Tag Archives: insurance

Accidents involving shadow fleet cast dark light

This account of the aftermath of the Pablo explosion on May 1 is chilling. Three crew were killed. But now no one is standing up to take charge of disposal of the wreck, much less the other damages it caused. Malaysia is the nation where the ship blew up.

No hull insurers have stepped forward. The ship was flagged in Gabon, not known for strict enforcement of owner obligations. And the ship is operated as a single-ship shell company, based in Marshall Islands. It appears not to have insurance.

It’s clear the vessel was engaged in transporting sanctioned oil. The cleanup will likely never be paid for.

The ship is not yet a ‘wreck’ in the sense of the Nairobi Wreck Removal Convention, which would allow a state (Malaysia) to remove it if it posed a danger to safety of lives, goods, sea traffic, or the environment. The hull might have some salvage value, so a hull insurance firm might be interested. So we have to wait to see what happens.

International rules are set up so that accidents like this will be taken care of, even though extensive and complex litigation may be required. But the countries engaging in sanctioned trade are placing others at risk and expense when something goes wrong.

It’s certainly a negative for Russia, Iran, Venezuela, and other nations who are using these shadow ships to move their oil. Those countries ought to step up and guarantee the costs through their insurers when these maritime accidents happen.

 Sam Chambers June 21, 2023

Exclusive satellite images of wrecked Pablo tanker cast dark light over shadow fleet

Marcus Hand | Jun 23, 2023

Panama expels 6.5 million gt of ships linked to Iran, North Korea or sanctions

NTSB finds Golden Ray capsized due to inaccurate stability calculations

One of the dangers in ocean shipping is calculating the stability of the vessel. As you can see, itis critical. One mistake, unchecked, led to over $200M damage. Plus a sunken ship!

Kim Biggar September 15, 2021

NTSB finds Golden Ray capsized due to inaccurate stability calculations – Splash247

FMC looks at accusations carriers are refusing chemical shipments

Here is an excellent example of customer segmentation.

In the last year or so there have been several ship explosions and fires causing ships to be laid up and cargo to be delayed or lost. Chemicals are probably the most important reason for ship fires which start in the cargo. What better way to reduce the risk than refusing the cargo.

There are two additional things you should know to understand this situation properly.

First, you might think insurance covers such accidents. It does not entirely, and it leads to endeless haggling and lawsuits. And accidents on ships can be declared ‘general average’ by the shipowner. That means that every cargo shipper must pay their share of the accident cost. The General Average clause goes back to the days of sailing ship voyages, which often were funded by an investor, or a group of investors. Often the captain had a share of the investment. The captain was in full charge of the business side during the voyage, choosing cargo and managing the voyage, hopefully safely. If the voyage succeeded, profits were lagrge for the investors. many New England fortunes were made that way. If the ship had a problem, general average meant all the cargo owners had to pay the costs. that meant the investors were on the hook, since they usually had shares in the cargo. Insurance coverage for cargo was limited.

On today’s container ships, the situation is quite different. The cargo is owned by the shippers, not investors. Ships are separate companies, so if a ship is lost the actual owners are shielded from the loss by simply declaring the ship bankrupt. And most cargo is covered by insurance, usually individual insurance policies. ships themselves have some liability insurance. When general average is declared, all the container cargo owners have to pay their share of the losses. You can see how huge fights can develop over who pays how much. Also, if some containers are not damaged, the cargo owners cannot pick up their cargo until they have paid the general average share of the loss. So accidents at sea are a general nightmare for all concerned.

Second, cargo in containers is fairly often mislabeled. The bill of lading does not contain correct information aboutwhat is in the container, eg. chemicals or lithium batteries. That’s done to get a lower rate, and/or to avoid customs duties. Or it’s just a mistake. So dangerous chemicals can be in containers unknown to the ship. When the cargo shifts or some container is damaged, a fire starts, and the ship has a real problem. It may not be able to continue the trip, or it may succeed in putting outthe fire, but some of the cargo is damaged, whether by burning or by smoke or fumes, or the fire retardant. Losses!

So you can see why when a ship is already easy to fill with benign cargo, a carrier might not want to accept chemicals. But as a common carrier (in the US) a ship must accept any cargo offered. Plenty of demand lets carriers cherry pick what they want to carry.

Sam Chambers September 6, 2021

FMC looks at accusations carriers are refusing chemical shipments – Splash247