Damage to yacht rigging whilst undergoing topside painting

Well, what can be said.  Look out for the pirates in Venezuela but no-one warned us about the crooks on Curacao!

Our yacht was stored in Curacao Marine for safety and security while we were in Australia for 7 months in 2011. Curacao Marine were notified by us in August 2011 that we had decided to engage them to apply Awlgrip paint to the hull as per their proposal, with work to commence on the 5^th of January 2012, the date we were to arrive back in Curacao.

However, when the regular monthly invoice was presented by Curacao Marine for November  it included mast removal. We immediately contacted Curacao Marine to ascertain why the mast had been removed from our yacht and were informed that there was space in the paint shed so painting had begun. Further queries confirmed that the yacht was ready for the topcoat.

This outraged us as we wanted to be present whilst the work was being carried out. But being a respectable boatyard, so we thought, we reconciled ourselves that all was in hand and it would be good to arrive and have the painting complete.

We arrived at Curacao on the 5^th January, and visited the yacht on the 6^th.  While I held discussions over the following weeks with Curacao Marine regarding the quality of the paint work (future blog to follow) I noticed that our mast, which had not been re-stepped, had been significantly damaged.

See details below of main damage.

When Curacao Marine was asked about this they denied all knowledge and suggested I talk to the Curacao Marine contract rigger who did it. He also denied knowledge of the damage.  Although he had already replaced half of the furler drum which had shattered during de-stepping of the mast.

Curacao Marine was again questioned and told by myself that Curacao Marine was responsible for the yacht, mast, and rigging, particularly as they had taken it on themselves to commence the paint work prior to the 5^th January, without us being present. Curacao Marine still denied any knowledge and said they could not be held accountable and that we were to involve our insurance company (see Curacao Marine terms of storage).

Further discussions with Curacao Marine led to them becoming aggressive and threatening,  it was clear no resolution was to be had regarding payment or compensation for the damage caused to our yacht whilst the paint work was being undertaken.  It was at this point I knew I was dealing with a company that had no integrity.

During our discussions with Curacao Marine our boat was either on the hard or on a slip, without the mast. We spent almost 3 months trying to get them to repair the damage and restep the mast.  The repairs they carried out were rudimentary and unsuccessful and we were of course obliged to pay the boatyard fees for the time in the yard.

Main damage to yacht while in the care of Curacao Marine.

Furlex forestay bent (photos 1&2)

The Furlex forestay was bent. The profile is made of aluminium and cannot be bent back into position without losing strength as confirmed by European riggers. Curacao Marine attempted to repair the furler profile by ‘bending’ it back to the correct alignment. This was not successful as the profile remains damaged.

Photo 1

Photo 2

Furlex drum bent (broken half already replaced by Curacao Marine rigger) (photo 3)

One half of the forestay Furlex furling drum does not align with the replaced half (previously replaced by Curacao Marine rigger, after it broke into two pieces during de-stepping the mast) Curacao Marine attempted to realign the bent drum which did not work as the locating lugs insufficiently hold the alignment and the drum has become misaligned again. The drum is now inoperable with the protective cowling in place.

Photo 3

Electronic cable terminals exposed and not protected (photo 4)

Electronic cables and terminals at the base of the mast were exposed and not protected at the base of the mast. Cable sheaths were ripped commensurate with being ‘pulled’as they were not disconnected. Curacao Marine installed cabling heat shrink over the split and torn outer sheaves and positively tested the wiring. A reduction in the cable core diameters cannot be detected with such tests, and may result in failure of the cables at a later date. The rectification work by Curacao Marine is unsafe and unacceptable for important navigation equipment.

Photo 4

Rigging lying on ground in dirt (photo 5&6)

The stored mast and rigging was found to be lying in Curacao Marine yard in dirt. I would not consider this to be best practice and shows the level of care and attention to equipment by Curacao Marine.

Photo 5

Photo 6

In summary, no compensation or payment has been made by Curacao Marine for the damaged rigging. With the various other scratches on the rubrail, the wind transducer and the mast itself, my conclusion about the damage is that something went wrong with the de-stepping of the mast such as cables not being disconnected and/or poor crane operations. I guess I will never know.

I would advise all cruisers to avoid Curacao Marine for undertaking or performing any works to vessels. I consider them to be incompetent, and negligent, in the works they perform. Curacao Marine have no integrity and when challenged become aggressive and threatening.

The above details have been extracted from e-mails and letters sent to Curacao Marine during discussions. No emails or letters have ever been replied to.

Mark and Marion on S/Y Zenna