Back to main page

SANKARA · PUBLIC EVIDENCE FILE

The public case file: liability no longer disputed, valuation disputed

Fifteen exhibits, 80 redacted document pages and 64 photographs. The image record now expressly separates nine pre-collision images I added to the file, the dated immediate pre-collision evidence and all post-collision material.

NOT DISPUTEDLiability in principleE01
DISPUTEDCompleteness of the valuation record, value and condition before the collisionE06
15 exhibits80 pages64 photographs4 private files
HOW TO READ THIS FILE

Liability is no longer in dispute. The records document two separate objections to the valuation. The transmission email shows both contract pages as attachments. The assessor describes the version available to him as truncated. The public record does not establish where that discrepancy arose. His report says that this version lacked the buyer's and seller's names and the vessel particulars. He also derives the stated pre-loss value from records and photographs of the already damaged vessel.

Exhibits and appendices

E01

MAIF liability handling

MAIF tells its insured in writing that it will pursue my claim as the German injured third party under liability cover. The matter is therefore handled as a liability claim; the remaining dispute concerns the amount of compensation.

4 pages
E02

Videos, photographs and records are transferred

Transfer confirmations and MAIF email acknowledging videos, photos and documents.

6 pages
E03

Repair quotation, both purchase-contract pages and vessel records

The transmission email shows both contract pages as attachments. It also shows the repair estimate and a further vessel document as attachments.

1 page
E04

Assessor contact and renewed media transfer

Appointment of the assessor; direct re-transfer of 47 files after the videos had not reached him.

13 pages
E05

Waiting for the assessor report

MAIF states that it is still awaiting the assessor report.

2 pages
E06

Liability analysis, truncated purchase record, valuation method and EUR 2,000 offer

The collision sequence is not disputed. The transmission email shows both contract pages as attachments. The assessor describes the version available to him as truncated. The public record does not establish where that discrepancy arose. His report says that this version lacked the buyer's and seller's names and the vessel particulars. He says the report is document-based and still subject to physical verification, yet relies on photographs of the already damaged vessel to derive a EUR 1,000–2,000 ‘pre-loss value’. MAIF offers EUR 2,000.

3 pages
E07

Objection to the document discrepancy and valuation

The transmission email shows both contract pages as attachments. The assessor describes the version available to him as truncated. The public record does not establish where that discrepancy arose. My further objection is that a pre-loss value was worked backwards from post-loss photographs. Liability is no longer in dispute, but MAIF maintains EUR 2,000.

10 pages
E08

Transmission to Greek authorities

Record of transmission to Greek authorities; private originals remain withheld.

2 pages
E09

Response from the marine expert network

Response from a marine expert network concerning the absence of an insurer instruction or response.

2 pages
E10

MAIF announces a further review

MAIF announces a detailed review and response after renewed escalation.

7 pages
E11

Submission to the French insurance supervisor

My submission to the French supervisory authority and its standard receipt.

9 pages
E12

Technical challenge to the document basis and backward valuation

My technical statement sets out both issues. The transmission email shows both contract pages as attachments. The assessor describes the version available to him as truncated. The public record does not establish where that discrepancy arose. No pre-loss inspection is documented, while post-loss photographs were used to derive an alleged pre-loss value of EUR 1,000–2,000.

12 pages
E13

Dated pre-incident image from 8 January 2026

An image timestamped 8 January 2026 at 13:07 shows SANKARA one day before the collision. It records actual pre-incident external condition and must be distinguished from post-loss images.

4 pages
E14

Officially recorded declaration on my situation

Redacted extract of an officially recorded declaration concerning housing, income and the consequences of the incident. I additionally explain that I had worked as a sailing instructor and professional skipper, undertaking delivery voyages elsewhere on vessels supplied by my clients; because pumping and monitoring SANKARA kept me from those assignments, I say my contracts were terminated. E14 records my statements about hardship; it does not independently establish those occupational details, the terminations, their cause, causation or liability.

1 page
E15

NAUSICAA — registry and technical extracts

Redacted and cropped extracts from historic French vessel papers for NAUSICAA. The public version retains the name, dates and technical particulars such as length, beam and tonnage; document numbers, ownership data and signatures remain concealed.

4 pages

Photographic record

TWO VESSELS · TWO ROLES

Which vessel is which?

Every photograph is assigned to the correct vessel. For SANKARA, the record also makes clear whether an image documents pre-collision condition or post-collision damage.

Liability is no longer in dispute. The label ‘vessel responsible in the documented collision sequence’ follows the liability handling, assessor text and compensation offer. What remains open is the amount of compensation – particularly the correct reconstruction of SANKARA's condition immediately before the collision.

Damaged vessel · SANKARA

SANKARA — the damaged vessel

46 photographs record SANKARA on the incident day, during later inspections and at haul-out. The dated pre-incident image from 8 January is separately available as exhibit E13. The valuation record expressly distinguishes before from after.

Before the collision — added to the file by me

Nine images from before the collision. Their precise dates are not publicly verified; they document the general pre-collision condition and actual use. The dated immediate pre-collision image from 8 January 2026 is published separately as E13.

9 photos

Incident day

1 photograph

January documentation

9 photographs

April documentation

5 photographs

July haul-out

8 photographs

Further details

14 photographs
Vessel responsible in the documented collision sequence · NAUSICAA

NAUSICAA — the vessel responsible in the documented collision sequence

18 photographs record NAUSICAA, scale, exterior condition, deck areas and moorings. Liability is no longer in dispute; the images illustrate the undisputed collision sequence.

Incident day

1 photograph

April documentation

8 photographs

May documentation

6 photographs

Moorings and lines

3 photographs

PRIVACY BY PUBLICATION DESIGN

Redaction and source integrity

Every published document page was converted into a new raster image. Names, contact details, case references, banking information, signatures and other direct identifiers were permanently covered; two photographs were cropped so uninvolved people are no longer present. Originals and metadata are not part of the website.

Intentionally withheld

Four files remain private: three images of an identity document and one photograph of medical records. The medical image is considered only in the private source review. Health statements are expressly identified as my account, and no medically established causal link is claimed. Publishing the raw records would expose disproportionate identity and health data. The other previously withheld sources are now available as cropped photographs or permanently redacted documentary extracts.

Download source inventory Editorial and redaction log Download press kit