Uncertainty in new Spoornet insurance scheme worries P&I Clubs

a specialist maritime attorney in Durban has expressed concern about the lack of information made available on the new Spoornet insurance scheme.
At a round table meeting in Johannesburg recently - also attended by insurance brokers Price Forbes, who will operate the scheme - FTW was assured that everything would be made clear to Spoornet's public before the general launch of the scheme on April 1. We were promised that a complete communications programme would be put into effect before this came about.
But already the shipping lines - in the form of ASL (Association of Shipping Lines) and the associated body, ASABOSA (Association of Ships Agents and Brokers of SA) - have professed their continued ignorance of the details of the new package. An extremely unsatisfactory situation, according to one major shipowner.
And now it's the turn of the P&I clubs of the marine world to be left in blissful ignorance. And these are important people in the insurance issue - as they are effectively the bodies behind the special form of self-insurance operated by reputable shipping lines around the world. They also fall liable to cover any claims not covered by standard insurance policies - and could face big costs if the scheme displays any weaknesses in its practical application.
It is the uncertainty of all this that really bugs us, said a board member of one of the P&I clubs. We just don't know where we stand. And, apart from that, SA is the only country in the world known to have such a scheme - and one which could very well contravene a number of areas of internationally-accepted contractual practice in shipping.
Shane Dwyer, one of SA's prominent maritime attorneys - in preparing a report for P&I body, Steamship Mutual of the UK - has had to admit he is presently still working largely on hearsay, and that detailed information on the scheme has not yet been forthcoming.
In a letter to Mutual's Chris Adams -released to FTW and to ASL/ASABOSA - Dwyer said: I regret I am still trying to get a clear and unambiguous response from the author of the pilot project, and, indeed, copies of the documentation and new tariff (restricting liability, as I understand it, but giving the option of insurance cover at the expense of the consignor.
Dwyer is also not certain about whether anyone of any note has actually accepted the proposed insurance scheme.
The industry has rejected the proposal by all accounts, he said, and the major rail users have refused to acknowledge their being bound by the change, which they say was unilaterally adopted without proper consultation - a relatively new concept in terms of our 1994 Constitution, which binds the State (and parastatals) to consult and be 'transparent'.
Not that Dwyer professes any certainty about these claims. I have heard, but I don't know, he told FTW in a telephone interview.
And his letter to Steamship Mutual admits to this.
In any event, it added, all the above is really hearsay, and I will continue to badger the alleged architect for more detail, and will revert. As I say, however, my understanding is that the project has been put on hold until proper consultation has taken place.
By Alan Peat