Ai inchiria o barca in Romania ?
- Autor subiect RobertAmbrozie
- Dată creare
skipper
RYA Instructor
Daca voiau s-o scoata o scoteau in maxim o saptamana. Nici nu se stie cum de s-a scufundat legata la cheu dupa ce s-a schimbat apropritarul!
Acum chiar si daca o scot ce-ar mai putea sa faca cu o barca de lemn tinuta trei luni la murat?
Acolo cam putzea de la inceput, acum nici nu mai pute ca e sub apa! Dar clar, justitia romana e de vina!
Grethe Witting
Basically for the wood the waters of the black sea are very good. For the rest: the ship needs to be rebuild, clear. How did it happen? Simple, my co-financer went to the Romanian court and bought my ship. Just like that! Is that possible? No, but in Romania, yes it is! Now the ship has two owners and I cannot do anything because I am not allowed by the authorities who sold the ship just like that. However the Dutch authorities do not accept the Romanian Court ruling because it is a Dutch vessel and therefore governed by Dutch Law. Besides that, all rights were violated and no legal procedure was respected. We are now fighting in the Romanian Court against the decision of the Court. But help arrives: http://markusvrieling.wordpress.com/2010/02/17/help-from-holland-for-the-grethe-witting/
Note: The ship is a Dutch ship, the contract with my financer is Dutch, We are Dutch. So why didn't they sent us to Holland to fight over it there? Then I would have won (case would not have started because the financer has a contract with me to respect) and the Grethe Witting still would be sailing the Black Sea.
Basically for the wood the waters of the black sea are very good. For the rest: the ship needs to be rebuild, clear. How did it happen? Simple, my co-financer went to the Romanian court and bought my ship. Just like that! Is that possible? No, but in Romania, yes it is! Now the ship has two owners and I cannot do anything because I am not allowed by the authorities who sold the ship just like that. However the Dutch authorities do not accept the Romanian Court ruling because it is a Dutch vessel and therefore governed by Dutch Law. Besides that, all rights were violated and no legal procedure was respected. We are now fighting in the Romanian Court against the decision of the Court. But help arrives: http://markusvrieling.wordpress.com/2010/02/17/help-from-holland-for-the-grethe-witting/
Note: The ship is a Dutch ship, the contract with my financer is Dutch, We are Dutch. So why didn't they sent us to Holland to fight over it there? Then I would have won (case would not have started because the financer has a contract with me to respect) and the Grethe Witting still would be sailing the Black Sea.
Ultima editare:
Eu am alta parere:
cineva a visat frumos despre cum e sa faci bani in Marea Neagra, nu numai in Turcia, Bulgaria dar si in Romania. Numai ca in Romania realitatea e alta, e una trista. Fara prea multa experienta, nu tocmai ancorati in "realitatile" romanesti, fara un echipaj profesionist, fara o industrie turistica care sa sustina astfel de proiect, fara infrastructura, fara multe altele lucrurile au luat-o razna: venituri ioc, cheltuieli cu duiumul. Probabil ca statul a arestat barca pentru neplata cheltuielilor portuare si s-a grabit s-o vanda, cum numai baietii isteti stiu sa o faca. Noul proprietar o fi avut el un plan in minte, dar nu a avut bani sa o repare (sau sa zic restaureze?) asa ca s-a gandit sa o mai lase un pic pe unde este pana cand reuseste sa ... . Tineti minte ca era in stare deplorabila, lua apa pa peste tot si trebuiau sa aiba pompele in functiune tot timpul ca sa o tina pe linia de plutire? Ei bine, pompele alea sunt electrice, iar intr-o noapte curentul in Mangalia a cazut. In toata Mangalia. Iar barca s-a dus la fund. Simplu si fara teoria conspiratiei. Oricum prea mare rau nu cred ca i sa intamplat: oricum trebuia reparata capital si probabil ca echipamentul care nu fusese furat era distrus. Intrebarea este ce o sa se intample cu ea de acum incolo. Ca daca e sa se hotareasca in justitie, a noastra sau a olandezilor, parerea mea este ca asta a fost toata istoria glorioasa de aproape o suta de ani a frumoasei ambarcatiuni.
Parerea mea.
cineva a visat frumos despre cum e sa faci bani in Marea Neagra, nu numai in Turcia, Bulgaria dar si in Romania. Numai ca in Romania realitatea e alta, e una trista. Fara prea multa experienta, nu tocmai ancorati in "realitatile" romanesti, fara un echipaj profesionist, fara o industrie turistica care sa sustina astfel de proiect, fara infrastructura, fara multe altele lucrurile au luat-o razna: venituri ioc, cheltuieli cu duiumul. Probabil ca statul a arestat barca pentru neplata cheltuielilor portuare si s-a grabit s-o vanda, cum numai baietii isteti stiu sa o faca. Noul proprietar o fi avut el un plan in minte, dar nu a avut bani sa o repare (sau sa zic restaureze?) asa ca s-a gandit sa o mai lase un pic pe unde este pana cand reuseste sa ... . Tineti minte ca era in stare deplorabila, lua apa pa peste tot si trebuiau sa aiba pompele in functiune tot timpul ca sa o tina pe linia de plutire? Ei bine, pompele alea sunt electrice, iar intr-o noapte curentul in Mangalia a cazut. In toata Mangalia. Iar barca s-a dus la fund. Simplu si fara teoria conspiratiei. Oricum prea mare rau nu cred ca i sa intamplat: oricum trebuia reparata capital si probabil ca echipamentul care nu fusese furat era distrus. Intrebarea este ce o sa se intample cu ea de acum incolo. Ca daca e sa se hotareasca in justitie, a noastra sau a olandezilor, parerea mea este ca asta a fost toata istoria glorioasa de aproape o suta de ani a frumoasei ambarcatiuni.
Parerea mea.
@ Nike
It is nice that you have an opinion but allow me to give you some details:
1. The GW sank as a result of a sequestration ordered by the court in Constanta on behalf of a Dutch private investor who lives in Romania. Because of the sequestration that was followed by the (illegal)selling of the ship, the owner (me) was removed from the ship. The sequestration was executed in November 2008, the moment when the ship should have gone to the shipyard for the annual check. The Court however blocked the owner to take care of the ship. As a result it sank being neglected for months because nobody took care of her. Recent underwater survey did not show any damage to the hull.
2. There were no port costs to pay at all and no other debtors that ordered the ship to be sequestrated.
3. The ship was in a sound condition before sequestration. The main engine just overhauled and we were busy doing the maintenance as usual needed for a Wooden Tall Ship when she was arrested. Type Grethe Witting in You Tube and you see her sailing out on the Black Sea in July-August.
4. The ship has (had) 2000 AH batteries, meaning that pumps could run for weeks without shore power. Moreover she has two generators on board (12 KVA and 6 KVA. All the equipment has be demolished by the 'new' owner because he did not have a clue how to take care of the ship.
5. The crew was certified Romanian crew with years of experience at sea. Moreover the owner has the Enkhuyzer Zeevaart School (sailing academy for traditional ships) and is Certified Radar navigator for world wide operations.
6. coming to Romania was with the objective to do sail training, not exactly a business that you get rich overnight. Yes, done properly you can support the ship, crew and also provide young people an experience of a life time.
The only mistake I made was to get into business with a notorious alcoholic, What I learned? Never getting into business again with people that drink 24/7. We sailors like to drink a beer, but then after we sailed, not before or during.
follow the developments on markus.vrieling@wordpress.com
It is nice that you have an opinion but allow me to give you some details:
1. The GW sank as a result of a sequestration ordered by the court in Constanta on behalf of a Dutch private investor who lives in Romania. Because of the sequestration that was followed by the (illegal)selling of the ship, the owner (me) was removed from the ship. The sequestration was executed in November 2008, the moment when the ship should have gone to the shipyard for the annual check. The Court however blocked the owner to take care of the ship. As a result it sank being neglected for months because nobody took care of her. Recent underwater survey did not show any damage to the hull.
2. There were no port costs to pay at all and no other debtors that ordered the ship to be sequestrated.
3. The ship was in a sound condition before sequestration. The main engine just overhauled and we were busy doing the maintenance as usual needed for a Wooden Tall Ship when she was arrested. Type Grethe Witting in You Tube and you see her sailing out on the Black Sea in July-August.
4. The ship has (had) 2000 AH batteries, meaning that pumps could run for weeks without shore power. Moreover she has two generators on board (12 KVA and 6 KVA. All the equipment has be demolished by the 'new' owner because he did not have a clue how to take care of the ship.
5. The crew was certified Romanian crew with years of experience at sea. Moreover the owner has the Enkhuyzer Zeevaart School (sailing academy for traditional ships) and is Certified Radar navigator for world wide operations.
6. coming to Romania was with the objective to do sail training, not exactly a business that you get rich overnight. Yes, done properly you can support the ship, crew and also provide young people an experience of a life time.
The only mistake I made was to get into business with a notorious alcoholic, What I learned? Never getting into business again with people that drink 24/7. We sailors like to drink a beer, but then after we sailed, not before or during.
follow the developments on markus.vrieling@wordpress.com
Hi Markus,
thank you for your details, I don't like to be in error.
What is obvious is that the boat was neglected, so pity, because from my shoes doe's not matter so much who is the owner, as I am not involved, as matter to be proper operated to enjoy my eyes, and let me the opportunity to learn from the others, but not from the other's mistakes.
By the way, I am not denying your seamanships knowledge, all though I have some problems understanding where you or anybody else can find enough Romanian seaman experienced in Wooden Tall Ships, able and willing to be hired as GW crew.
Praiseworthy your objective, but regarding your business skills and your connections with Romanian realities, I presume that the facts are talking by themselves. We always have to be carefully in whom to trust and to entrust our money, no matter what.
However would be great to hear also the other part' opinion, and why after all the boat was sequestrated.
Tip: among us is also a judge. Write to him, maybe he can help you at least with some advices.
Best regards and best wishes,
Nike
intrebari...
vasul a fost pus sub sechestru sau a fost scos la licitatie? pentru ca se vorbeste despre ,,new owner", nu despre un administrator al bunului sechestrat. oricum, calificarile proprietarului sau echipajului nu conteaza in speta...
sa revin... daca a fost scos la licitatie si a existat un nou proprietar, e tzeapa lui. daca a fost sechestru si bunul a ,,pierit", raspunde administratorul sechestrului. asa ca problema este gresit pusa dpdv juridic...
ce a dus la aceasta situatie nu are legatura cu ,,scosu aerului si intratul apei".
vasul a fost pus sub sechestru sau a fost scos la licitatie? pentru ca se vorbeste despre ,,new owner", nu despre un administrator al bunului sechestrat. oricum, calificarile proprietarului sau echipajului nu conteaza in speta...
sa revin... daca a fost scos la licitatie si a existat un nou proprietar, e tzeapa lui. daca a fost sechestru si bunul a ,,pierit", raspunde administratorul sechestrului. asa ca problema este gresit pusa dpdv juridic...
ce a dus la aceasta situatie nu are legatura cu ,,scosu aerului si intratul apei".
@ Alanegru
The Grethe Witting was sequestrated by a Dutch national who lives in Romania in order to let her being sold by auction and get control over the ship. During that process he proposed the owner to give him double the money he invested just a few months before but that never was followed up. The owner knows that the GW cannot be sold by auction in Romania as she is a registered Dutch sea-going vessel but was surprised by the fact that both Court and lawyers have so less knowledge of the position of a ship in European law. After the ship was sold the insurance of the owner was cancelled as the insurance was informed about the sale. If the 'buyer' had it insured we don't know.
We now form a group of people and regain possession of the ship by some legal procedures. In fact it is quite simple: the ship is still registered in Holland on the owner's name as The Netherlands does not accept the Court ruling because Holland has the EXCLUSIVE JURISDICTION. We then want to repair the ship and start all over again with the mission we had when we came here: setting up Sail Training Association Romania and sail with a traditional sailing vessel with the youth of Romania.
See the GW story at: http://markusvrieling.wordpress.com/ (by the owner of GW)
See http://sailtrainingromania.wordpress.com for details about STA-R
We love to receive your comments, help and like to discuss about the future of STA-R and the GW. Feel free to leave your comments here or on one of the blogs indicated above.
Thanks
(I speak and read Romanian but I am still not ready to write it properly so please excuse me in addressing this forum in English)
The Grethe Witting was sequestrated by a Dutch national who lives in Romania in order to let her being sold by auction and get control over the ship. During that process he proposed the owner to give him double the money he invested just a few months before but that never was followed up. The owner knows that the GW cannot be sold by auction in Romania as she is a registered Dutch sea-going vessel but was surprised by the fact that both Court and lawyers have so less knowledge of the position of a ship in European law. After the ship was sold the insurance of the owner was cancelled as the insurance was informed about the sale. If the 'buyer' had it insured we don't know.
We now form a group of people and regain possession of the ship by some legal procedures. In fact it is quite simple: the ship is still registered in Holland on the owner's name as The Netherlands does not accept the Court ruling because Holland has the EXCLUSIVE JURISDICTION. We then want to repair the ship and start all over again with the mission we had when we came here: setting up Sail Training Association Romania and sail with a traditional sailing vessel with the youth of Romania.
See the GW story at: http://markusvrieling.wordpress.com/ (by the owner of GW)
See http://sailtrainingromania.wordpress.com for details about STA-R
We love to receive your comments, help and like to discuss about the future of STA-R and the GW. Feel free to leave your comments here or on one of the blogs indicated above.
Thanks
(I speak and read Romanian but I am still not ready to write it properly so please excuse me in addressing this forum in English)
ok markus!
din pacate toate discutiile legate de gw trec prin faza cu scufundarea...desi prezenta gw pe litoralul romanesc ar fi una salutara, cam cum te-ai simti tu sa te urci plin de entuziasm pe asa o barca sa-ti plimbi familia, sa-ti bucuri copilul cu o plimare sau o minicroaziera, si sa te trezesti la decizia unor marinari beti, si pe un material plutitor care mai tot timpul are ceva sau totul lipsa...am sa-ti dau un exemplu: acum cativa ani eram un grup in tomis si priveam ce se intampla acolo, si vine un nene aburit bine sa ne propuna o plimbare cu vaporasul...nimeni n-a avut curajul sa se increada intr-un astfel de om...trece ceva timp si aflu de pe media ca a luat foc un vaporas in tormis...poate nu acelasi, dar cu siguranta cam acelasi tip de personaje luau banii si tineau timona...
din pacate , despre gw s-a cam aflat totul, probabil daca o sa mai fie in stare de plutire , o sa trebuiasca mutata in alt colt de lume, unde sa o poata lua de la capat...prea multe scufundari a avut scula asta de 100 ani ca sa mai poti pacali barcaholici...poate doar diletanti....
eu raman la faza de folosit ca decor la fotografii, altceva,sorry!
din pacate toate discutiile legate de gw trec prin faza cu scufundarea...desi prezenta gw pe litoralul romanesc ar fi una salutara, cam cum te-ai simti tu sa te urci plin de entuziasm pe asa o barca sa-ti plimbi familia, sa-ti bucuri copilul cu o plimare sau o minicroaziera, si sa te trezesti la decizia unor marinari beti, si pe un material plutitor care mai tot timpul are ceva sau totul lipsa...am sa-ti dau un exemplu: acum cativa ani eram un grup in tomis si priveam ce se intampla acolo, si vine un nene aburit bine sa ne propuna o plimbare cu vaporasul...nimeni n-a avut curajul sa se increada intr-un astfel de om...trece ceva timp si aflu de pe media ca a luat foc un vaporas in tormis...poate nu acelasi, dar cu siguranta cam acelasi tip de personaje luau banii si tineau timona...
din pacate , despre gw s-a cam aflat totul, probabil daca o sa mai fie in stare de plutire , o sa trebuiasca mutata in alt colt de lume, unde sa o poata lua de la capat...prea multe scufundari a avut scula asta de 100 ani ca sa mai poti pacali barcaholici...poate doar diletanti....
eu raman la faza de folosit ca decor la fotografii, altceva,sorry!
Grethe Witting, the true story part 1
Thank you for writing that you would be interested to there the other side’s opinion, and smart thinking should deserves to be rewarded, so here we are. Obvious here is something smelly about markus’ story, but the main reason I write this because I am sick and tired of being insulted by someone who had not even a penny in his pocket, who I saved from being forced to do a non-refundable down payment of 10% and lose it, and whom I gave a present being 30% of a business on the Grethe Witting. For readers getting bored quickly there is a summary on the end.
I have to excuse myself like markus for not writing in Romanian. As he said in a forum: I do not write Romanian good enough , but I do understand it. Which is interesting because he asked the Romanian court to abrogate verdicts because he could not understand Romanian.
But let’s get to some more serious matters. Our agreement was recorded in a contract regarding the business and also, because of circumstances that I will explain later, in a mortgage contract regarding the “loan” with the ship as collateral. In this contract the sum was of course mentioned and the only way for me to end the loan was to ask markus the money back. No more. So his accusation that I asked like euro 400.000 is not only not true, but also impossible. If I wanted to break the contract, I had to ask my money back which is very significantly less. That would have given him the opportunity to pay me back and get rid of me, which is fine with me. If I would have asked more, I could not have broken the contract and he would stay owner of the ship, which is not fine with me. Simple.
But back to where it all begun. markus came to me with his business plan regarding the Grethe Witting. He said he already signed a selling-buying contract but no money. The plan had some questionable assumptions but it used to be my profession to evaluate plans like this and I could see through the parts where he was too optimistic. I judged that it would be difficult to lose money with it. How wrong I was. So I told him I could be interested in participating for 40%, because I have this unstoppable urge for adventure. Because the first installment already was overdue I immediately transferred the first 10%, which was non refundable
Here it is time to refute another of markus’ allegations, i.e. that I every time paid late. Well, first payment I just explained. Second payment was late because the notary did not send me a bill so I could not pay, and third time the Nationality Declaration could not be obtained but after long delays, so the final sales was delayed too. All what I am telling you I can prove by way of emails, contracts,, sms-es, witnesses and his famous business plan.
According the agreement we put into writing we would make a business structure and markus would have been responsible for all the activities and I would finance until other investors were found. The ship would be brought into this structure (a present of 30% of the value) as an asset. However, the offers for setting up this structure, budgeted by markus (hereafter to be referred to as m. )for 1500 euro were extremely high, 10.000 per year for something that did not bring any tax benefits in my opinion, thus waiting for an better offer and stressed by time m. came with the solution to put the ship on his name for the time being giving me a mortgage with the ship as collateral. Since this mortgage had to pass while m. was at sea, m. left a power of attorney with the notary and told me I could change everything I wanted. Reading the contract m. had composed I noticed that the loan was mentioned as redeemable in one sum after5 years including accrued interest, which by the way was smaller then the interest I could get with any respectable bank. I left the interest for what it was but added only that I could end the loan any time I wanted, a back door in case of problems I did not want him to sit on my money. Please note that the first agreement and the first payment were done end of 2007, so his allegations that I revoked our agreement two months after the signing of the mortgage agreement is incorrect. Although the final agreement was signed somewhere in may, there was a preliminary agreement which was also legally binding.
In this agreement was also stated that m. was responsible for both maintenance and insurance, so another allegation down the drain. We agreed however to do full maintenance as soon as possible, which is in my view latest after the season, taking into account that the ship was declared sailing worthy for one year by the authorities end of 2007 and was, according to m., in good condition. Also take into account that he prediction from m.’s business plan (bp) that half of the revenues would be paid like half a year in advance was only wishful thinking.
So the contract was signed and m. was going to sail to Romania.
There were some problems: the engine (m.: the engine is ok, but in one or two years we better change it for a more economical one) broke down in the Kieler channel and had to be replaced.
The Odyssey, according to the bp a fantastic adventure that should bring paying passengers for the trip to Romania and spare us a complete crew, was not possible because the papers were not okay for ocean travel with passengers. Guess who paid for the engine and the crew, I even had to pay m.’s bus ticket to the airport because he did not have a nail to scratch his ass.
On arrival in Mangalia he had arranged nothing. I first had the unpleasant surprise that the Dutch captain said that the ship had overdue maintenance of 10000-20000 euro’s, I do not recall exactly, but of that magnitude. In later correspondence with the former owner m. was reproached that m. did not use the opportunity to come and inspect the ship, I was told by m. that he knew the ship and that it was in fair condition.
I bring to mind that the agreement that m.’s job was to do all the work, only I proposed that my son would also try to do some sales against normal commission. m.’s later reproach that my son was supposed to do all the selling is therefore incorrect and showing his own incompetence, i.e. he should by then have sold half the season, but he did not sell nothing. But in fact my son did some very successful prospecting. We established a Romanian company, which I put completely on my sons name for the time being, because m. did not take care of that and he was at see. We also took care of arranging a Romanian crew and of the contacts with the ANR.
After that we had e some nice trips and some more unpleasant surprises in finding out that the Germans did not want to continue to be responsible for the ship because m. had not fulfilled the formalities, so the ship was without a flag state.
One other reproach by m. was that I drunk too much and I won’t deny that a certain temperance was recommendable. But besides m. nobody seemed to be bothered by this, let’s say I was no exception. And notwithstanding the fact that it was not his f!@#$%g business at all I decided to abstain and focus on the business. And so I did. A few days later he sent me from the ship, probably afraid that I would come to my senses. Thank you for a cheap loan and @#$% off was the message.
to be continued...
Dear Nike,
Thank you for writing that you would be interested to there the other side’s opinion, and smart thinking should deserves to be rewarded, so here we are. Obvious here is something smelly about markus’ story, but the main reason I write this because I am sick and tired of being insulted by someone who had not even a penny in his pocket, who I saved from being forced to do a non-refundable down payment of 10% and lose it, and whom I gave a present being 30% of a business on the Grethe Witting. For readers getting bored quickly there is a summary on the end.
I have to excuse myself like markus for not writing in Romanian. As he said in a forum: I do not write Romanian good enough , but I do understand it. Which is interesting because he asked the Romanian court to abrogate verdicts because he could not understand Romanian.
But let’s get to some more serious matters. Our agreement was recorded in a contract regarding the business and also, because of circumstances that I will explain later, in a mortgage contract regarding the “loan” with the ship as collateral. In this contract the sum was of course mentioned and the only way for me to end the loan was to ask markus the money back. No more. So his accusation that I asked like euro 400.000 is not only not true, but also impossible. If I wanted to break the contract, I had to ask my money back which is very significantly less. That would have given him the opportunity to pay me back and get rid of me, which is fine with me. If I would have asked more, I could not have broken the contract and he would stay owner of the ship, which is not fine with me. Simple.
But back to where it all begun. markus came to me with his business plan regarding the Grethe Witting. He said he already signed a selling-buying contract but no money. The plan had some questionable assumptions but it used to be my profession to evaluate plans like this and I could see through the parts where he was too optimistic. I judged that it would be difficult to lose money with it. How wrong I was. So I told him I could be interested in participating for 40%, because I have this unstoppable urge for adventure. Because the first installment already was overdue I immediately transferred the first 10%, which was non refundable
Here it is time to refute another of markus’ allegations, i.e. that I every time paid late. Well, first payment I just explained. Second payment was late because the notary did not send me a bill so I could not pay, and third time the Nationality Declaration could not be obtained but after long delays, so the final sales was delayed too. All what I am telling you I can prove by way of emails, contracts,, sms-es, witnesses and his famous business plan.
According the agreement we put into writing we would make a business structure and markus would have been responsible for all the activities and I would finance until other investors were found. The ship would be brought into this structure (a present of 30% of the value) as an asset. However, the offers for setting up this structure, budgeted by markus (hereafter to be referred to as m. )for 1500 euro were extremely high, 10.000 per year for something that did not bring any tax benefits in my opinion, thus waiting for an better offer and stressed by time m. came with the solution to put the ship on his name for the time being giving me a mortgage with the ship as collateral. Since this mortgage had to pass while m. was at sea, m. left a power of attorney with the notary and told me I could change everything I wanted. Reading the contract m. had composed I noticed that the loan was mentioned as redeemable in one sum after5 years including accrued interest, which by the way was smaller then the interest I could get with any respectable bank. I left the interest for what it was but added only that I could end the loan any time I wanted, a back door in case of problems I did not want him to sit on my money. Please note that the first agreement and the first payment were done end of 2007, so his allegations that I revoked our agreement two months after the signing of the mortgage agreement is incorrect. Although the final agreement was signed somewhere in may, there was a preliminary agreement which was also legally binding.
In this agreement was also stated that m. was responsible for both maintenance and insurance, so another allegation down the drain. We agreed however to do full maintenance as soon as possible, which is in my view latest after the season, taking into account that the ship was declared sailing worthy for one year by the authorities end of 2007 and was, according to m., in good condition. Also take into account that he prediction from m.’s business plan (bp) that half of the revenues would be paid like half a year in advance was only wishful thinking.
So the contract was signed and m. was going to sail to Romania.
There were some problems: the engine (m.: the engine is ok, but in one or two years we better change it for a more economical one) broke down in the Kieler channel and had to be replaced.
The Odyssey, according to the bp a fantastic adventure that should bring paying passengers for the trip to Romania and spare us a complete crew, was not possible because the papers were not okay for ocean travel with passengers. Guess who paid for the engine and the crew, I even had to pay m.’s bus ticket to the airport because he did not have a nail to scratch his ass.
On arrival in Mangalia he had arranged nothing. I first had the unpleasant surprise that the Dutch captain said that the ship had overdue maintenance of 10000-20000 euro’s, I do not recall exactly, but of that magnitude. In later correspondence with the former owner m. was reproached that m. did not use the opportunity to come and inspect the ship, I was told by m. that he knew the ship and that it was in fair condition.
I bring to mind that the agreement that m.’s job was to do all the work, only I proposed that my son would also try to do some sales against normal commission. m.’s later reproach that my son was supposed to do all the selling is therefore incorrect and showing his own incompetence, i.e. he should by then have sold half the season, but he did not sell nothing. But in fact my son did some very successful prospecting. We established a Romanian company, which I put completely on my sons name for the time being, because m. did not take care of that and he was at see. We also took care of arranging a Romanian crew and of the contacts with the ANR.
After that we had e some nice trips and some more unpleasant surprises in finding out that the Germans did not want to continue to be responsible for the ship because m. had not fulfilled the formalities, so the ship was without a flag state.
One other reproach by m. was that I drunk too much and I won’t deny that a certain temperance was recommendable. But besides m. nobody seemed to be bothered by this, let’s say I was no exception. And notwithstanding the fact that it was not his f!@#$%g business at all I decided to abstain and focus on the business. And so I did. A few days later he sent me from the ship, probably afraid that I would come to my senses. Thank you for a cheap loan and @#$% off was the message.
to be continued...
I think he calculated that I would take me a while to go through the legal procedures, so he could look for an investor, he was always overconfident about his own capacities and he thought that his brilliant ideas were worth like five times the real investment, even with an unknown product in an unknown market, so he gambled to have 80% without costing him a penny. To go to an investor with a plan, a ship and a going concern situation is a lot easier then in a situation where you have only a plan and have to ask the future investor for money for the bus to meet him. For interested people I have his investor proposal in pdf format.
I tried to reason with him, also through mediators, first to go back to our original agreement, then to give me the money back and for him to sail where ever the wanted and be happy, then even in installments, giving him ample time to find an investor . He kept saying that he had investors but never came with the money, blaming me of course.
After he send me from the ship he kept on sailing playing the big captain (by the way, he was at the Enkhuizer sailing school, but only to get his navigation diploma there that was already expired during the trip to Romania), colliding with a 2.000.000$ yacht leaving the harbor under sail why?), crossing the Bulgarian border illegally with like 30 passengers, almost sinking the ship because he had done maintenance to the electric system that did not make it much better so the pumps stopped, calling the coast guard to come to rescue ( I let you guess who paid the bill, but this time is wasn’t me), loosing the anchor and two life rafts in the action, and ending up with –according to m.- a damaged engine, a destroyed interior so he had to break out interior walls, and in my opinion the generator and other equipment could hardly have survived. Plus of course a lot of negative publicity and a bad name with the ANR.
The ANR came to inspect the ship and came to 36 conflicts with the existing regulations before they concluded that further inspection would not add much at that moment, and they tied up the ship. I have a copy of the official report. One of the most intriguing issues was that the ship never had a safety certificate since it left from Germany.
His allegation that he did continued maintenance is a farce, the only changes he made where two pressurized tanks that he needed to take a shower, but not a drop a paint was applied, the overhauling of the engine I do not believe until I see the invoice.
After this incident in Bulgarian waters I decided to take legal action, which procedure I entirely left to my lawyer. I decided to act in Romania for some reasons that later appeared not to be valid, but as far as I know the whole procedure was correctly done. In the end I seized the ship. M. told me because of this he could not maintain the ship, although according to the law he could and according to the contract he even was obliged to do it. I also gave him permission personally.
On his reproach that because of the sequestration he could not find investors I told him that in case of finding an investor I would give an unlimited power of attorney to everybody concerning everything related to the ship at the moment of sales. Since the ship was already tied up there was actually no difference.
For the record: during the complete procedure until today m. had the possibility to pay me back my money and get the !@#$ out of my life, although obviously after the sinking this was a little more complicated and less attractive. Witnesses present.
The legal procedures did not take 5 days as I was told, but almost one year due to m.’s desperate struggle, but after like 5 trials the verdict was spoken and the auction held in Constanta, where due to lack of interested buyers the ship was assigned to me, And belief it or not, the very day I could pick up the official paper it got the word it was sinking. I saved the ship and put someone aboard to watch the pumps, but it is clear that something went wrong because the ship went down again to where she is at this moment.
Last events, beside m.’s never ending stories on the internet is that he took the case to high court and that he put me by email in default for 1,5 million euro, which he claims to be the value of the ship. Also he wants me to pay for missed business and legal costs.
So there we are today, ready to summarize the unfortunate chain of events:
- I saved m.’s ass from being forced to pay the down payment of 10% and loose it.
- I gave him a present of 30% of a business and a boat i.e. a very big nail to scratch his ass
- He did maybe 5% of what he was supposed to do.
- He threw me from the ship.
- He could not find investors and expected me to continue financing him even though he had thrown me from the ship.
- He makes my life miserable by not giving in in court and stalking me on the internet until today.
- He did not do any maintenance causing the ship to sink.
- As thank for my generosity he wants to sue me now for 1.500.000 euro ++
It goes without saying that will persecute this vertebrate through my lawyer into hell if necessary.
Thank you for your attention
Dutch investor
I tried to reason with him, also through mediators, first to go back to our original agreement, then to give me the money back and for him to sail where ever the wanted and be happy, then even in installments, giving him ample time to find an investor . He kept saying that he had investors but never came with the money, blaming me of course.
After he send me from the ship he kept on sailing playing the big captain (by the way, he was at the Enkhuizer sailing school, but only to get his navigation diploma there that was already expired during the trip to Romania), colliding with a 2.000.000$ yacht leaving the harbor under sail why?), crossing the Bulgarian border illegally with like 30 passengers, almost sinking the ship because he had done maintenance to the electric system that did not make it much better so the pumps stopped, calling the coast guard to come to rescue ( I let you guess who paid the bill, but this time is wasn’t me), loosing the anchor and two life rafts in the action, and ending up with –according to m.- a damaged engine, a destroyed interior so he had to break out interior walls, and in my opinion the generator and other equipment could hardly have survived. Plus of course a lot of negative publicity and a bad name with the ANR.
The ANR came to inspect the ship and came to 36 conflicts with the existing regulations before they concluded that further inspection would not add much at that moment, and they tied up the ship. I have a copy of the official report. One of the most intriguing issues was that the ship never had a safety certificate since it left from Germany.
His allegation that he did continued maintenance is a farce, the only changes he made where two pressurized tanks that he needed to take a shower, but not a drop a paint was applied, the overhauling of the engine I do not believe until I see the invoice.
After this incident in Bulgarian waters I decided to take legal action, which procedure I entirely left to my lawyer. I decided to act in Romania for some reasons that later appeared not to be valid, but as far as I know the whole procedure was correctly done. In the end I seized the ship. M. told me because of this he could not maintain the ship, although according to the law he could and according to the contract he even was obliged to do it. I also gave him permission personally.
On his reproach that because of the sequestration he could not find investors I told him that in case of finding an investor I would give an unlimited power of attorney to everybody concerning everything related to the ship at the moment of sales. Since the ship was already tied up there was actually no difference.
For the record: during the complete procedure until today m. had the possibility to pay me back my money and get the !@#$ out of my life, although obviously after the sinking this was a little more complicated and less attractive. Witnesses present.
The legal procedures did not take 5 days as I was told, but almost one year due to m.’s desperate struggle, but after like 5 trials the verdict was spoken and the auction held in Constanta, where due to lack of interested buyers the ship was assigned to me, And belief it or not, the very day I could pick up the official paper it got the word it was sinking. I saved the ship and put someone aboard to watch the pumps, but it is clear that something went wrong because the ship went down again to where she is at this moment.
Last events, beside m.’s never ending stories on the internet is that he took the case to high court and that he put me by email in default for 1,5 million euro, which he claims to be the value of the ship. Also he wants me to pay for missed business and legal costs.
So there we are today, ready to summarize the unfortunate chain of events:
- I saved m.’s ass from being forced to pay the down payment of 10% and loose it.
- I gave him a present of 30% of a business and a boat i.e. a very big nail to scratch his ass
- He did maybe 5% of what he was supposed to do.
- He threw me from the ship.
- He could not find investors and expected me to continue financing him even though he had thrown me from the ship.
- He makes my life miserable by not giving in in court and stalking me on the internet until today.
- He did not do any maintenance causing the ship to sink.
- As thank for my generosity he wants to sue me now for 1.500.000 euro ++
It goes without saying that will persecute this vertebrate through my lawyer into hell if necessary.
Thank you for your attention
Dutch investor