30 a.m. 14th inst. I wish to state the following:

I regret about the contact, but the stern of your vessel and sea side were not properly lit, as required by the Regulations, which together with the fog, made it extremely difficult for us to determine the distance to your stern with sufficient accuracy when we were approaching the berth. I called the attention of the pilot, Mr. Carpenter to the fact, and had this fact duly recorded in the ship's Log Book. I am sure he will confirm the fact.

As to your allegation about our approaching the berth at an excessive speed, I assure you that our speed at the time of the contact was not more than half a knot. This can be easily verified by questioning our pilot.

As my opinion your own lack of due care, and not my allegedly excessive speed was the cause of the damage I reject your claim as groundless.

Yours faithfully,

V. I, Stepanov

Master of m/v "Chigirin"

Date: 2015-12-24; view: 798