IJ ...

'
APRIL 1981

n
·. J
'
\ ....

n
n GUIDANCE FOR OWNERS' REPRESENTATIVES
CONDUCTING DAMAGE SURVEYS WITH A VIEW TO EVENTUAL

n CLAIMS ON UNDERWRITERS

The following suggestions are made in good faith and with the
compliments of the Salvage Association and the intention of assisting
D Marine and Engineer Superintendents in their negotiations with
Surveyors when presenting damage cases which will eventually be the
D basis of the Owners' claim on Underwriters. The suggestions should
not be considered as hard and fast rules but if the case is buHt

D upon this.type of foundation most of the contentious points which

arise later in the processing of the claim will be eliminated-thus
implementing early claims adjustment.
D
It should be appreciated by the Superintendent that here he is
D considered to be the key man in the assembly of all documentation
and personnel required at the survey and attention to these matters
D will save time and trouble as the case develops. Depending upon
Owners' instructions he would be well advised to consult his insurance.

D department and ascertain their... requiremen.ts as to" distribution.

the areas of responsibility are such that Owners do not give their
Where

D Superintendent the authority to handle these aspects of the matter

he should make the attending surveyor aware that this is the case.

D Documentation

[] As the onus of proof lies· with the Owner, when making a claim the
Superintendents should have and make available for the Surveyor's

D perusal

a) The vessel's log book or books wherein is

D recorded the casualty or the condition which is

u considered to have caused or contributed to

the casualty, and necessary log books covering
the period since the last drydocking prior to the
u ·casualty or any other period which may be considered
relevant by Owners or the surveyor.

~
r:
1J. - 2 -

b) A signed statement or statements from ship's

l!
personnel involved if no entry covering the
casualty has been made in the log books.
'·
I
c) A statement from the Superintendent or other
l
_)
Owners' Representative outlining what, in his
opinion, was the cause of damage and the

J reasoning which led to the formation of this

opinion.

D d) Any other documents which will 'support the Owners'

' ' .
contention as to the cause and/or extent of the
D damage.

D e) A specification of damage found and repairs

recommended by the Owners' Representative.

0 This will be omitted if. the Owners' Representative

has not yet sighted the damage.

D There will sometimes be cases when the cause of a damage is not

readily apparent and the Owners' Representative c.annot give a clear
D allegation as to cause. In these circumstanc·~s the Superintendent
should be prepared to give the Surveyor every assistance by supplying

D any further documentation which he requires such as a report from

a. metallurgist, lubr.icating oil analyses, records of the vessel's

0 performance, classification reports, crew lists or any other relevant

documentation which will help in assessi.ng the merits of the Owners'
claim when it is eventually submitted.
0
The Owners Representativ2 is normally expected to express an opinion
0 as to cause of damage and may reasonably expect the surveyor to
indicate that a) he agrees, b) he disagrees, c) he has reservations.

u The expression of an opinion as to cause should not be expected bef.ore

the Superintendent indicates his allegation.

u It should be particularly noted however that if settlement of claims

is required without undue delay every eff.ort should be made to come
L to an agreement as to the date and cause of damage at the time of

u survey or during discussions immediately after survey.

r1
li
- 3 -

n It must be appreciated that Underwriters reserve the right to

n
. ::
investigate all aspects of the claim and even after survey
agreements they, like the Owners, can call in further technical or

n other advice and opinions so it is important to 'see that any

vital evidence is retained or recorded.

n From the foregoing paragraph it will be seen that we would expect

the Superintendent who is conducting the case to have vested in

D him by the.Owners full authority to agree extent and cause of

damage with the Surveyor. These, being technical matters, should

0 not be left to Owners' Claims Manager or to. Aver.ige Adjusters.

Some aspects of claims are quite rightly the province of other
parties and we would not wish these matters to be discussed with the
D Salvage Association surveyor but technical matters should be
finalised whenever possible at the time of survey.
D
Personnel

D Where the Owners feel there are no conflict of interest aspects,

besides having the Owners' Representative and the Salvage Association
D Surveyor present it will facilitate matters to have in attendance at
the initial survey:
D
a) A Surveyor of the appropriate Classification
D Society (if damage affects Class).
b) A Manager o·f the rep.air contractor if repairs

D .are to be done innnediately.

c) Such deck or engine-room officers as are

D required to assist with their knowledge of the

·ship and/or the casualty. .,

u So that all concerned can arrange to assemble at the proper time

it is advisable for the Owners' Representative ·to give as much
u notice as possible as to the time at which the survey will be
held.

D
If the damage .is to the hull of the vessel, drawings should be on
hand so that plates, frames etc., can be correctly designated.

u
11
u·-·~:
·:·:

[]
r'
- 4 -
i' I[
I I

Copies of these drawings should always be aboard the vessel so

n that on every occasion of survey the same identification can be

given to the plates or frames. Only too often dispute arises as
to the' allocation of. damages carried over from one survey to
another because of differing methods of designating plates and
frames.
[l
Notification of Survey

n tb Surveyor can survey your vessel without the authori~y of, the Owners

0 and there are various manners in which a survey is instigated

a) Through the Owners' Claims Office, to the

0 Insurance Broker and then to Head Office of the
Salvage Association who will instruct either
0 one of their Staff Survey Offices or the appropriate
Lloyd's Agent to appoint a Surveyor. This would

0 pertain mostly if the damage is known, or a casualty

recorded, before arrival of the vessel at the

0 b)
survey port.
The Superintendent may, upon finding damage to
the vessel during inspection, call a local
0 office of the Salvage Association or the
Lloyd's Agent to instruct a Surveyor to attend.
0 In· this case the Superintendent should innnediately
inform the Claims Department of the Shipowner

D .so that the Insurance Broker can< be advised and

the instructions to survey confirmed at thP

0 c)
Association Head Office.
Upon finding damage to the vessel or having
suffered a casualty, if innnediate survey is
D required, the Master of the vessel may call
in a Salvage Association Staff Surveyor or the
u Lloyd's Agent, Usually the master will have been
briefed on these matters when taking command.

u In such cases the Master should be instructed to

inform his Owners without delay, giving an idea of

u the extent of damage so that if necessary a

Superintendent can be despatched to the vessel to
conduct the survey.
r1
 - 5 -

Conducting a Survey

n The Owners' Sup•!rintendent is virtually, for the purpose of. the

survey, the Shipowner. He is presenting the claim from the
technical point of view (thia may be altered later by the Oomers'
Claims Manager or th~' Average Adjuster but teclmical fact and
details should b<;; .:!stabl.ished at uurvey) c.nd he is the only one who
D can authorise repair work to be carried out. The Salvage Association
Surveyors may agree to the proposed repair ·or even recommend a
D certain course of action but they have no authority whatsoever to
instruct a repairer to ca.rry out repairs.

D Having assembled the survey party a brief discussion should be

D entered into and survey documents distributed to those who are

entitled to receive them.

D If the Superintendent has himself seen the damage and formed an opinion
as to cause and the repair he proposes he can at this stage inform
D the Surveyor so that at the inspection of the damage the latter
can.form an opinion upon the cause of damage, the necessity for,

D and the cost of the repairs envisaged •.

D The survey party can now proceed to the location of the damages
and each individual sho•1ld write up in his own note-book the
nature of the damage imd the desc:..'iption of the part being inspected
D b'ut one individual (1'n:'.~ferably the Superi.ntendent) should recite what
the damag•~ is am! i.t this stage each toemb.'!1: of the party should
u state his· agreement., doubt or disagreement with the' findiugs and
recommendations.

0 In some areas it is the practice to issue a field survey report

and this document is usually· signed by those concerned in the survey.
D
One of the main purposes of the survey, so far as The Salvage
u Association is concerned, is to come to a fair and reasonable
agreement with the Owners' Representative as to what is the.

u cause, nature and extent of the damage or damages.

found that very few cases exist where ever.y aspect of the
It will be
cl~im
r I is completely covered by factual evidence and an attempt should
L be made to divide clearly between facts and opinions whether as
to cause or extent of damage.
 ' .

- 6 -

~
...:·:
We cannot stress too heavily that every endeavour should be made
I }
to reach this end while the evidence is still available. At
times it will probably be found that some further records require to
be produced or research instigated before conclusion can be reached
; and th~ Owners' Representative should take note of what is
D J,.. required and take the necessary steps to produce it at the earliest
possible date.

Wherever repairs will remove evidence and no agreement as to cause or

extent can be arrived at photographs of the damage should be taken
and copies kept by both the Owners' Representative and the ~urveyor

D in order to assist in clarifying matters at a later date.

'
An estimate
of the probable cost of repairs should be made at an early date and
discussed and, if repairs are to be immediately put in hand, the
0 repairers may be reque.sted to submi~ a bid or discuss terms upon
which the repairs will be carried out provided that it has not been
0 decided that this is a repair which should be put out to general
tender.

0 A specification of the repairs agreed as necessary should then be

0 written ·out for submissi9n to the repairers •. Here the question of

'submitting the specification to a number of contractors with the
purpose of inviting competitive bids· should be considered and
0 the Salvage Association will assist in editing and compiling ·the
specification and .tender conditions, as also in recommending a list
D of contractors. if this course is decided upon by the Owner.

0 The specification .should be divided into suitable subsections to cover

•
agreed damage items, items under discussion, general expense ·items

u and should give a clear separation between damages caused by various

casualties and/or items of a general average nature. The tenderer

u should at least be requested to make a price separation between

such subsections.

u The Salvage Association Surveyor will not instruct the Owner or

his Superintendent to call for tenders but may recommend that this
should be the prudent thing to do as the Owner will eventually
require to satisfy the Underwriters that the repair was carried

u out in the most economical manner.

11
 .;:
I
i
::~
,•,

.:.•
' <·:
~ - 7 -
l :_:::
.·.

·.:·,.·
·.
The extent of the work necessary will, of course, guide those
l ·.;::
at the survey as tb whether or not the question of calling for
tenders is worthwhile.

At this.stage it is also desirable to come to an agreement as to

whether drydocking of the vessel is or is not necessary for the
execution of the repairs. Drydocking may be required for Owners'

D repairs but there may be some cause for a difference of opinion

as to whether this also applies to the damage repairs and so it
is as well to remove all doubts at this time. During the progress
D of repairs there may be need for a change in opinion and this is a
0
point which should be dealt with·as soon as it arises while the
D evidence is available.

0 If the Owners elect to defer the repairs the Owners' Representative

should be prepared to let the Surveyor know the reason for the deferment

D as this point may be raised at the Adjustment stage and the Surveyor
will be required to make comment. Where this is the case the agreed
specification must contain sufficient detail to make it possible
0 to separate any further damage caused during subsequent operations.

D Before putting the· repairs in· hand the ··prudent Owners' Representative
will attempt to get the Surveyor's approval of the course and

D methods he intends to adopt.

0 Progress of Repairs

u As the work progresses further surveys may be necessary and, while

the Surveyor will from time to time revisit the vessel or the scene
of the repairs to satisfy himself on various points, it is the
D Superintendent's duty to advise the Surveyor specifically if new
evidence comes to light or the scope of the work or the claim

D is expanded from that of the original agreement.

Unnecessary contention can be avoided if the Superintendent notifies

LJ the Surveyor in sufficient time to arrange the required additional
survey, if considered necessary, without undue delay to the·
repairs. The Superintendent should not wait until the Surveyor
makes an occasional visit but should make sure that he is aware
u that further survey is.required.

r1
l - 8 -

·.
l :.,..: The object is to ensi:,1:e that the.re is full disclosure, as far
as possible, at every stage of the case, by the Superintendent,
This can only be achieved by keeping the Surveyor as fully
l i·'
,,
informed as possible directly any new development in the case

o· occurs or-any point a~ises which the Superintendent sees as

corroboration of his submission as. to cause. It is advisable
for Superintendents to make daily work lists and provide the
Surveyor with copies of any which may be relevant to the damage
claim. Remember it is the Owners' prerogative and duty to call for
survey when considered prudent or necessary.

Finalising Repairs
D
As the repairs draw to their conclusion a meeting should be arranged
D between the Superintenden~ and the Surv~yor when, as well as
rechecking the notes already taken, agreement Cl\n be reached as to

0 the length of time which has been necessary for the damage repairs;
if there was more than one damage case, the times that each repair

0 if done separately would have required; any drydocking necessary

should be treated similarly. This is always desirable but becomes
of the utmost i'mportance when a 'loss of :liire or loss of earnings
0 policy may also be involved. During the repair period or at· least before
the conclusion of ·repairs the Superintendent should go through the vessel 1 s
0 repair sheets with the Surveyor indicating which items he considers
form part of the claim. Where discussions' are unresolved as to

D particular items the repairer should be requested, by the Superintendent,

to prepare a separate price for them.

0 Payments on Account

0 If, during the course of repairs, payments in advance of the final

account being submitted are required, if problems and delays are to
0 be avoided, the Owners should instigate arrangements at or before
the commencement of repairs. It is also advisable that the

u Superintendent gives ample notice to the Surveyor that such a

request is imminent so that he can assess the cost of repairs

u already satisfactorily completed thus being in a position to.advise

Underwriters when asked to do so.

lJ
(1
 ----- .. -·- -·· --· --·. ·'. •.. ··~-. ····'·'"· ... , ••·.~·-·-· .•..,,;,•..;..;.;..:.r,••••.

I
-. 9 -

l·'. The Surveyor cannot instigate a request for any payment by Underwriters.
The request must be made by the Shiprepairer to the Owner, ancl the Owner

n; then will inform the broker who in turn will make a request to the
Underwriter. Where it appears that the damage is clearly caused
by a ~asualty covered by the vessels insurance policy and there are
0 no encumbrances the Underwriter may agree to assist by making the
proposed progress payments. The Underwriter will then usually

o· enquire from the Salvage Association if the amount required is

fully covered by work already completed aboard the vessel.
The Salvage Association will in turn ask their surveyor this
question and he will need the full co-operation of the. Own~rs'

Repr~sentative
0 and repairer if delays are to be avoideq.

Approval of Accounts
D
An essential part of the Salvage Association report is a detailed
0 explanation of the costs involved in the repa{rs with clear
subdivision of the sums involved against the various ~asualties

D being dealt with i.n the report and also an itemised General Expenses
account.

0 The time taken on each individual caseanrl also. the dock time, if
drydocking was necessary, for each repair must also feature in the
0 Survey report. To enable the s·urveyor to s4pply this information
close liaison is required between him and the Superintendent on

D this important matter and so discussion should take place between

these parties.

0 If the Owner so wishes he may present accounts. to the Surveyor

which have been already agreed between the Shipowner and the
0 Repairer but the Surveyor is not required to approve these unless
he is quite satisfied as to the reasonableness of every aspect
0 of the items and costs in the account. Many Owners adopt the
system of supplying the Surveyor with a draft account of the

u entire work done, with the items which the Owner considers are
for the various damage cases clearly marked.and, after sufficient

u time for the Surveyor to study the figurE;s and allocations,

a meeting with the Shiprepairers,' Owners 1 Superintendent and

u ·Surveyor is conve.ned when the accounts ·C!l:n· be finalised.

 , .............. ...,,,, .
--~·-····.J.- ~

l /.·:'
. - 10 -
:;:
.;
;.
.. •: It is an advantage if the Superintendent who was in attendance .
..,.
••.

] '
::
:~~
during repairs is present at this meeting as he is the only one
representing.Owners who can, from intimate knowledge of the case,
discuss the various points which arise. It may be the Owners'
policy that only their Senior Superintendent should agree costs
with the Repai~er but, this being so, the man who saw the work
done and made agreements with the Surveyor should be on hand
to discuss the methods adopted and other matters pertinent
0 to the costs.

D The time of discussing the accounts is not the proper time to

introduce new claims or enlarge existing claims; it is possible

0 that one or t~o small items have been missed during the repairs
and these are acceptable but if the survey has been conducted along
the lines suggested in these notes it should not be necessary to
D make further claims merely beco\'USe the itel!l1'. appear on the
Shiprepairer's account.
D Where Owners are claiming items that have not been the subject. of

0 survey by the Salvage Association it is not possible to obtain

their Surveyors' unqualified approval of accounts relative to them.

0 The Owners' Representative can however obtain. a "Cost· Only" approval

and this.may assist in· claim presentation.

0 Whilst the Surveyor will be prepared to discuss the accounts,

indicating his opini6n as to whether they are fair and reasonable

0 or otherwise· the repairers' direct dealings are with the Owners

and it is they who are responsible to negotiate a reasonable

0 figure.

u The additional cost incurred by working overtime over the cost which
would have been incurred if the repairs had been carried out in

u normal working time should be agreed, as also the time saved both
afloat and in drydock on each case due to such overtime working.

0 Although the total costs in respect' ,of ea·ch separate casualty can
be quoted as a lump sum for that claim, certain costs within this

u figure will be required Hy the Average Adjuster and so should be

extracted and agreed at this time. These aret

u
l!
- 11 -

n a) Cost of temporary repairs.

b) Cost of removing temporary repairs.
n
u c) Cost of items in dispute.
d) Cost of. repairs due to efforts to refloat
n or salvage operations as distinct from
repairs to damage by the grounding.

D e) Cost of repairs to damage caused by

extinguishing a fire as distinct from

D repairs to the fire damage.

f) Cost of any underwater coating if included in the
account.
0 g) Cost of any part which it is considered failed
due to being latently defective.
D These costs are required by the Average Adju•ter in separating

D costs in respect of:

A) Particular Average.
D B) General Average.

D As these are two very impdrtant aspects "of Marine Insurance

their meaning and intention should be studied by the Superintendent

D as he will be required to supply much detail in respect of the

compilation of the·claims under·these headings. The Superintendent

D should not however attempt to interpret what is General Average

or Particular Average; this is the function of the Average Adjuster.

u In order to avoid delays in reporting, Surveyors have been instructed

to issue their formal reports shortly after repairs are completed
D and if accounts are not to hand to issue an addendum at the· time
of accounts approval. Where possible Superintendents should, if
D they have the authority, proceed to acco·unt approval before departure
from the repair port.

u Additional Costs

u As well as the Repairers' account there may be other accounts which

u should be brought to the Surveyor's attention for approval and

inclusion in his report, These costs are for:

[
 - l.L. -

I J

a) Sub-contractors' accounts not included in the

Repairers' account e.g. tank cleaning, boiler
cleaning, painting etc.
b) Supply of replacement parts from Owners'
stock or suppliers.

D c) Work done by crew in respect of the repairs.

This can be a very contentious point and so should
be well documented and,where relevan~ crew overtime
D wages sheets with signatures should be provided to
the surveyor.
0
If such accounts are not to hand at the time that the Repair

D account is agreed the Owners' Superintendent should make it quite

clear to the Surveyor that they remain to be agreed so that a note

D to that effect can be made in the Formal Survey Report.

Special Cases
0
1. Surveys without prejudice on behalf of. an interest other
[] than the Owners or the Underwriters

D The representative of the Owners of th~ property being

surveyed is expected to indicate the damage being claimed and

D make the repair· recommendations. T~e Surveyor will note the

damage and if he agrees with the repair reconnnendations he should
be requested to approve them as being relevant to the casualty.
D If the surveyor acting for the other party disagrees the
Owners' representative will be informed and discussions should
D take place on any omissions, substitutions' or modifications the
surveyor considers necessary. The Superintendent should try

D to achieve mutual agreement. If no agreement can be reached the

Owners must be kept informed of the actual areas or items of

D disagreement and the Superintendent should see that he has the

separate cost of these items in case of later litigation.

D If Owners invite the without prejudice surveyor to attend account

•
nf>~otiP..tio11 his dttent:lanLc;- d.)~S- uut indj_cate .accentancc of
D liability by the interests he represents. In such cases of
attendance the repair costs will be shown in the Surveyor's
r I report or addendum/s or letter to his principals indicating that
LJ
the Surveyor considers that the costs are fair and reasonable,
but that the accounts are noted without prejudice to liability.

r,
 I,_J .. - 13 -

[] It is unusual for accounts or joint.survey reports to be signed

by the without prejudice surveyor.

n 2. Collision

n It is in the Owners interests to see that surveys are held

upon both vessels by surveyors representing both his
and the colliding vessels interests. On no accotmt should
the Owners Representative allow one surveyor to represent

0 both interests - this applies equally to Underwriters Surveyors.

0 In this particular type of casualty it i.s general practice

for a separate surveyor to be appointed on behalf of each
vessel·' s underwriters and there will of course be at least
0 one Owners' representative per ship.

0 Apart from the necessary "Cross Collision Aspects" i.e. vessel

"A" interests carry out surveys led by the vessel "A" Owners

0 representative and attended amongst others by vessel "A"

Underwriters' surveyor and vessel "B" Owners' representative

0 and Underwriters' surveyor (the latter two gentlemen

carrying out their survey strictly without prejudice) the
surveys are carried out in a normal fashion.
D The procedure .is reversed when surveys are carried out on
ship "B".
0 Without prejudice .surveyors and superintendents do not sign
accotmts· on the colliding vessel's repairs etc. which must

0 be' e>iamined for cost only. .!

0 Owners' Repairs

The Surveyor is not greatly interested in the Repairs to

D Owners' accotmt except in their volume and in the time both

u afloat and in drydock for their execu~ion. It will greatly

facilitate eventual settlement if he is given all the detail he
requests in this respect.

D Should the Surveyor be reporting for a "Loss of Earnings" case he

D will additionai'ly require to know the extent of any repairs which

were i'l!llllediately necessary for restoring the vessel to a condition
making her fit for the intended voyage ·and the time required for
the execution of these both afloat and drydock,

r I
 .,
lI
n - 14 -

n Where "loss of earnings" insurance is involved the Superintendent

should keep notes of numbers of men and hours worked in overtime

n to assist in assessing times saved on the various repairs.

D Deferred Repairs

Should the Owner elect to defer repairs to a damage, a comprehensive

D specification with all sizes where applicable should be drawn up
and agreed; and such a description made of the damage that it
D may readily be evaluated if a further damage is super-imposed on
the original. The specification should be such that the repa~r can

D be quantified at any time, this often being necessary when a vessel

is changing Ownership and settlement for unrepaired damage is

0 required.

D In General

If the Superintendent takes t.he Surveyor into his confidence and

D explains his case in a forthright manner there should be little if
any trouble in coming to fair and amicable agreements. The Surveyors
D. are deaJ:ing daily with damages and Owner.s' claims and have a wealth
of experience for the Superintendent to draw upon for while the

D Surveyor will not make the Owners' claim for him, likewise he will
not frustrate the Owner in making his claim but will endeavour
to make a straight factual report which will assist both the
D Owner and the Underwriter in reaching a proper and fair settlement of
the Owners claim under the conditions of the relevant policy. (policies).
D
Where there are differences of opinion every effort should be made

D to solve these but ·if this is not possible the fullest possible description
of the damages should be agreed as well as all pertinent facts which

u each considers have been instrumental in forming his opinion.

this information available it may be possible for a referee to
With

u resolve the dispute at a later date.

u ·The·foregoing are the basic guidelines for carrying out surveys for
damage claims and with these, common sense and tolerance there should
be no cause for anything worse than a mild difference of opinion
u occasionally.

[]
lI
n
n
n
n
n
D
D
D
D
D
D
D
0
D
u
0
[J
u
u
lJ
 &
11

n AB/lf THE SALVAGE

ASSOCIATION ....../ ...
lt-OC01il'OltAT£[1 ll\' llCIYAL C"HAKT£1\ U1t.t
25th October 1989

n TECHNICAL INSTRUCTION NO. 4/89 (TI 4/89)

li
GUIDANCE FOR CONDUCT OF HULL SURVEYS ON BEHALF OF CARGO INTERESTS
D During the course.of the work of the Cargo Department, occasions arise when

n it is necessary to appoint a ship surveyor on behalf of cargo interests.

With many casualties the Association will have already been instructed on
behalf of H-& M Insurers with a Staff surveyor in attendance. In such
D instances, because of possible conflict of interest, Consultant Surveyors
are appointed. However, whenever possible, Staff Surveyors are used.

HULL SURVEYS BEHALF OF CARGO

Procedures relating to hull and machinery surveys behalf cargo are set out
in Guidance Notes to Surveyors Article 59. However, despite these notes
D some surveys still do n.ot i;:over the ground required by cargo interests.
This instruction amplifies the Guidance Notes and it is hoped will ensure
D tl1e correct conduct of such surveys. A separate instruction, TI 5/89,
covers Cargo Surveys, which are distinct from Ship Surveys Behalf Cargo.
Any particular direction in which investigations should proceed will
D usually be contained in the preliminary instructions, or f6llowing the
.surveyor's prelimin~ry report.
D
A request for a survey of the ship on behalf of cargo interests often
D arises due to suspicion that the damage or loss of cargo is due to a fault
'-' in the vessel. Sometimes there may be little or no damage to the· cargo but
D the vessel has suffered a casualty and incurred salvage and/or general
average expenses to ;,·hi ch cargo interests will be required to contribute.

D
'
In view of the very high value of cargo these days in relation to the
vessel's value, the contribution by cargo is. likely to be ver~. substantial.

D Therefore it is import<:nt for cargo interests to have a survey of the ship'

to discover whether the actual cause of the casualty was a fortuity or not.
When cargo is carried by a vessel a contract of carriage is drawn up
D between the shipper and the shipowner. This contract is often governed by
the Hague Visby Rules. Article III.I states the following:-·
D 1
LJ A.Brodie,Esq.

u
ll
lj
~
lj

il "The carrier shall be bound before and at the beginning of the voyage
IJ to exercise due diligence to:

0 (a) Make the ship seaworthy.

D (bl Properly man, equip and supply the ship.

n (c) Make the holds, refrigerating and cool chambers, and all other
parts of the ship in which the goods are carried, fit and safe

0 for their reception, carriage and preservation."

The survey required is very much of an investigatory nature and is solely

D~ to discover the cause and whether it should have been discoverable by a
shipowner or his agent before the commencement of the voyage in quest ion,
D exercising due diligence. The extent of any damage to the vessel and the
cost of repairs whether temporary or permanent is in most instances not

D required.
accordingly.
If this has any bearing on the case, you shall be instructed

D Where the facts warrant, cargo interests will be 1oak i ng to make a recovery
from the ship and litigation will be a possible outcome, so any evidence
D that is available must be gathered in note form and if possible,
photographically, whilst it is there to be sighted. Evidence obtained will
D not always be clear cut and it is stressed that this type of survey is one
which requires the surveyor to observe and note anything which is doubtful
D'--' in the proper running of the ship. Whi 1st, in his view, what he discovers
may be very borderline, in the hands of a marine lawyer, the information

D may be very relevant to the case.

Prompt reaction to instructions is obviously very impor~ant. If the

D surveyor is prevented from boarding the vessel, an immediate telephone call
at whatever time of day to the Cargo Department or out of office hours to
D one of the staff at home will be sufficient to set in motion a procedure,
through the lawyers concerned, hopefully to obtain a Court Order permitting
D the surveyor to get on board, usually within the next 24 hours.

D
D 2

I
l:
n 111;,-~
ft:....
It is important for the surveyor to telex his preliminary views so that an
D immediate assessment of the case can be made by instructing principals or
their lawyers.
n Again, because the outcome of the survey could lead to litigation, the

n lawyer may wish the report to be privileged and require it to be addressed

to him. When this is necessary, you will be instructed accordingly.

D Reference to Article III.I of the Hague Visby Rules will make it clear that
it will be necessary to review all the documents on the running and manning
D of the vessel. Full operating manuals should be available in the
appropriate language, together with up-to-date classification certificates
D as well as the relevant charts and Sailing Directions for the voyage
concerned which should be fully amended and up to date. The vessel must

D also be manned by a full and properly certificated crew.

0 From time to time the Cargo Department also requires the appointment of a
ship surveyor in General Average situations where it is important for the
surveyor to separate Particular Average damage from that relating to
D General Average together with the appropriate separation of costs. Brief
Guidance on such surveys are set out in Article 60 of the Guidance Notes to
D Surveyors.

D Should the occasion arise where Staff Surveyors find it necessary to

entrust the ship survey on behalf cargo to one of their approved
~

D Consultants they must ensure that the selected Consultant conducts the
survey in accordance with the foregoing guidelines.

0 An example of typical requirements of a Hull survey behalf Cargo is

attached.
D
D A. Galloway
Chief Surveyor and

u Deputy General Manager

Encl. 1.

u
3
LJ
lJ
n
11
THE SALVAGE
ASSOCIATION
l!\C01it'OliAT£0 llY 110\"Al C'HAflTEfl lh~1
m
~

n
HEADOFFJCE

D INSTRUCTION DATE:
BANKSIDE HOUSE
10711121.EADENHALL STREET
LONDON EC3A 4AP

SURVEY REPORT NO: TELEPHONE: QJ.623 1299

D DATE
TELEX:9~017l87

CABLES: WRECKAGE
FAX: 01-626 ""963

0
0 '-
THIS IS TO CERTIFY

0 that, in accordance with instructions received from

0 THE SALVAGE ASSOCIATION - LONDON OFFICE

D and on behalf of whom it may concern, our staff surveyor attended on board
the

0 H.V. "DISASTER"

0 while lying afloat at the port of Tampico, Mexico on October 15, 1989 to
investigate circumstances leading to towage of the vessel and diversion to
'----'
Tampico while en route from Buenos Aires to New Orleans with a cargo of
D maize in bulk. Survey was also carried out to investigate the cause(s) of
reported ingress of water to cargo compartments resulting in damage to
cargo.
0 Our surveyor was initially denied access to the vessel at the time of
berthing at Dock B on October 14 - the Master advising that on
0 Owners'/Charterer's instructions, permission to carry out survey was being
deferred pendlng arrival at Tampico of a surveyor acting on behalf of
Owners' Protection and Indemnity Association. Permission was given late on
October 14, our surveyor attending on board on October 15, 1989 and
D subsequently together with the undernoled parties:

u 1

c
u 0FF1CESTHROUGHOUTTHEWORLD
GEJ-;ERAL MA.NAGER M. R. ELU.S CHIEF' SURVEYOR&. DEPUTY GENERAL MANAGER, A. CAJ.J..OWAY C.ENO .. F.J.Mar.E.,F.C.M.6.

r i
l J

n
ll

n Mr. A. owners' Superintendent

0 Mr. B.
Mr. C.
Surveyor acting on behalf of owners' P & I.
Classification Society Surveyor
Mr. D. Cargo Surveyor acting on behalf of insurers of cargo.

0 Voyage records and other data were provided for review by all parties with
the vessel's Master, Captain XYZ amplifying information as required. Our
surveyor noted as follows:
0 GENERAL PARTICULARS OF VESSEL

D Name:
Flag:
Year Built:
"Disaster" (ex ''Oxidation'')

G.T.:
D N. T.:
Summer Draught: 35'00'
Summer Deadweight: 20,000 Tons
D Classification Society:
Main engine: -
Owners:
Charterers: -
D The "DISASTER" is a gearless bulk carrier with five (5) holds situated
forward of the bridge house/machinery space - all weatherdeck hatch
0 openings featuring single pull, folding, steel covers whicl1 open fore and
aft and are hydraulically operated.

0 For the voyage under review, movements of the vessel were governed by a
Voyage Charter Party dated October 1, 1989 between the above named Owners
and Charterers. A copy of the Charter Party is included in Appendix A
attached to this report. Attention is directed to min/max cargo quantities
0 given at line 9 of the agreement.
It ~·as reported that the "DISASTER" was "on hire" after completion of "on
0 hire" survey carried out soon after the vessels' arrival in ballast at
Buenos Aires on October 2, 1989. No details of this "on hire" survey were
made known to our surveyor and Owners have been asked to provide l.ls w·ith a
D copy of the relevant survey report as soon as possible.

u 2
u
u
l J

n
n
'l J

In!,
Cargo compartments were inspected by local authorities in Buenos Aires who
0 found all holds "clean and dry and in fit condition to receive a cargo of
maize in bulk". A copy of the pre-loading inspection certificate from
which the above is a freely translated quote, is included in Appendix A.
0 It should be noted that the attached certificate only refers to the
interior condition of compartments designated to receive the subject cargo
and, we believe, is not intended to reflect approval of any other part of

0 the vesse 1.
Loading Statement of Facts is included in Appendix A with salient points
extracted and quoted hereunder:
o~ October 2 0100 Notice of Readiness tendered.
0800 On Hire Survey completed.
0 October 3 -
0900
0930
1000 to 1100
Cargo compartments inspected and passed.
Commence loading
Rain-hatches covered.
2300 Completed loading.
0 October 4 -
2400
0600
Vessel moved to bunker berth.
Vesse 1. sailed.

0 Cargo bill of lading, both sides of which are reproduced in Appendix A,

states 19,000 tons of maize in bulk was "received on board in apparent good
order and condition" and no adverse endorsements appear thereon. The
D vessel's Master advised that weight of cargo was established by draught
survey jointly carried out by the shippers and XYZ inspectors. A copy of
the XYZ inspection draught survey report is included in Appendix A and we
note that mean salt water draught (fresh water allowance applied) is given
as 29' 11 7/8" •
Fuel oils totalling 600 tons were reportedly delivered to the vessel after
completion of loading. Review of the vessel's deck log indicates that
draught prior to departure from Buenos Aires was not recorded. With no
allowance for replenishment of fresh water reportedly carried out at the
0 bunker berth and after application of appropriate tons per inch immersion,
we estimate that the vesel's summer loadline was submerged by approximately
12" at the time of departure from Buenos Aires.

0 Although original documents were sighted by our surveyor during the course
of his attendance on board and despite repeated requests for copies of the
vessels' deck and engine log books, these have not been provided to us. An
D extract of the former, together with the Masters Note of Protest lodged at
Tampico, were passed to our surveyor and are reproduced in Appendix B
attached to this report.
LJ
3
lJ
I:

li
n
n
n It will be noted that reference is made to adverse weather experienced on
October 5th and 6th with winds to force 10 and "vessel shipping seas on
deck and hatches" reported. Weather conditions reportedly improved
thereafter, subsequent entries in the attached extract stating as follows:
n October 10, 1989 1800
1810
hrs.
hrs.
Fire in engine room.
Stop engine.
1815 hrs. Evacuate engine room.
D October 11, 1989
1820
0300
hrs.
hrs.
Inject 6 bottles C02 to engine room.
Inject further 6 bottles C02 to engine
room.
D- 0800 hrs. Inspection of engine room by Chief
Engineer wearing breathing apparatus.
0900 hrs. Contact 01<1ners by R/T - tug assistance
requested.
D October 12, 1989 0830 hrs.
1000 hrs.
Tug "GARCIA" passes tow wire.
Commence tow to Tampico as Port of
Refuge.
D October 14, 1989 1200 hrs. All fast alongside Dock B, Tampico-Tug
''GARCIA" released.

D Accompanied by the various parties mentioned earlier in this narrative, our

surveyor inspected the engine room of the "DISASTER" and noted as follows:
Upper platforms moderately smoke stained overall.
D Middle platform similarly smoke stained with heavier concentration of soot
and minor scorching of paintwork at the after end.
Bottom platform and auxiliaries at aft end heavily soot stained;
D paintwork scorched and blistered; generator flat, generators and
associated piping and wiring fire damaged; adjacent main electrical
switchboard scorched/buckled apparently by fire and/or heat.
D The vessels' Chief Engineer had previously advised that fire had first been
noted in way of No. 2 generator (the centre unit of three identical
machines)' located in a raised flat aft of the main engine control position
D and immediately forward of the main electrical switchboard. Close
examination of No. 2 generator revealed that a high pressure fuel line.
serving this unit had ruptured while the generator was in use. It'.·would
D appear that fuel under pressure had sprayed on to the generator casing and
adjacent units with resultant ignition into flame.

u The attached statement from the watchkeeping engineer describes initial

attempts to combat the fire using portable fire extinguishers before
subseque'nt injection of C02 gas.

LJ
4
l
u
u
Ii

n
n
n Inspection of the vessels' CMS records indicated that No. 2 generator
n engine, a Volvo Penta TAMD 121c, 376 HP, 2000 RPM, had been subject of
scheduled survey by the classification society at Cape Town on January 8,
1989 with no conditions then being imposed. Close up photographs of the
damaged fuel line are contained in Appendix B. It will be noted that
D rupture apparently occurred at a bend in the line (1/2" I.D. steel pipe)
and our surveyor saw no signs of any damage which might be considered of a
pre-existing nature e.g. indentations i.w.o.· the rupture or external
D corrosion.
On the basis of conditions sighted and information made available at the
D,'. '--
time of survey our surveyor is of the opinion that fire which occurred on
board the "DISASTER" on October 10, 1989 was of a fortuitous nature and
could not have been foreseen.

0 Further, our surveyor is of the op1n1on that the vessels' crew reacted
correctly to the emergency and every effort appears to have been made to
limit damage to the vessel. Inspection of the vessels' statutory
0 certificate for fire fighting appliances revealed that equipment was last
examined at Cape Town in January, 1989 when all fire extinguishers were
recharged as necessary and all listed appliances found in satisfactory

0 condition.
Extensive fire/heat damage to overhead cable trays and wiring was evident
at the time of survey with severe damage of a similar nature to the main
0 electrical switchboard and associated fittings. The extent of damage
sighted ~·as such that repairs by the ships' staff were not possible.

0 As no power could be supplied to auxiliaries etc. it was not

restart machinery following the emergency stop on October 10
request for tug assistance was therefore necessary. Precise
possible to
and the
particulars of
the terms of employment of the tug "GARCIA" are not known to us although
reported to be. U.S. s.10,000/day from the time of unberthing from base at
Tamp\co to return.
Fuel remaining on board the "DISASTER" when engine was stopped was reported
to be as follows:

0 Bunker fuel 430 tons

Diesel 30 tons
On October 16, 1989, following inspection of damage by local repairers, it
0 was reported that repairs would be undertaken at Tampico with an estimated
time for.completion of 45 days. It was also reported that arrangements
were to be made for transhipment of all cargo for delivery to destination
D although such discharge was not required for repairs to the engine room.
5

-1_,
[]
n

n ln anticipation of cargo transhipment, all hatches were opened for

inspection by parties in attendance as listed earlier in this narrative
when the following was noted:
Cargo in holds 1, 4 and 5 in apparent good order with surface grain dry and
D free-flowing. Hatch cover gaskets were noted to be in good order
throughout and appeared to have been recently renewed.

D Hold No. 2

Cargo in way of the hatch square surface hardened to a depth of

o._ approximately 3" with evidence of mould formation localised in way of the
starboard forward corner of the hatch opening over an area of approximately
20 squar·e feet. Samples of surface hardened grain and of mouldy material
were taken by Mr. B and Mr. D - the latter subsequently reporting l1igh
D chloride content was found on independent analyses, suggesting that
conditions were brought about by salt water contact.

D Inspection of No. 2 hatch closures revealed steel cover compression bars

heavily rusted and wasted. Cross joint gaskets were found hardened and
part missing. A sharp indent measuring 4" in length was found on the
D starboard forward coami ng gutter. Evi de.nee of recent filtration of water
was noted on coamings in way of all cross joints with heavier concentration
of what appeared to be fresh rust in way of the indent mentioned above.

D Testing of affected areas usfng a silver nitrate solution indicated rust to

be of salt water origin. Scrapings from rusted coaming plates were taken
jointly by our surveyor and by Mr. B. and are being retained in a sealed
D condition for later use as necessary.
Hold No. 3
0'--' Cargo was found surface-hardened to a depth of approximately 3" at
scattered locations in way of the hatch square. Samples of hardened cargo
were taken by Mr. B. and Mr. D. - latter reporting the presence of
D chlorides: found after testing. lnspection of hatch closures revealed cross
joint gaskets to be generally hardened and wasted although compression bars
were intact. Re-closing of No. 3 hatcli cover revealed that, of a desi.gn
D total of 50 cross joint wedges, 23 were missing. ··
Evidence of water ingress was noted at scattered locations in way of cross
D joints - silver nitrate testing indicati11g rust to be of salt water origin.
Photographs depicting conditions noted are included in Appendix B attached

u to this report.

6
D
r i
iI . '

n
n
n
During further discussion with the vessels' Master, it was learned that
D during handling of steel products at Cape Town in January, 1989 damage had
been caused to No. 2 hatch coaming. This incident was recorded in the
vessels' deck log and in the Stevedore Damage Report prepared at that time.
n These reports were sighted by our· surveyor but copies were not made
available.
Inspection of the vessels' Load Line Certificate revealed that annual
D inspection had been completed at Montevideo in September, 1989 and all
found to be in order with Certificate revalidated until September 1990.

o,_ In our surveyors' opinion, water ingress to holds 2 and 3 was directly
attributable to the poor condition of hatch closures. The Stevedore Damage
Report referred to earlier was copied to Owners for claim purposes and they
were therefore aware of the existence of such damage. Similarly, recent
D replacement of gaskets in other compartments suggests that Owners should
have been aware of the deteriorated condition of gaskets in holds 2 and 3.
h'hile there appears to be little doubt that the "DISASTER" experienced a
D period of adverse weather soon after departure from Buenos Aires, it will
be recalled that the vessel was loaded beyond the statutory loadl ine and it
would not be unreasonable to assume that the effect of adverse weather was
D increased accordingly.
Hold bilge sounding record was examined and no evidence of undue
accumulation of water noted in any compartment bilge. On the basis of
D conditions sighted at the time of hatch survey, it would appear that damage
to cargo was restricted to the extent described. t-rrc.ngements are in hand
to skim affected grain - estimated to amount to approximately 200 tons-for
D eventual dumping at sea.
Mr. D. was scheduled to remain in attendance during cargo tranship.:nent and,
o·~ with the agreement of Hr. B., arrangements were to be made to hose test
hatch covers of holds 2 and 3 on completion of discharge.
The final. attachment in Appendix B of this report is a copy of our
D surveyors' letter to Owners dated October 17, 1989. This letter confi rn1s
our surveyors' request for copies of log books etc. Up to the time of
writing, no reply has been received.
0
0 Attending Surveyor: A.N. Other
C:\WS2000\INS_REP4.001
0
7
LJ

J
J