|Abandonment ID:|| 00258|
|Ship name:||MALAVIYA SEVEN[disputed]|
|7-digit IMO no.:||9087312|
|Port of abandonment:||Aberdeen|
|Abandonment date:||6 October 2016|
|Reporting Member Govt. or Org.:||ITF|
|No. of Seafarers:||12|
|Circumstances:||Detained from June 15 2016 for owed wages from Jan 2016. All paid til end June. July wages paid in August, vessel released following pressure from flag state. Sept Ė August wages not paid, vessel detained again. 12 seafarers now on board, some since March. Wages owed from Aug 2016 to date. Off-signers owed wages from Jan. Commercial manager in UK providing food.|
Vessel detained by port state for owed wages. Liaison with mortgage bank.
|Repatriation status:||Repatriation pending|
|Payment status:||17 January 2017: Payment Pending|
AS OF 17TH JAN $400,000 approx inc. offsigners
|Comments and Observations:||ITF (23 May 2017)|
Arrested with ITF support
ITF (13 November 2017)
Six crew members from the Indian-owned and flagged Malaviya 7 are finally back home after the vessel had been detained in Aberdeen, Scotland for more than a year.
The ship has been put up for auction with an offer accepted, and it is hoped to retrieve some of the unpaid wages owed to the crew from the sale. The ITF will continue to support the remaining crew.
ITF (7 December 2017)
Vessel sold, crew wages still to be released
ITF (14 November 2018)
From: Jonathan Warring [mailto:Warring_Jonathan@itf.org.uk]
Sent: mercredi 14 novembre 2018 17:20
To: 'Natalie Shaw' ; Jan de Boer ; Noh, Jinhak
Subject: RE: MALAVIYA SEVEN (9087312) Abandonment ID: 00258
This case predates the entry into force of the 2014 amendments and as such did not involve any financial security under the MLC. Therefore any reference to the 4 months wages is not appropriate.
The crew arrested the vessel and the vessel was sold at auction. The amount recovered was not sufficient to cover all outstanding wages. Following an auction, the crew have exhausted their ability to take actions against the vessel in rem. There may be a possibility for the crew to take action against the owner in personam, but it is unlikely that this will happen.
Further, the ITF will not be taking any further action in respect of the case.
Having referred back to the detailed procedure, it states that:
A case of abandonment will be considered as resolved if, and only if, ILO has received clear advice from the Member State or organization having originally provided the information that:
(i) the totality of the crew has been successfully repatriated; and
(ii) the totality of all outstanding remuneration and contractual entitlements have been paid and duly received by all the crewmembers.
This confirms that reference to 4 months wages is not the measure for resolution. It also confirms that Janís position is correct and the case should remain as disputed.
I appreciate that this may be somewhat unsatisfactory as the case will never move from that status and, in reality, none of the parties involved wish to take any further action in relation to the case.