DAMAGE TO CARGO IN CONTAINERS
Referring to your telex of July 14, 1992 addressed to our Agent, regarding damage to containers with electronic equipment, delivered to you by my vessel under B/Ls 81 and 82 on voyage 2/92 please be advise of the following.
The above containers, as well as the another cargo, were loaded and discharged under supervision of my Cargo Mate, an experienced officer, who made no mention to me of any rough handling of the containers by the stevedores. Our stowage plan and the stowage was approved by the Cargo Surveyor. So, there is no question of improper stowage or damage during loading or discharge. The breakage of the goods inside the containers could have been caused either before, or after shipment, or the cargo was stowed into the containers in damaged condition.
Moreover, as you can see from my remark on the B/Ls, following the usual practice in container transport, when the goods are received in a sealed container the quality and condition of the cargo were accepted as unknown to the Carrier. Which, as your lawyer, no doubt, will tell you, relieves the Carrier of liability.
DAMAGE TO CARGO BY FIRE.
Referring to your telex of July 14, 1992 regarding damage by fire to part cargo of textiles shipped to you in 1 container by my vessel under B/L 81 on voyage 2/92 please be advised of the following.
The fire started in Hold 3 due to self-ignition of the cargo of mineral oil. The fire was successfully put out, but the ship and the cargo sustained some damage.
Your claim for damages and refusal to pay your share in the general average is based, as I understand, on the results of the survey after the ship's berthing, when your representative found several smoked cigarette ends in Hold 3, where the fire had started. You interpret this as an evidence of the crew smoking in the holds - a clear negligence of the Carrier's servants.
I should like to point out, however, that this is very difficult to prove:
the cigarettes could have been smoked by stevedores in any of the ports before Philadelphia.
Moreover, my lawyer tells me that according to British law, and the Hague
Rules, the Carrier is liable for damage by fire, only if his own act, or direction, or those of the ships' officers were the caused of the fire, and he is not answerable for omissions or negligence of the crew. So, legally your claim is groundless in any case.
Understanding your feelings, I, however, suggest that you review your stand on matter, and drop your claim.
|
|
|
SHIFTING IMPOSSIBLE: SHIP IMMOBILIZED FOR ENGINE
REPAIR.
With reference to your order to shift our vessel from Berth A-1 North to Berth A-3 North today at 19.00 which was delivered to me at 10.00 hours today, please note that my vessel will not be able to carry out your order, since the vessel is immobilized as per prior permission for overhaul of the main engine.
Acting on the promise of the Appledore Co. whose repair team is replacing a cylinder liner of our main engine, in my request for permission to immobilize the vessel I indicated that the ship would be immobilized until 16.00 today.
Unfortunately, the work has not completed, and according to the repair team information, will require another 12 hours for reassembling of the faulty cylinder and testing the engine.
I kindly ask you to cancel your shifting order and to let us complete the repair at the present berth.
DELAY IN SHIFTING.
As you know, my vessel was to be shifted about 150 feet ahead this morning at 06.00 hours. I specially asked shifting to be arrange for that time, so as not to cause unnecessary delay of cargo operations.
The vessel was all ready to shift at 06.00 hours sharp whereas the shore morning crew were not present and came only at 07.00 hours. The resulted in one hour's delay in discharging the cargo.
I hold the port authorities fully responsible for the delay. Kindly inform the authorities concerned.
Topics for discussion
Oral presentation 1
Single letter codes.
A Alpha - I have a diver down; keep well clear at low speed.
B Bravo - I am taking in, or discharging or carrying dangerous goods.
C Charlie - Yes (affirmative or "the significance of the previous group should be read in the affirmative").
D Delta - Keep clear of me, I am manoeuvring with difficulty.
E Echo - I am altering my course to starboard.
F Foxtrot - I am disabled; communicate with me.
G Golf - I require a pilot. When made by a fishing vessel operating in close proximity to the fishing grounds: "I am hauling nets."
|
|
|
H Hotel - I have a pilot on board.
I India - I am altering my course to port.
J Juliet - I am on fire and have dangerous cargo on board; keep well clear of me.
K Kilo - I wish to communicate with you.
L Lima- You should stop your vessel instantly.
M Mike- My vessel is stopped and making no way through the water.
N November - No (negative or "the significance of the previous group should be read in the negative"). This signal may be given only visually or by sound. For voice or radio transmission the signal should be "no" in response to a preceding signal).
O Oscar - Man overboard.
P Papa - [in harbour] All persons should report aboard as the vessel is about to proceed to sea.
- [at sea] It may be used by fishing vessels to mean "my nets have come fast upon an obstruction".
Q Quebec - My vessel is "healthy" and I request free pratique.
R Romeo - Single letter code R has no allocated meaning.
S Sierra - My engines are going astern.
T Tango - Keep clear of me; I am engaged in pair trawling.
U Uniform - You are running into danger.
V Victor - I require assistance.
W Whisky - I require medical assistance.
X X-ray - Stop carrying out your intentions and watch for my signals.
Y Yankee - I am dragging my anchor.
Z Zulu - I require a tug.When made by a fishing vessel operating in close proximity to the fishing grounds: "I am shooting nets."
Дата добавления: 2018-04-05; просмотров: 235; Мы поможем в написании вашей работы! |
Мы поможем в написании ваших работ!