Translate the business letters into English

1.

Dear Sirs,

Regarding alleged pollution of the sea,

This is to inform you that 6 of July this year

The representatives of German Cost Guard come on board of our vessel, which was

Staying at the outer roadstead of the port of Bremen  and accused us of sea pollution

With oil products. The accusation is grounded on the verbal information of the Pilot

Of the privet helicopter. Who sighted an oil slick at a distance of 3 miles down the river.

However oil slick was not sighted along my vessel’s sides. Inspection of entries in the

Engine Record Book also showed that our did not discharge any oil products while

Visiting German territorial waters. The accusation of violation of the International Convention

MARPOL was rejected by me. I ask you to arrange survey of my ship by independent surveyor

And note the sea protest right after my vessel arrival?, and also inform the consulate about it.

2.

To port Master Rangoon May 30, 2000

Port of Rangoon

Birma

Dear Sirs,

In connection to you claim about alleged saving of our ship with two tugs of your port during

Refloating of my vessel and towing her to the port 21 this month. I would like to inform you about following.

I have to reject your claims concerning the payment for the saving of our vessel, as there as no such

Service for my vessel and no appropriate documents was signed. I ask you to bear in mind, that nobody

Offered my to sign a Lloyds Contract of salvage during the above as sinking was not threatening to our vessel. I think that refloating effected by the tug was Port Authorities duty, that is why I agree to pay for usual expenses for towing if you produce me an appropriate dill for the effect work.

       Truly yours

Master of m/v A.

3.

Dear Sirs,

Regarding to the damage to the propeller. My vessel B. From Baltimore was

Drifted by wind while the maneuver  entering the lock, December 10, this year.

At that time the stern tug let out the howser, which winded on our screw and broke it.

Our vessel has general cargo on board, including deck cargo. I had to take away a part of

The cargo, order a diver for the inspection of the damage, then the vessel was towed into the

Dry-dock. I will repair the vessel in the port and send a cost, which your company must pay

To my ship owner for the damage to the vessel caused in consequence of the tug, and also

For the discharging or part of the cargo.

4.

To Port Master, Port of Glasgow

Dear sirs,

In reply to your injury I beg to inform you the following.

In connection with the necessity of shifting of my vessel to №5 pier for loading

I ordered two port tugs, according to the local rules. However one of the tugs arrived with the

Great delay. Moreover, the tug line parted twice and it was to be substituted.

That is why the shifting took much time and finished  late in the evening.

In view of the said above I refused to pay fine for alleged using of the pier over the

Established time.

5.

To Port Master   June, 30, 2000

Bremen

In reply to your letter of 5, this month regarding the towing of my vessel while

Proceeding out of your port, I would like to inform you the following.

As I was sailing out of the port in day-time. I ordered only one tug, what

Is allowed by local rules of your port. However two tugs arrived at the indicated

Time, that is why I had to refuse from one of them. Consequently,

the assistance was effected by one tug , which Master can confirm my statement.

In connection of the said above I refused to pay your bill for the help of two tugs.

6.

Dear Sirs,

I regret to inform you, that I consider the claim concerning the damage, received

By your tug on 23^rd, March, this year groundless. I ordered only one tug to pass

Trough the lock, leading to the south dock.

In the order from delivered by your representative officer I indicated that I need

Only one tug signed an appropriate order.

Dock pilot, who was on board of my vessel at the time also said, that vessels

Usually order one tug to pass this lock and he did not offer  me to take a second tug.

Master of the tug was operating at his risk, that is why he is the only who is responsible

For the received damage.

7.

Boston.

Dear Sirs,

In replay to your injury we inform you, that my vessel arrived to an outer  roadstead

Of your port in accordance with the voyage schedule. However the Port Authorities

Informed me, that there was no available berth in the port and so they recommended

Me to anchor. The Pilot, who was met our vessel at the roadstead on the 22^nd of June

At 0400hrs by local time, also confirmed the instruction of the Port Authorities to lead

our vessel to the special anchorage situated in two miles from the pilot station. At present

we are still at anchor and waiting for a permission to enter the port, however 7 days have

passed. I ask you to inform the Shippers about the said above.

Truly yours.