|Comments and Observations:||Govt. of Panama (8 March 2017)|
From: Gabriela Ceron [mailto:email@example.com]
Sent: 08 March 2017 17:38
To: Jan de Boer
Subject: Re: New abandonment case notification
Dear Jan de Boer,
Thank you for the information provided.
In regards to the vessel "Pan Prosperity", I would like to let you know that we have been informed from Panama that a case file has been opened and the vessel is under restriction to leave the registry. As soon as we receive a new information we will let you know.
ITF (23 May 2017)
Crew repatriated by flag, local lawyer appointed by crew. Question mark over why no abandonment insurance.
Govt. of Panama (12 September 2017)
From: labormar [mailto:firstname.lastname@example.org]
Sent: 12 September 2017 16:06
To: Jan de Boer
Subject: RV: PAN PROSPERITY
Dear Mr. De Boer.
Hope you are doing well.
We address you in this occasion regarding the case of the crew of M/V PAN PROSPERITY, IMO 9125152. In the attached documents, you may observe that the case of the crew was resolved; payment of all wages owed and repatriated.
Therefore, we ask you to include this case in the list of cases resolved on the Database on Reported Incidents of Abandonment of Seafarers, IMO/ILO.
Please do not hesitate to contact us for any further question,
ITF (18 September 2017)
Re the Pan Prosperity – the crew were repatriated by the flag state (Panama) but the crew also decided to appoint a local lawyer in Venezuela – the lawyer was engaged on a private basis without the ITF’s participation in the legal action and we do not have further details on the action. I don’t have copies of the documents to which the correspondents below refer.
Govt. of Panama (31 December 2020)
COMPLAINT CLOSED on September 13, 2017, because the shipowner paid the outstanding salaries and the repatriations were taking care. Based on this we request that this complaint be label as "RESOLVED".
According to the Database, on September 18, 2017, ITF indicated "the crew were repatriated by the flag state (Panama) but the crew also decided to appoint a local lawyer in Venezuela, the lawyer was engaged on a private basis without the ITF's participation in the legal action and we do not have further details on the action."
Although no written response received from the owners’ insurer Hydor, the ship’s Master was contacted by Hydor and told over the phone that no cover under the latest Amendments to the MLC 2006 on abandonment of seafarers had been arranged.