Dan Streech Responds to YachtForums and Nordhavn Litigation

A heated and contested discussion on YachtForums regarding the sinking of Nordhavn 75 EYF #2 in Cabo San Lucas has led to a statement from Dan Streech, President of Pacific Asian Enterprises, the manufacturer of Nordhavn brand trawlers.

A Statement from PAE (also attached to the bottom of this post) alleges that there has been false information about Nordhavn provided on the YachtForum web site. According to the statement:

Because PAE was not a “supporter” of the YachtForum site with paid advertising, we were blocked from the site and unable to respond, explain or defend ourselves. It has been very frustrating to sit on the sidelines and watch the misinformation multiply and feed on itself.

The YachtForums discussion can be found here. Surprisingly enough, the discussion was closed on March 4, 2011 by YachtForums. Here is a quote from the YachtForums statement regarding why the discussion was closed:

On November 7th, 2010, I added Nordhavn’s domain extension to our ban list after we discovered that several PAE employees had been operating in a clandestine nature to promote Nordhavn on YachtForums. We take serious exception with manufacturers that pose as independent 3rd parties, attempting to sway popular opinion. We believe it’s important to maintain the integrity of our medium and it brings into question Nordhavn’s participation on other forums. We will not allow YF to be adulterated by those with commercial or vested intentions.

[Editorial note removed Monday, March 21, 2011 at 6:44PM]

[Editorial note added Monday, March 21, 2011 at 6:57PM:

A link to an updated discussion and response from YachtForums can be found here. The statement is quoted as saying, in part:

… Nordhavn was never blocked from YF because they were not advertisers, which is evidenced by Jeff Leishman’s membership and prior posts. The sinking of the Nordhavn EYF75 is a separate occurrence that came several months later, but a ban on the Nordhavn domain extension was already in place. …

]

The Nordhavn Statement

The statement(s) addresses two key aspects of the Nordhavn discussion.

  • PAE has numerous lawsuits pending…
  • “N75 #2 had faults or deficiencies which caused the sinking in Cabo San Lucas Mexico…”

To address the pending Nordhavn litigation claims, the statement reads:

To help clear the air, a complete listing of all lawsuits that PAE has been involved in over the past 10 years is shown below.

  1. Andersen; three lawsuits:
    1. Rhode Island, dismissed by the court
    2. Orange County Superior Court, Tried to a judgment before a jury in April and May of 2010.  The judgment that Andersen obtained in the State Court action related mostly to:
      1. The speed of his commissioning which was done at the Newport Shipyard in Newport, Rhode Island;
      2. The method of the mounting of his davit which was done by the Hinckley Shipyard near Newport, Rhode Island, and not by PAE
      3. The special contractual agreement relating to the understanding of his special numbering of his wiring agreed to between Mr. Andersen and Joe Meglen,  a retired PAE officer.
      4. The amount awarded by the jury was less than 5% of the amount Mr. Andersen was seeking and PAE has paid all amounts awarded by the jury.
      5. Mr. Andersen was dissatisfied with the jury award and subsequent judgment and has appealed that to the Court of Appeal in California. The briefing is not yet due on that appeal and no resolution is expected in that appeal for a significant period of time.
    3. Federal District Court, Central District of California, Orange County action filed November 24, 2010 (amended on February 28, 2011) regarding the wire loom to which PAE has filed a motion to dismiss.
      1. Federal Regulation have been promulgated regarding boating safety in the United States and they do not require any particular specifications regarding wire loom
      2. PAE is not aware of any actual incidents where wire loom played any part in starting or spreading a fire in any Mason or Nordhavn over the last 30 years.
      3. The issue of fire retardant wire loom is not known to be an issue that surveyors look for or affects insurance availability or premiums. Surveyors and insurance companies apparently do not see the issue as a significant risk.
    4. Becket
      1. Federal District Court action by PAE against contracted Buyer of an N86 for declaratory relief that contract was valid and enforceable when the Buyer defaulted.
      2. Settled by agreement
    5. Conconi
      1. Orange County Superior Court action by Conconi against PAE arising out of the collision of an N72 with a freighter alleging negligent hiring of the captain by PAE.
      2. Settled with Mr. Conconi buying a N86;  Mr. Conconi is also the buyer of N120 #1
    6. Fireman’s Fund
      1. Action against PAE alleging that PAE had not paid insurance premiums
      2. Dismissed by Fireman’s Fund when they realized they were mistaken and PAE had indeed paid the premiums
    7. Markel Insurance Company
      1. Lawsuit against PAE, Hubble and others arising out of the engine room fire started by a defective Hubble electrical outlet on an N47.
      2. Settled between insurance companies with no contribution by PAE
    8. Pacific Seacraft
      1. Lawsuit filed by PAE to collect loan amounts advanced by PAE to Pacific Seacraft
      2. Settled with re-payment to PAE over time by Pacific Seacraft’s guarantor
    9. Pearson
      1. Claim of personal assault off site, after hours, by PAE dockworker on dockworker’s acquaintance.
      2. Dismissed after motion by PAE showing no PAE responsibility for dockworker’s after work activities; nothing paid by PAE
    10. Siemens
      1. Lawsuit filed by PAE for damages against Siemens for defective diesel electric systems installed in a N72 and a N76; systems had to be removed.
      2. Settled to PAE’s satisfaction with confidentiality agreement as to the terms of settlement; no lawsuits by owners; owners taken care of by PAE
    11. Swayze
      1. Collection action against Buyer who took advantage of PAE billing mistake on final invoice
      2. Settled with payment by buyer
    12. N56MS
      1. Action against longshoreman who negligently allowed the N56MS to drop from the slings while unloading in San Diego, causing a total loss of the vessel
      2. Filed by insurance company who paid claim, seeking to recover PAE’s deductible payment as well

TrawlerBlogs has not independently confirmed that the list of litigation itemized above is full or complete.

Nordhavn 75 EYF Sinking

Nordhavn 75 EYF #2

A separate document is attached providing a detailed explanation with accompanying photos regarding the sinking of Nordhavn 75 EYF #2 in Cabo San Lucas. TrawlerBlogs previously covered that story here: Breaking News: Nordhavn 75 EYF.

 

 

 

 

Reference Files

  1. Statement from PAE
  2. Statement on the Sinking of Nordhavn 75 Hull #2

Subscribe

Subscribe to our e-mail newsletter to receive updates.

, , , ,

Comments are closed.