"chartering" with guests
 

Hi,

I have a charter captain friend who told me once that there is a
loophole around the conventional "6-pack" CG License chartering
regulations.

He said something to the effect that if you have a contract that
specifies that the boat is being rented as a whole to the "guests",
that they are able to pick whoever they'd like to be the captain of
their "rented" vessel, whether that person is licensed or not.

So, in essence, the boat "rental" provides the income, and the
"captain" performs duties for free.

With this method, he was able to charter his boat with more than 6
guests, and without a captain's license.

Does anyone know the real story on this? Was he f.o.s.?

Thanks,

Mike.

"chartering" with guests
 

"beaufortnc" wrote in message
oups.com...
Hi,

I have a charter captain friend who told me once that there is a
loophole around the conventional "6-pack" CG License chartering
regulations.

He said something to the effect that if you have a contract that
specifies that the boat is being rented as a whole to the "guests",
that they are able to pick whoever they'd like to be the captain of
their "rented" vessel, whether that person is licensed or not.

So, in essence, the boat "rental" provides the income, and the
"captain" performs duties for free.

With this method, he was able to charter his boat with more than 6
guests, and without a captain's license.

Does anyone know the real story on this? Was he f.o.s.?

Thanks,

Mike.

I haven't heard of anything like this. I think that if you're boarded and
the CG asks if anyone has paid to be on the boat, you better have the right
license. Of course, you can contest anything in court. Doesn't mean you'll
win, however, and what a huge hassle. If you're being boarded for cause,
they might impound the boat.

A fast way of finding out would be to call the local CG office, speak to a
chief and see what he or she says.

--
"j" ganz @@
www.sailnow.com

"chartering" with guests
 

On 14 Jul 2006 13:35:09 -0700, "beaufortnc"
wrote:

With this method, he was able to charter his boat with more than 6
guests, and without a captain's license.

Does anyone know the real story on this? Was he f.o.s.?

What about your insurance company, what do THEY think? That's where
you are most likely to get in trouble first. Your co called friends
will be calling lawyers very quickly if there is any kind of mishap
onboard. It is unlikely in my opinion, that your insurance company
will provide charter coverage without a licensed captain.

"chartering" with guests
 

"Wayne.B" wrote in message
...
On 14 Jul 2006 13:35:09 -0700, "beaufortnc"
wrote:

With this method, he was able to charter his boat with more than 6
guests, and without a captain's license.

Does anyone know the real story on this? Was he f.o.s.?

What about your insurance company, what do THEY think? That's where
you are most likely to get in trouble first. Your co called friends
will be calling lawyers very quickly if there is any kind of mishap
onboard. It is unlikely in my opinion, that your insurance company
will provide charter coverage without a licensed captain.


That's a good point, and you'd better not trust what any insurance agent
says unless he's ready to put it in writing. I'm not talking about reading
the policy itself, which is obviously important, although they can also be
vague. I'm talking about a plain-English letter from the agent which
addresses specific questions you ask. I just went through this with my
agent, who's a real pro with regard to home, car & life insurance. But, he
was a bit weak when it came to providing coverage for musical equipment used
professionally, and questions about what happens if a club burns down with
my equipment in it. I kept giving him scenarios like that, and he finally
said he wasn't 100% sure about all of them. We ended up doing a conference
call to an underwriter at the actual insurance company.

"chartering" with guests
 

beaufortnc wrote:
Hi,

I have a charter captain friend who told me once that there is a
loophole around the conventional "6-pack" CG License chartering
regulations.

He said something to the effect that if you have a contract that
specifies that the boat is being rented as a whole to the "guests",
that they are able to pick whoever they'd like to be the captain of
their "rented" vessel, whether that person is licensed or not.

So, in essence, the boat "rental" provides the income, and the
"captain" performs duties for free.

With this method, he was able to charter his boat with more than 6
guests, and without a captain's license.

Does anyone know the real story on this? Was he f.o.s.?
Probably, depending on the details. In addition to my comments below,
I seem to remember that a "bare boat charter" must not include the
owner or his representative. This sort of makes the described
"contract" bogus.

About 12 years ago the rules were eased up a little, allowing for
guests to share some expenses, bring lunch, etc. However, anything
that "smells" like making money is not allowed. The question that
must be asked is "Would the captain take these guests out even if they
were not contributing anything?" If the answer is "No," then they are
probably passengers for hire. If the answer is "yes", then they are
friendly guests who happen to be contributing a bit. If the
contribution is less than a share of the fuel cost, it probably isn't
a charter. If the Captain ends up with more money in his pocket then
he started with, it is a charter. However, the CG has a lot of local
discretion on a case by case basis.

The following is taken from:
http://www.uscg.mil/hq/g-m/nvic/7_94/n7-94.htm

The important parts are "contributed as a condition" and
"'Consideration' does not include a voluntary sharing of the actual
expenses of a voyage."

SEC. 506. PASSENGER FOR HIRE.

Section 2101 of title 46, United States Code, is amended by inserting
between paragraphs (21) and (22) a new paragraph (21a) to read as follows:

"(21a) 'passenger for hire' means a passenger for whom consideration
is contributed as a condition of carriage on the vessel, whether
directly or indirectly flowing to the owner, charterer, operator,
agent, or any other person having an interest in the vessel.".

DESCRIPTION - The determination of what constitutes the carriage of a
"passenger for hire" must be made on a case by case basis. This
determination is dependent upon the actual operation of a vessel and
the flow of consideration as determined by the facts of each case. In
general, there needs to be some form of tangible consideration or
promise of performance being passed for a "passenger for hire"
situation to exist.

SEC. 507. CONSIDERATION.

Section 2101 of title 46, United States Code, is amended by inserting
between paragraphs (5) and (6) a new paragraph (5a) to read as follows:

"(5a) 'consideration' means an economic benefit, inducement, right, or
profit including pecuniary payment accruing to an individual, person,
or entity, but not including a voluntary sharing of the actual
expenses of the voyage, by monetary contribution or donation of fuel,
food, beverage, or other supplies.".

DESCRIPTION - Section 507 amends 46 U.S.C. 2101 by adding a definition
of the term "consideration." Although this term was used in the prior
definition of a "passenger," it was not previously defined by statute.
Generally, some tangible amount of worth exchanged for carriage on a
vessel such as payment, exchange of goods or a promise of performance
is required. "Consideration" does not include a voluntary sharing of
the actual expenses of a voyage. Additionally, employees or business
clients that have not contributed for their carriage, and are carried
for morale or entertainment purposes is not included as exchange of
consideration.

"chartering" with guests
 

"Jeff" wrote in message
. ..
beaufortnc wrote:
Hi,

I have a charter captain friend who told me once that there is a
loophole around the conventional "6-pack" CG License chartering
regulations.

He said something to the effect that if you have a contract that
specifies that the boat is being rented as a whole to the "guests",
that they are able to pick whoever they'd like to be the captain of
their "rented" vessel, whether that person is licensed or not.

So, in essence, the boat "rental" provides the income, and the
"captain" performs duties for free.

With this method, he was able to charter his boat with more than 6
guests, and without a captain's license.

Does anyone know the real story on this? Was he f.o.s.?
Probably, depending on the details. In addition to my comments below, I
seem to remember that a "bare boat charter" must not include the owner or
his representative. This sort of makes the described "contract" bogus.

About 12 years ago the rules were eased up a little, allowing for guests
to share some expenses, bring lunch, etc. However, anything that "smells"
like making money is not allowed. The question that must be asked is
"Would the captain take these guests out even if they were not
contributing anything?" If the answer is "No," then they are probably
passengers for hire. If the answer is "yes", then they are friendly
guests who happen to be contributing a bit. If the contribution is less
than a share of the fuel cost, it probably isn't a charter. If the
Captain ends up with more money in his pocket then he started with, it is
a charter. However, the CG has a lot of local discretion on a case by
case basis.

Sir, the beer, sandwiches, cooler and ice were in the boat when we came back
from parking the car & trailer. Someone must've dropped them in the wrong
boat by mistake.

"chartering" with guests
 

JoeSpareBedroom wrote:
"Jeff" wrote in message

Sir, the beer, sandwiches, cooler and ice were in the boat when we came back
from parking the car & trailer. Someone must've dropped them in the wrong
boat by mistake.


"Yes, but 200 kegs seems a bit excessive."

"chartering" with guests
 

"Jeff" wrote in message
. ..
JoeSpareBedroom wrote:
"Jeff" wrote in message Sir, the beer, sandwiches,
cooler and ice were in the boat when we came back from parking the car &
trailer. Someone must've dropped them in the wrong boat by mistake.
"Yes, but 200 kegs seems a bit excessive."

Not to me. :-)

--
"j" ganz @@
www.sailnow.com

"chartering" with guests
 

"
That's a good point, and you'd better not trust what any insurance agent
says unless he's ready to put it in writing. I'm not talking about reading
the policy itself, which is obviously important, although they can also be
vague. I'm talking about a plain-English letter from the agent which
addresses specific questions you ask. I just went through this with my
agent, who's a real pro with regard to home, car & life insurance. But, he
was a bit weak when it came to providing coverage for musical equipment
used professionally, and questions about what happens if a club burns down
with my equipment in it. I kept giving him scenarios like that, and he
finally said he wasn't 100% sure about all of them. We ended up doing a
conference call to an underwriter at the actual insurance company.

A letter signed by the agent is worth little more than the paper it's
written on, since your contract of coverage is not with the agent. An agent
can attest to anything, but if it is outside the coverage specified in the
contract (policy), it may not be enforceable. The insurance company can
always claim that the agent was acting outside the authority of his capacity
as agent. A letter signed by an officer of the insurance company
stipulating or clarifying coverage is another matter. I'd take that with me
to court any day.

"chartering" with guests
 

You will **** off a chief if you call him/her "Sir.". Officer's are call "Sir". Officers
may outrank chiefs, but chiefs are better (and any officer who doesn't understand this
will have a short carreer).

You will **** off a chief if you bull**** him/her. There's NO better bull****ter
than a chief.


"JoeSpareBedroom" wrote in message ...
"Jeff" wrote in message . ..
beaufortnc wrote:
Hi,

I have a charter captain friend who told me once that there is a
loophole around the conventional "6-pack" CG License chartering
regulations.

He said something to the effect that if you have a contract that
specifies that the boat is being rented as a whole to the "guests",
that they are able to pick whoever they'd like to be the captain of
their "rented" vessel, whether that person is licensed or not.

So, in essence, the boat "rental" provides the income, and the
"captain" performs duties for free.

With this method, he was able to charter his boat with more than 6
guests, and without a captain's license.

Does anyone know the real story on this? Was he f.o.s.?
Probably, depending on the details. In addition to my comments below, I seem to remember that a "bare boat charter" must not
include the owner or his representative. This sort of makes the described "contract" bogus.

About 12 years ago the rules were eased up a little, allowing for guests to share some expenses, bring lunch, etc. However,
anything that "smells" like making money is not allowed. The question that must be asked is "Would the captain take these guests
out even if they were not contributing anything?" If the answer is "No," then they are probably passengers for hire. If the
answer is "yes", then they are friendly guests who happen to be contributing a bit. If the contribution is less than a share of
the fuel cost, it probably isn't a charter. If the Captain ends up with more money in his pocket then he started with, it is a
charter. However, the CG has a lot of local discretion on a case by case basis.

Sir, the beer, sandwiches, cooler and ice were in the boat when we came back from parking the car & trailer. Someone must've
dropped them in the wrong boat by mistake.

"chartering" with guests
 

beaufortnc wrote:
Hi,

I have a charter captain friend who told me once that there is a
loophole around the conventional "6-pack" CG License chartering
regulations.

He said something to the effect that if you have a contract that
specifies that the boat is being rented as a whole to the "guests",
that they are able to pick whoever they'd like to be the captain of
their "rented" vessel, whether that person is licensed or not.

So, in essence, the boat "rental" provides the income, and the
"captain" performs duties for free.

With this method, he was able to charter his boat with more than 6
guests, and without a captain's license.

Does anyone know the real story on this? Was he f.o.s.?

Thanks,

Mike.


Why not just do it with the proper paperwork? A lot of the license
schools will coach you through lying about your sea service, and in
exchange for $600-$800 will basically ensure that you pass the exam. If
you really want to haul people for hire, get the license.

"chartering" with guests
 

"RG" wrote in message
. ..

"
That's a good point, and you'd better not trust what any insurance agent
says unless he's ready to put it in writing. I'm not talking about
reading the policy itself, which is obviously important, although they
can also be vague. I'm talking about a plain-English letter from the
agent which addresses specific questions you ask. I just went through
this with my agent, who's a real pro with regard to home, car & life
insurance. But, he was a bit weak when it came to providing coverage for
musical equipment used professionally, and questions about what happens
if a club burns down with my equipment in it. I kept giving him scenarios
like that, and he finally said he wasn't 100% sure about all of them. We
ended up doing a conference call to an underwriter at the actual
insurance company.

A letter signed by the agent is worth little more than the paper it's
written on, since your contract of coverage is not with the agent. An
agent can attest to anything, but if it is outside the coverage specified
in the contract (policy), it may not be enforceable. The insurance
company can always claim that the agent was acting outside the authority
of his capacity as agent. A letter signed by an officer of the insurance
company stipulating or clarifying coverage is another matter. I'd take
that with me to court any day.


Per my lawyer, a letter from the agent is a reminder that he may be
personally liable. Fear is good.

"chartering" with guests
 

"Chuck Tribolet" wrote in message
...

You will **** off a chief if you bull**** him/her. There's NO better
bull****ter
than a chief.

I've seen such bull**** attempted, when the CG cited me for rules they
misinterpreted. It didn't work. They got spanked.

"chartering" with guests
 

Per my lawyer, a letter from the agent is a reminder that he may be
personally liable. Fear is good.

So, you're willing to have this particular area of coverage backed up by the
solvency of your agent? The two of you deserve each other. And I suppose I
might as well throw the lawyer in there too.

"chartering" with guests
 

"Chuck Gould" wrote:
beaufortnc wrote:
Hi,

I have a charter captain friend who told me once that there is a
loophole around the conventional "6-pack" CG License chartering
regulations.

He said something to the effect that if you have a contract that
specifies that the boat is being rented as a whole to the "guests",
that they are able to pick whoever they'd like to be the captain of
their "rented" vessel, whether that person is licensed or not.

So, in essence, the boat "rental" provides the income, and the
"captain" performs duties for free.

With this method, he was able to charter his boat with more than 6
guests, and without a captain's license.

Does anyone know the real story on this? Was he f.o.s.?

I've talked to a man (let's call him M) who charter a boat (from a
charter company) and get a group of people together each of whom pays
M a part of the fee. Say one of those big cats that sleeps 8, and M
gets six couples and divides the charter cost by 6 instead of 8, so
that his part is paid for by the others. Then the people each bring
or buy some of the food and do the cooking and M acts as the captain
and cruise director. He gets his airfare and expenses paid for. But
he doesn't own the boat although I suppose he could have leased the
boat to the charter company.


Why not just do it with the proper paperwork? A lot of the license
schools will coach you through lying about your sea service, and in
exchange for $600-$800 will basically ensure that you pass the exam. If
you really want to haul people for hire, get the license.

The way I read this, the guy wants to take more than 6 people. Or are
you saying the next license above the six-pack license is easy to get?

"chartering" with guests
 

"Chuck Gould" wrote in message
oups.com...

beaufortnc wrote:
Hi,

I have a charter captain friend who told me once that there is a
loophole around the conventional "6-pack" CG License chartering
regulations.

He said something to the effect that if you have a contract that
specifies that the boat is being rented as a whole to the "guests",
that they are able to pick whoever they'd like to be the captain of
their "rented" vessel, whether that person is licensed or not.

So, in essence, the boat "rental" provides the income, and the
"captain" performs duties for free.

With this method, he was able to charter his boat with more than 6
guests, and without a captain's license.

Does anyone know the real story on this? Was he f.o.s.?

Thanks,

Mike.


Why not just do it with the proper paperwork? A lot of the license
schools will coach you through lying about your sea service, and in
exchange for $600-$800 will basically ensure that you pass the exam. If
you really want to haul people for hire, get the license.

I don't know any school that will coach someone to lie to the CG. They'll
explain what you need. It's up to you to get the sea time.

But, that said, I agree... get the license.
--
"j" ganz @@
www.sailnow.com

"chartering" with guests
 

"Shortwave Sportfishing" wrote in message
...
On 14 Jul 2006 13:35:09 -0700, "beaufortnc"
wrote:

Does anyone know the real story on this? Was he f.o.s.?

Partly f.o.s.

It's called demarage or something like that (can't remember the exact
term) but the way it works is you rent the boat sans captain, then
provide a list of captains who are acceptable to you allowing the
charterer to obtain his own captain.

The way it works is you provide the list to the charterer, say three
captains, and oddly, only one is available to do the charter. Assuming
that your boat can handle the capacity, you can have up to twelve
people aboard with a Captain who has an OUPV - that Captain can be you
assuming you have the proper license.

The captain is still required to have a license and has to stay within
the tonnage and/or limitations of the license, but that's the way it
is done.

OUPV = 6 people max. If you can find the reference that says differently,
please post it.

--
"j" ganz @@
www.sailnow.com

"chartering" with guests
 

beaufortnc wrote:
Hi,

I have a charter captain friend who told me once that there is a
loophole around the conventional "6-pack" CG License chartering
regulations.

He said something to the effect that if you have a contract that
specifies that the boat is being rented as a whole to the "guests",
that they are able to pick whoever they'd like to be the captain of
their "rented" vessel, whether that person is licensed or not.

So, in essence, the boat "rental" provides the income, and the
"captain" performs duties for free.

With this method, he was able to charter his boat with more than 6
guests, and without a captain's license.

Does anyone know the real story on this? Was he f.o.s.?

Thanks,

Mike.



Hey...... give it a try ,request a boarding, and see what happens. post
the results here.
Bob

"chartering" with guests
 

What country is "M" chartering in? "Big Cats" doesn't sound like the
US. Do the various Caribbean charter countries have the same strict
licensing requirements as the US?


Rosalie B. wrote:
"Chuck Gould" wrote:
beaufortnc wrote:
Hi,

I have a charter captain friend who told me once that there is a
loophole around the conventional "6-pack" CG License chartering
regulations.

He said something to the effect that if you have a contract that
specifies that the boat is being rented as a whole to the "guests",
that they are able to pick whoever they'd like to be the captain of
their "rented" vessel, whether that person is licensed or not.

So, in essence, the boat "rental" provides the income, and the
"captain" performs duties for free.

With this method, he was able to charter his boat with more than 6
guests, and without a captain's license.

Does anyone know the real story on this? Was he f.o.s.?

I've talked to a man (let's call him M) who charter a boat (from a
charter company) and get a group of people together each of whom pays
M a part of the fee. Say one of those big cats that sleeps 8, and M
gets six couples and divides the charter cost by 6 instead of 8, so
that his part is paid for by the others. Then the people each bring
or buy some of the food and do the cooking and M acts as the captain
and cruise director. He gets his airfare and expenses paid for. But
he doesn't own the boat although I suppose he could have leased the
boat to the charter company.

Why not just do it with the proper paperwork? A lot of the license
schools will coach you through lying about your sea service, and in
exchange for $600-$800 will basically ensure that you pass the exam. If
you really want to haul people for hire, get the license.

The way I read this, the guy wants to take more than 6 people. Or are
you saying the next license above the six-pack license is easy to get?

"chartering" with guests
 

"RG" wrote in message
m...


Per my lawyer, a letter from the agent is a reminder that he may be
personally liable. Fear is good.

So, you're willing to have this particular area of coverage backed up by
the solvency of your agent? The two of you deserve each other. And I
suppose I might as well throw the lawyer in there too.


You're being silly. Stop.

"chartering" with guests
 

Jeff wrote:

What country is "M" chartering in? "Big Cats" doesn't sound like the
US. Do the various Caribbean charter countries have the same strict
licensing requirements as the US?

The USVI. I don't know of many charter fleets in the CONUS.

Rosalie B. wrote:
"Chuck Gould" wrote:
beaufortnc wrote:
Hi,

I have a charter captain friend who told me once that there is a
loophole around the conventional "6-pack" CG License chartering
regulations.

He said something to the effect that if you have a contract that
specifies that the boat is being rented as a whole to the "guests",
that they are able to pick whoever they'd like to be the captain of
their "rented" vessel, whether that person is licensed or not.

So, in essence, the boat "rental" provides the income, and the
"captain" performs duties for free.

With this method, he was able to charter his boat with more than 6
guests, and without a captain's license.

Does anyone know the real story on this? Was he f.o.s.?

I've talked to a man (let's call him M) who charter a boat (from a
charter company) and get a group of people together each of whom pays
M a part of the fee. Say one of those big cats that sleeps 8, and M
gets six couples and divides the charter cost by 6 instead of 8, so
that his part is paid for by the others. Then the people each bring
or buy some of the food and do the cooking and M acts as the captain
and cruise director. He gets his airfare and expenses paid for. But
he doesn't own the boat although I suppose he could have leased the
boat to the charter company.

Why not just do it with the proper paperwork? A lot of the license
schools will coach you through lying about your sea service, and in
exchange for $600-$800 will basically ensure that you pass the exam. If
you really want to haul people for hire, get the license.

The way I read this, the guy wants to take more than 6 people. Or are
you saying the next license above the six-pack license is easy to get?

"chartering" with guests
 

Shortwave Sportfishing wrote:
....

As I said, I don't know the exact name of the term, but that's the way
it works - I know guys who do it occasionally - perfectly legal
because you are being hired to operate a boat- even if it's your own
boat - you are just an employee of the charterer. As the original
poster asked, it is a loophole in the laws/rules/regulations -
whatever.

I don't know about the legalities of this situation (seems OK but
sleazy), but it is quite different from the OP since the captain
actually has a license. The whole point of the original post is that
the *unlicensed* owner can make money as a captain by creating a
"legal fiction" which I believe is completely illegal.

A long long time ago I was part of a charter group where the owner
insisted that his friend be aboard as the "first mate." I've been
told recently that changes the charter from a bare boat to passengers
for hire, and thus he should have had a license. I don't know if this
true but it sounds like it is.


What you cannot do is exceed the 12 person max - that's the key. And
you have to stay within the tonnage and distance limitations of your
license - so, for instance, if you have an OUPV Near Shore out to one
hundred miles and your boat can handle the capacity safely, that's the
limitation. And you have to be hired to operate the boat - even if
it's your own boat.

OUPV is 6 passengers.

"chartering" with guests
 

"Shortwave Sportfishing" wrote in message
...
On Fri, 14 Jul 2006 21:43:11 -0700, "Capt. JG"
wrote:

"Shortwave Sportfishing" wrote in message
. ..
On 14 Jul 2006 13:35:09 -0700, "beaufortnc"
wrote:

Does anyone know the real story on this? Was he f.o.s.?

Partly f.o.s.

It's called demarage or something like that (can't remember the exact
term) but the way it works is you rent the boat sans captain, then
provide a list of captains who are acceptable to you allowing the
charterer to obtain his own captain.

The way it works is you provide the list to the charterer, say three
captains, and oddly, only one is available to do the charter. Assuming
that your boat can handle the capacity, you can have up to twelve
people aboard with a Captain who has an OUPV - that Captain can be you
assuming you have the proper license.

The captain is still required to have a license and has to stay within
the tonnage and/or limitations of the license, but that's the way it
is done.

OUPV = 6 people max. If you can find the reference that says differently,
please post it.

As I said, I don't know the exact name of the term, but that's the way
it works - I know guys who do it occasionally - perfectly legal
because you are being hired to operate a boat- even if it's your own
boat - you are just an employee of the charterer. As the original
poster asked, it is a loophole in the laws/rules/regulations -
whatever.

Well, I can't find any mention of any legal way for a person to have paying
guests.

What you cannot do is exceed the 12 person max - that's the key. And
you have to stay within the tonnage and distance limitations of your
license - so, for instance, if you have an OUPV Near Shore out to one
hundred miles and your boat can handle the capacity safely, that's the
limitation. And you have to be hired to operate the boat - even if
it's your own boat.

No, that's not good enough. If you have an OUPV, you cannot exceed six
paying passengers.

Like I said, find the statute and I'll back down.

I'm not going to argue about it because I honestly don't care if you
believe it or not and I don't have the time to look it up. If you
really honestly doubt it and want to prove me wrong, then by all
means, call your local USCG MSO or one of those "captains" schools
and ask them about it - I suspect the "captains" school might be a
better source because that's how they sell their "stuff". :)

I don't need to argue with you nor prove you wrong. I know the regs. I don't
need to call the USCG, because I can read the regs online (hint, hint).

Now, all that said, lots of sailing organizations organize sails wherein a
skipper volunteers to be skipper and the school places people on the boat.
No money changes hands between the skipper and the crew.

And, I wish to make it perfectly clear, that I don't agree with it and
I think it's something that should be closed. I would not advise
doing it in any case and I don't recommend it.

Good for you! :-)

As with anything on the Internet, unless you can independently verify
it, in writing from a unimpeachable source, view it as suspicious
and/or highly unlikely.

Which is exactly what I'm doing. It can't be verified.

If I'm wrong, I'll admit it right here in front of God and the whole
virtual universe - I've been wrong before and probably, well, more
than likely, be wrong again.

Feel free... :-)

--
"j" ganz @@
www.sailnow.com

"chartering" with guests
 

"Bob" wrote in message
ups.com...

beaufortnc wrote:
Hi,

I have a charter captain friend who told me once that there is a
loophole around the conventional "6-pack" CG License chartering
regulations.

He said something to the effect that if you have a contract that
specifies that the boat is being rented as a whole to the "guests",
that they are able to pick whoever they'd like to be the captain of
their "rented" vessel, whether that person is licensed or not.

So, in essence, the boat "rental" provides the income, and the
"captain" performs duties for free.

With this method, he was able to charter his boat with more than 6
guests, and without a captain's license.

Does anyone know the real story on this? Was he f.o.s.?

Thanks,

Mike.



Hey...... give it a try ,request a boarding, and see what happens. post
the results here.
Bob

Whew... :-) That's harsh. :-)

--
"j" ganz @@
www.sailnow.com

"chartering" with guests
 

"Shortwave Sportfishing" wrote in message
...
On Sat, 15 Jul 2006 10:30:03 -0700, "Capt. JG"
wrote:

If I'm wrong, I'll admit it right here in front of God and the whole
virtual universe - I've been wrong before and probably, well, more
than likely, be wrong again.

Feel free... :-)

Ah - well seeing hows I had a ton of time sitting here at the airport
because my flight was cancelled and I'm waiting for another to arrive,
I took the time to look around - and I found it.

It's called a Demise Charter - basically the lease of a vessel in
which all control is relinquished by the owner to the charterer, and
the charterer bears all the expenses of operation.

It's kind of like a bareboat charter only slightly different.

That's where the OUPV thing used (note the used) to come in -
apparently in Section 2101.1.42 the term uninspected used to allow for
up to 12 passengers and there wasn't a distinction between between
vessels of 100 gross tons or greater and 100 gross tons and under.

However, that all changed in 1993 with something called the Passenger
Vessel Safety Act (Public Law public law 103-206) which eliminated the
loophole where vessels operating under legitimate bareboat or demise
charters were not required to meet the commercial passenger vessel
standards. Thus, even if you had an OUPV, under the old Demise Charter
regs, you could take up to 12 passengers. There were some other
technical legal specifics involved and I don't have time to search for
them. It's mute anyway because it can't be done anymore.

So there you have it. I was right in that you could do it at one time
but since 1993 you can't anymore because that loophole was closed.
Which is interesting because I know some charter captains who are
still operating under the impression that it's all legal and what not.
It also would appear that I need to peruse the CFR's - I've had my
license a long time and haven't really kept up with the regs - need to
put that on my to-do list for the winter.

Let's call it a draw. :)

And now, I'm about to get my butt in line, head off to NC and sea
trial my new boat.

WHOO HOO!!

By the way Capt JG - pleasure meeting you - all the best.

Well, I'm glad we were both right. :-) I've been sailing for many years, but
only relatively recently got my OUPV, with near coastal.

Definitely a good idea staying current. No one wants to argue with the CG
and be wrong. :-)

What's your new boat? In any case, have a safe flight. Be sure to take your
shoes off when you get in line.

--
"j" ganz @@
www.sailnow.com

"chartering" with guests
 

On Sat, 15 Jul 2006 18:19:14 GMT, Shortwave Sportfishing
wrote:

And now, I'm about to get my butt in line, head off to NC and sea
trial my new boat.

=================

Pictures ?

"chartering" with guests
 

On 14 Jul 2006 13:35:09 -0700, "beaufortnc"
wrote:

Hi,

I have a charter captain friend who told me once that there is a
loophole around the conventional "6-pack" CG License chartering
regulations.

He said something to the effect that if you have a contract that
specifies that the boat is being rented as a whole to the "guests",
that they are able to pick whoever they'd like to be the captain of
their "rented" vessel, whether that person is licensed or not.

So, in essence, the boat "rental" provides the income, and the
"captain" performs duties for free.

With this method, he was able to charter his boat with more than 6
guests, and without a captain's license.

Does anyone know the real story on this? Was he f.o.s.?

Thanks,

Mike.


Close, the boat can be rented "bareboat" and then they hire the
captain of their choice. The captain would have to be licensed.
It's also used to get around the foreign built rule.

There is a term for this kind of charter, but for the life of me I
can't recall what it is.

"chartering" with guests
 

On Sat, 15 Jul 2006 11:09:18 -0400, Jeff wrote:

Shortwave Sportfishing wrote:
...

As I said, I don't know the exact name of the term, but that's the way
it works - I know guys who do it occasionally - perfectly legal
because you are being hired to operate a boat- even if it's your own
boat - you are just an employee of the charterer. As the original
poster asked, it is a loophole in the laws/rules/regulations -
whatever.

I don't know about the legalities of this situation (seems OK but
sleazy), but it is quite different from the OP since the captain
actually has a license. The whole point of the original post is that
the *unlicensed* owner can make money as a captain by creating a
"legal fiction" which I believe is completely illegal.

A long long time ago I was part of a charter group where the owner
insisted that his friend be aboard as the "first mate." I've been
told recently that changes the charter from a bare boat to passengers
for hire, and thus he should have had a license. I don't know if this
true but it sounds like it is.


What you cannot do is exceed the 12 person max - that's the key. And
you have to stay within the tonnage and distance limitations of your
license - so, for instance, if you have an OUPV Near Shore out to one
hundred miles and your boat can handle the capacity safely, that's the
limitation. And you have to be hired to operate the boat - even if
it's your own boat.

OUPV is 6 passengers.


What you seem to be missing here, is the fact that the legal loop hole
in this deal is, as I recall, that due to the fact that the boat is
first chartered bareboat then that charterer hires a captain to only
run the boat, there are no paying passengers. There for you can put
on board as many people as the boat can handle based on it's size.


It's just like if you hired a captain to run your own private boat for
a day. There are no paying guests, so there for the "captain" would
not have to have a license according to the USCG. And yes, I have
asked them about this. But in most cases your insurance would require
it.

I've been doing this for decades. And I even know of a large, 90" +,
foregn charter boat in this area that got stopped by the CG on just
this issuse. He had all is ducks in a row as far as the contract paper
trail goes, and nothing came of it.

"chartering" with guests
 

Capt. Bill wrote:

What you seem to be missing here, is the fact that the legal loop hole
in this deal is, as I recall, that due to the fact that the boat is
first chartered bareboat then that charterer hires a captain to only
run the boat, there are no paying passengers. There for you can put
on board as many people as the boat can handle based on it's size.

Oh, I understand exactly what you're claiming. You're say that you
can put a piece of paper in your pocket that says: "I'm the owner and
I'm not licensed but that's OK because I've only been hired to drive
the boat" and then you become exempt from all of the rules concerning
passengers for hire.

If you think this really works, then you should print it up and sell
in on EBAY as a "Master's License Substitute - Approved by the CG"



It's just like if you hired a captain to run your own private boat for
a day. There are no paying guests, so there for the "captain" would
not have to have a license according to the USCG. And yes, I have
asked them about this. But in most cases your insurance would require
it.

No, its really not the same if guests are not paying anything. In
fact, that is exactly the distinction. Your situation may work if
bare boat customers hire a deck hand to help, but it certainly doesn't
work if they hire the owner or his representative.


I've been doing this for decades. And I even know of a large, 90" +,
foregn charter boat in this area that got stopped by the CG on just
this issuse. He had all is ducks in a row as far as the contract paper
trail goes, and nothing came of it.

Hmmm. Do you think that foreign flagged vessels might be covered
under different rules? Or for that matter, owners of 90' boats get to
operate under different rules.

"chartering" with guests
 

On Sun, 16 Jul 2006 09:02:21 -0400, Jeff wrote:

Capt. Bill wrote:

What you seem to be missing here, is the fact that the legal loop hole
in this deal is, as I recall, that due to the fact that the boat is
first chartered bareboat then that charterer hires a captain to only
run the boat, there are no paying passengers. There for you can put
on board as many people as the boat can handle based on it's size.

Oh, I understand exactly what you're claiming. You're say that you
can put a piece of paper in your pocket that says: "I'm the owner and
I'm not licensed but that's OK because I've only been hired to drive
the boat" and then you become exempt from all of the rules concerning
passengers for hire.

If you think this really works, then you should print it up and sell
in on EBAY as a "Master's License Substitute - Approved by the CG"

Note I said "hires a captain".




It's just like if you hired a captain to run your own private boat for
a day. There are no paying guests, so there for the "captain" would
not have to have a license according to the USCG. And yes, I have
asked them about this. But in most cases your insurance would require
it.

No, its really not the same if guests are not paying anything. In
fact, that is exactly the distinction. Your situation may work if
bare boat customers hire a deck hand to help, but it certainly doesn't
work if they hire the owner or his representative.

No, you're right. They could not use the owner. But I believe that has
more to due with insurance than the CG.




I've been doing this for decades. And I even know of a large, 90" +,
foregn charter boat in this area that got stopped by the CG on just
this issuse. He had all is ducks in a row as far as the contract paper
trail goes, and nothing came of it.

Hmmm. Do you think that foreign flagged vessels might be covered
under different rules? Or for that matter, owners of 90' boats get to
operate under different rules.


Hmmm. Can you learn to read for content?

The boat wasn't "foreign flagged" at the time. As I said, it was
foreign built.

And owners of a 90' boat don't get to operate under a different set of
rules, believe me.

"chartering" with guests
 

"Capt. Bill" wrote in message
...
On Sun, 16 Jul 2006 09:02:21 -0400, Jeff wrote:

Capt. Bill wrote:

What you seem to be missing here, is the fact that the legal loop hole
in this deal is, as I recall, that due to the fact that the boat is
first chartered bareboat then that charterer hires a captain to only
run the boat, there are no paying passengers. There for you can put
on board as many people as the boat can handle based on it's size.

Oh, I understand exactly what you're claiming. You're say that you
can put a piece of paper in your pocket that says: "I'm the owner and
I'm not licensed but that's OK because I've only been hired to drive
the boat" and then you become exempt from all of the rules concerning
passengers for hire.

If you think this really works, then you should print it up and sell
in on EBAY as a "Master's License Substitute - Approved by the CG"

Note I said "hires a captain".




It's just like if you hired a captain to run your own private boat for
a day. There are no paying guests, so there for the "captain" would
not have to have a license according to the USCG. And yes, I have
asked them about this. But in most cases your insurance would require
it.

No, its really not the same if guests are not paying anything. In
fact, that is exactly the distinction. Your situation may work if
bare boat customers hire a deck hand to help, but it certainly doesn't
work if they hire the owner or his representative.

No, you're right. They could not use the owner. But I believe that has
more to due with insurance than the CG.




I've been doing this for decades. And I even know of a large, 90" +,
foregn charter boat in this area that got stopped by the CG on just
this issuse. He had all is ducks in a row as far as the contract paper
trail goes, and nothing came of it.

Hmmm. Do you think that foreign flagged vessels might be covered
under different rules? Or for that matter, owners of 90' boats get to
operate under different rules.


Hmmm. Can you learn to read for content?

The boat wasn't "foreign flagged" at the time. As I said, it was
foreign built.

And owners of a 90' boat don't get to operate under a different set of
rules, believe me.

Foreign flagged, charging people to ride in US waters? Umm... Jones Act
applies. I believe the fine is $200 per paying passenger. Now, there is a
way around *that*.

--
"j" ganz @@
www.sailnow.com

"chartering" with guests
 

"Capt. JG" wrote:

"Capt. Bill" wrote in message
.. .
On Sun, 16 Jul 2006 09:02:21 -0400, Jeff wrote:

Capt. Bill wrote:

What you seem to be missing here, is the fact that the legal loop hole
in this deal is, as I recall, that due to the fact that the boat is
first chartered bareboat then that charterer hires a captain to only
run the boat, there are no paying passengers. There for you can put
on board as many people as the boat can handle based on it's size.

Oh, I understand exactly what you're claiming. You're say that you
can put a piece of paper in your pocket that says: "I'm the owner and
I'm not licensed but that's OK because I've only been hired to drive
the boat" and then you become exempt from all of the rules concerning
passengers for hire.

If you think this really works, then you should print it up and sell
in on EBAY as a "Master's License Substitute - Approved by the CG"

Note I said "hires a captain".




It's just like if you hired a captain to run your own private boat for
a day. There are no paying guests, so there for the "captain" would
not have to have a license according to the USCG. And yes, I have
asked them about this. But in most cases your insurance would require
it.

No, its really not the same if guests are not paying anything. In
fact, that is exactly the distinction. Your situation may work if
bare boat customers hire a deck hand to help, but it certainly doesn't
work if they hire the owner or his representative.

No, you're right. They could not use the owner. But I believe that has
more to due with insurance than the CG.




I've been doing this for decades. And I even know of a large, 90" +,
foregn charter boat in this area that got stopped by the CG on just
this issuse. He had all is ducks in a row as far as the contract paper
trail goes, and nothing came of it.

Hmmm. Do you think that foreign flagged vessels might be covered
under different rules? Or for that matter, owners of 90' boats get to
operate under different rules.

Hmmm. Can you learn to read for content?

The boat wasn't "foreign flagged" at the time. As I said, it was
foreign built.

And owners of a 90' boat don't get to operate under a different set of
rules, believe me.

Foreign flagged, charging people to ride in US waters? Umm... Jones Act
applies. I believe the fine is $200 per paying passenger. Now, there is a
way around *that*.

Technically (just picking nits) it isn't the Jones Act which applies
mostly to cargo, but the Passengers Services Act. And foreign flagged
vessels such as the big cruise ships take passengers in US waters all
the time. What they can't do is have the pax get off the boat IN the
US before it goes to a distant foreign port like Aruba or Curacao.
All the ports in the Bahamas, Bermuda, Canada, Mexico and most of the
Caribbean are considered near foreign ports BTW - has to be a distant
foreign port or it doesn't count.

So the RCCL ship Grandeur of the Seas has an itinerary which goes from
Baltimore to Miami, Key West, Cozumel, Costa Maya and Port
Canaveral before returning to Baltimore and that's perfectly legal
because they start and end in the same port. And I was on the NCL
Crown which went Philadelphia, Bahamas, San Juan, St. Thomas, St
Maarten, Curacao and Aruba, and ending in Miami and that's legal too
because they went to Curacao and Aruba which are distant foreign
ports.

Yes it is a $200 per pax fine, but the cruise ship pays it.

"chartering" with guests
 

"Rosalie B." wrote in message
...
"Capt. JG" wrote:

"Capt. Bill" wrote in message
. ..
On Sun, 16 Jul 2006 09:02:21 -0400, Jeff wrote:

Capt. Bill wrote:

What you seem to be missing here, is the fact that the legal loop hole
in this deal is, as I recall, that due to the fact that the boat is
first chartered bareboat then that charterer hires a captain to only
run the boat, there are no paying passengers. There for you can put
on board as many people as the boat can handle based on it's size.

Oh, I understand exactly what you're claiming. You're say that you
can put a piece of paper in your pocket that says: "I'm the owner and
I'm not licensed but that's OK because I've only been hired to drive
the boat" and then you become exempt from all of the rules concerning
passengers for hire.

If you think this really works, then you should print it up and sell
in on EBAY as a "Master's License Substitute - Approved by the CG"

Note I said "hires a captain".




It's just like if you hired a captain to run your own private boat for
a day. There are no paying guests, so there for the "captain" would
not have to have a license according to the USCG. And yes, I have
asked them about this. But in most cases your insurance would require
it.

No, its really not the same if guests are not paying anything. In
fact, that is exactly the distinction. Your situation may work if
bare boat customers hire a deck hand to help, but it certainly doesn't
work if they hire the owner or his representative.

No, you're right. They could not use the owner. But I believe that has
more to due with insurance than the CG.




I've been doing this for decades. And I even know of a large, 90" +,
foregn charter boat in this area that got stopped by the CG on just
this issuse. He had all is ducks in a row as far as the contract paper
trail goes, and nothing came of it.

Hmmm. Do you think that foreign flagged vessels might be covered
under different rules? Or for that matter, owners of 90' boats get to
operate under different rules.

Hmmm. Can you learn to read for content?

The boat wasn't "foreign flagged" at the time. As I said, it was
foreign built.

And owners of a 90' boat don't get to operate under a different set of
rules, believe me.

Foreign flagged, charging people to ride in US waters? Umm... Jones Act
applies. I believe the fine is $200 per paying passenger. Now, there is a
way around *that*.

Technically (just picking nits) it isn't the Jones Act which applies
mostly to cargo, but the Passengers Services Act. And foreign flagged
vessels such as the big cruise ships take passengers in US waters all
the time. What they can't do is have the pax get off the boat IN the
US before it goes to a distant foreign port like Aruba or Curacao.
All the ports in the Bahamas, Bermuda, Canada, Mexico and most of the
Caribbean are considered near foreign ports BTW - has to be a distant
foreign port or it doesn't count.

So the RCCL ship Grandeur of the Seas has an itinerary which goes from
Baltimore to Miami, Key West, Cozumel, Costa Maya and Port
Canaveral before returning to Baltimore and that's perfectly legal
because they start and end in the same port. And I was on the NCL
Crown which went Philadelphia, Bahamas, San Juan, St. Thomas, St
Maarten, Curacao and Aruba, and ending in Miami and that's legal too
because they went to Curacao and Aruba which are distant foreign
ports.

Yes it is a $200 per pax fine, but the cruise ship pays it.

You're right... Interesting additional info.. thanks!

--
"j" ganz @@
www.sailnow.com

"chartering" with guests
 

On Sun, 16 Jul 2006 10:40:31 -0700, "Capt. JG"
wrote:

"Capt. Bill" wrote in message
.. .
On Sun, 16 Jul 2006 09:02:21 -0400, Jeff wrote:

Capt. Bill wrote:

What you seem to be missing here, is the fact that the legal loop hole
in this deal is, as I recall, that due to the fact that the boat is
first chartered bareboat then that charterer hires a captain to only
run the boat, there are no paying passengers. There for you can put
on board as many people as the boat can handle based on it's size.

Oh, I understand exactly what you're claiming. You're say that you
can put a piece of paper in your pocket that says: "I'm the owner and
I'm not licensed but that's OK because I've only been hired to drive
the boat" and then you become exempt from all of the rules concerning
passengers for hire.

If you think this really works, then you should print it up and sell
in on EBAY as a "Master's License Substitute - Approved by the CG"

Note I said "hires a captain".




It's just like if you hired a captain to run your own private boat for
a day. There are no paying guests, so there for the "captain" would
not have to have a license according to the USCG. And yes, I have
asked them about this. But in most cases your insurance would require
it.

No, its really not the same if guests are not paying anything. In
fact, that is exactly the distinction. Your situation may work if
bare boat customers hire a deck hand to help, but it certainly doesn't
work if they hire the owner or his representative.

No, you're right. They could not use the owner. But I believe that has
more to due with insurance than the CG.




I've been doing this for decades. And I even know of a large, 90" +,
foregn charter boat in this area that got stopped by the CG on just
this issuse. He had all is ducks in a row as far as the contract paper
trail goes, and nothing came of it.

Hmmm. Do you think that foreign flagged vessels might be covered
under different rules? Or for that matter, owners of 90' boats get to
operate under different rules.


Hmmm. Can you learn to read for content?

The boat wasn't "foreign flagged" at the time. As I said, it was
foreign built.

And owners of a 90' boat don't get to operate under a different set of
rules, believe me.

Foreign flagged, charging people to ride in US waters? Umm... Jones Act
applies. I believe the fine is $200 per paying passenger. Now, there is a
way around *that*.


One more time, I said foreign BUILT not foreign flagged.

And foreign flagged vessels charge to take people out all the time.
Just take a look at the criusie ship industry.

"chartering" with guests
 

Capt. Bill wrote:
On Sun, 16 Jul 2006 09:02:21 -0400, Jeff wrote:

Capt. Bill wrote:

What you seem to be missing here, is the fact that the legal loop hole
in this deal is, as I recall, that due to the fact that the boat is
first chartered bareboat then that charterer hires a captain to only
run the boat, there are no paying passengers. There for you can put
on board as many people as the boat can handle based on it's size.
Oh, I understand exactly what you're claiming. You're say that you
can put a piece of paper in your pocket that says: "I'm the owner and
I'm not licensed but that's OK because I've only been hired to drive
the boat" and then you become exempt from all of the rules concerning
passengers for hire.

If you think this really works, then you should print it up and sell
in on EBAY as a "Master's License Substitute - Approved by the CG"

Note I said "hires a captain".

The discussion was specifically about the owner of the boat being
hired as the captain.




It's just like if you hired a captain to run your own private boat for
a day. There are no paying guests, so there for the "captain" would
not have to have a license according to the USCG. And yes, I have
asked them about this. But in most cases your insurance would require
it.
No, its really not the same if guests are not paying anything. In
fact, that is exactly the distinction. Your situation may work if
bare boat customers hire a deck hand to help, but it certainly doesn't
work if they hire the owner or his representative.

No, you're right. They could not use the owner. But I believe that has
more to due with insurance than the CG.

So you're claiming that all those regulations about licenses and
passengers for hire really don't count?

The US Code (otherwise known as "The Law") is rather specific:
Title 46 section 2101:
(42) ``uninspected passenger vessel'' means an uninspected
vessel--
...
(B) of less than 100 gross tons as measured under section
14502 of this title, or an alternate tonnage measured under
section 14302 of this title as prescribed by the Secretary under
section 14104 of this title--
(i) carrying not more than 6 passengers, including at
least one passenger for hire; or
(ii) that is chartered with the crew provided or
specified by the owner or the owner's representative and
carrying not more than 6 passengers.

and then Sec. 8903:
A self-propelled, uninspected passenger vessel shall be operated
by an individual licensed by the Secretary to operate that type of
vessel, under prescribed regulations.

Seems pretty clear: if the owner or his rep is on board, then there
must be a license.

You may be right that this is really an insurance issue, since
violating the law probably voids your insurance.



I've been doing this for decades. And I even know of a large, 90" +,
foregn charter boat in this area that got stopped by the CG on just
this issuse. He had all is ducks in a row as far as the contract paper
trail goes, and nothing came of it.
Hmmm. Do you think that foreign flagged vessels might be covered
under different rules? Or for that matter, owners of 90' boats get to
operate under different rules.


Hmmm. Can you learn to read for content?

So far everything you've written has been content-free.


The boat wasn't "foreign flagged" at the time. As I said, it was
foreign built.

If the vessel was US flagged then the only significance of being
foreign built is that it would not be eligible to carry passengers for
hire at all. In this case, it would be very important for the owners
to make sure nobody was actually paying, or if they were, it was
strictly "bare boat." If it did have the Jones Act exemption
(intended for "small vessels," but your 90 footer might qualify), then
your "foreign" comment was totally gratuitous.


And owners of a 90' boat don't get to operate under a different set of
rules, believe me.

Whatever you say. Everyone, rich and poor, gets treated exactly the
same in our world.

"chartering" with guests
 

Jeff wrote:
Capt. Bill wrote:
And owners of a 90' boat don't get to operate under a different set of
rules, believe me.

Whatever you say. Everyone, rich and poor, gets treated exactly the
same in our world.




Hi
I would also like to add while surfing (net) around one evening I found
a uscg.mil site that listed case "decisions" on foreign built vessels
that wanted some sort of uscg variance to give sailing lessons" in the
US Near Coast waters.

Once everyone on a boat is "actively engaged" in learning they are no
longer "passengers for hire" they become "students" and sailing lessons
can be conducted on foreign built boats. Uhh, can you read between the
lines on that one?????

Another interesting thing, outside the boundary line a sailing school
must have a licensed master. However, on inland waters....get
this........ there are a few states that all you need is the state's
"Guides & Packers" license. No uscg master or oupv needed on inland
waters for sailing lessons. Just think YMCA summer sailing lessons...
as an example

Sole Proprietor, Schedule C
Bob

"chartering" with guests
 

Jeff wrote:
Capt. Bill wrote:
And owners of a 90' boat don't get to operate under a different set of
rules, believe me.

Whatever you say. Everyone, rich and poor, gets treated exactly the
same in our world.




Hi
I would also like to add while surfing (net) around one evening I found
a uscg.mil site that listed case "decisions" on foreign built vessels
that wanted some sort of uscg variance to give sailing lessons" in the
US Near Coast waters.

Once everyone on a boat is "actively engaged" in learning they are no
longer "passengers for hire" they become "students" and sailing lessons
can be conducted on foreign built boats. Uhh, can you read between the
lines on that one?????

Another interesting thing, outside the boundary line a sailing school
must have a licensed master. However, on inland waters....get
this........ there are a few states that all you need is the state's
"Guides & Packers" license. No uscg master or oupv needed on inland
waters for sailing lessons. Just think YMCA summer sailing lessons...
as an example

Sole Proprietor, Schedule C
Bob

"chartering" with guests
 

Rosalie B. wrote:


The way I read this, the guy wants to take more than 6 people. Or are
you saying the next license above the six-pack license is easy to get?

The 100-ton license is virtually the same test as the OUPV. However, to
carry more than six passengers for hire with that 100-ton master's, I
believe you have to operate an inspected vessel.

"chartering" with guests
 

Bob wrote:
....
Another interesting thing, outside the boundary line a sailing school
must have a licensed master. However, on inland waters....get
this........ there are a few states that all you need is the state's
"Guides & Packers" license. No uscg master or oupv needed on inland
waters for sailing lessons. Just think YMCA summer sailing lessons...
as an example

I'm guessing these "inland waters" are actually State regulated bodies
of water that are not covers by the US Inland rules. This would
include most of the lakes in New England, for example, where the camps
are.

These state rules are often quite different, and will include things
like "human powered vessels have right of way over sailboats," which
are totally ignored by the ColRegs or Inland Rules.

"chartering" with guests
 

Chuck Gould wrote:
Rosalie B. wrote:

The way I read this, the guy wants to take more than 6 people. Or are
you saying the next license above the six-pack license is easy to get?

The 100-ton license is virtually the same test as the OUPV. However, to
carry more than six passengers for hire with that 100-ton master's, I
believe you have to operate an inspected vessel.

There is a category of Uninspected Passenger Vessel over 100 tons and
suitable for up to 12 passengers. I don't know what license is
required to operate such a vessel, but I don't think its the basic
OUPV. The section "A" that I snipped from the USCode in a previous
post referred to those boats.