San Juan County District Court Judge enters judgment against Defendant: James Jim Rohrssen

On Tuesday December 22, 2009 at 4:30 PM the San Juan County District Court Judge entered a Small Claims Judgment against Defendant: James Rohrssen of Lopez Island who is trying to run a "sailing coop" or "working-crew" sailing adventure with his sailboat "La Picaresca" (AKA: Rhiannon).   The decision centered around a large cash deposit and significant "work/trade" deposit that were unjustly withheld from Plaintiff, following multiple unanswered demands by Plaintiff for a full refund.

It was obvious from the Defendants testimony that there was no intent of ever returning the deposit(s), even though the Plaintiff had never set foot on the boat while it was in the water.  Likewise, the deposit was for a voyage scheduled to depart Ecuador in February 2010, whereas the Defendant clearly states on his websites that he doesn't intend to leave his port on Lopez Island until mid-summer 2010.  Yep, a physical impossibility.

Evidence presented also showed that the Defendant was using deposits earmarked for future-period voyaging expenses to pay for current repair/retrofit/moorage expenses.  Plaintiff also showed that an inquiry with Defendants' bank confirmed that there were not sufficient funds available to facilitate even a 50% refund.  Defendant stated that he did indeed inappropriately consume the deposits for purposes other than their intended use and that he did not have the resources available to facilitate a refund.

Also presented in the trial was evidence that the Defendant doesn't demonstrate the ability to keep his boat off the rocks.  First blown from it's inadequate anchorage in Fisherman's Bay in December 2008, "La Picaresca" was hauled from the water and dry-docked in Fisherman's Bay until June 28, 2009.  Upon the completion of repairs, the vessel was again grounded while under Defendants' supervision within the first two weeks afloat while making passage to Prince Rupert, BC.  The grounding happened while trying to find anchorage at night, with charts in disarray and in the absence of both GPS & RADAR. (The Defendant publicly stated on his websites prior to embarking on the voyage "Don't worry, I have RADAR")

Not covered in the trial on the 22nd of December were two other specific cases where one gentleman paid $850 deposit AND also performed 85+ hours of labor upon Jim's sailboat at the prescribed "work/trade" compensation rate of $10/hour (an additional $850 deposit).  The $1650 fee was for "sailing expenses" for 2 months of sailing.  Both men boarded the boat on July 1st and both men disembarked at Prince Rupert on July 14th shortly after Jim had again grounded the craft.  They stated that they were both tired of his attitude and lack of integrity, as well as being quite concerned for their personal safety.

The second gentleman made an initial deposit of $1479.17 and an additional $650 deposit in cash to bring his deposit total to $2129.17 AND also performed 90+ hours of labor upon Jim's sailboat at the prescribed "work/trade" compensation rate of $10/hour (an additional $900 deposit).  This brought the deposit total for the second gentleman to $3029.17.  This fee was for "sailing expenses" would have purchased nearly 4 months of sailing at Jim's published rate.  As stated above, both men were only on the sailboat from July 1 to July 14.

Now you can do the math for yourself: the first gentleman only received 25% equity for his deposit... and the second gentleman only received 12.4% equity for his deposit.  Both gentlemen have requested refunds of their unused deposits... yet the Defendant has refused to consider a refund in either case.  Could this be because the monies were already spent toward paying moorage fees to get the boat out of dry-dock?

If you closely examine the wording in the documents that Jim has published on his website, you'll see that there is NO provision for a refund of any sort.  And I'd like to talk to anyone who can understand why someone would want to take any additional credit into the future on a "space available" basis (on a 35' boat where you can't physically "get away")... if 1) you don't trust the Captain, 2) if you don't get along with the captain, or 3) if you fear for your life because of his history of "reckless endangerment" of his crew and vessel.

Please be forewarned - this is a no-win situation for the person who comes aboard and is not fortunate enough to get along with Jim, or be compromised by schedule, because, to-date, he has demonstrated that he cannot even conform to his own published schedule.

Our suggestion to you... before you get too excited about sailing on THIS boat... have your lawyer look at his documents.  Please do your due diligence.  Don't set yourself up the way we did.  We hope you can benefit yourself by learning from our mistakes. 


Also be aware that he uses two different email addresses in his deception: freebird2020@gmail.com and papajim2000@yahoo.com

Best wishes in your journeys.