A potential tragedy

[fisherman]

A story about a sale. Man went to buy a car, advertised as 'in good condition', but found some minor problems and haggled the price down. Straight to a garage for a check up, found brakes majorly unfit. Back to vendor, who refused a refund and ends up in court. Judgement: you responded to the 'good condition' ad, but found faults to negate the ad, so you negotiated a new contract not on the ad terms. If you had accepted the vendor's assertions you could have been reimbursed. So is there any evidence of what he said about the boat, along with evidence that it isn't fit for purpose? There lies the difficulty.

If I buy a car I ask a pointed question like "Will it pass the MOT?" and accept the answer, warn the vendor what I'm up to, in the hope I can lean on that later if needed.

 

[PaulRainbow]

We fell in love and bought a 1947 30ft wooden sailing and motor Ketch, about 6 weeks ago. We knew it would need some work when we negotiated to buy it and although we did not do a survey, we looked the boat up online, as the previous but one owners had displayed their restoration journey with the boat on a Facebook page.

Can you post a link to the Facebook page please ?

 

[PaulRainbow]

Oh bugger, i've made a mistake, who can i sue to mitigate my losses ?

 

[NormanS]

Oh bugger, i've made a mistake, who can i sue to mitigate my losses ?

Unfortunately, that is a prevalent attitude.

 

[PaulRainbow]

How does one insure a 74 year old wooden boat without a survey ?

 

[SaltIre]

I'm a lawyer, but not an arse lol, but I hear what you are saying. I know that I can sue this man, only if nothing but to make his life miserable, but I'd rather spend the money on our boat tbh, really what I wanted were opinions on is the criminal aspect and to canvass what people felt. I have called 101 in any event and am waiting for an officer to call us, from the fraud time. I am hoping for a sympathetic officer that although may not charge our hero, but will at least contact him and let him know that he is sailing close to the wind (pardon the pun)

Out of interest how much would it cost you, a lawyer, to sue him? Would you need to purchase Court time? Is the cost of the lead within the small claims court limit?
I know nothing about it - hence the question.

 

[pandos]

Bitter experience.

Of them all! ?

Or just those who had the joy of having as a client someone who would insult an entire profession.?

How so ?

The seller advertised a boat, the buyer responded to the ad'. Seller goes to look at boat, which at the time he looked did not have any internal lead for trimming the boat. Seller buys the boat. It's the boat he looked at, in the condition he saw it in, with the lead never being there when he viewed it.

Misrepresented how ?

You do not know that this is the entire story, the OP bought the boat having seen an on line a restoration, if the seller told them about that video in a manner that suggested that it represented the boat then the silence about his subsequent removal of an essential part could be a misrepresentation.

The exact timing of the removal or what was actually said or done is not readily aparent from the posts.

His statement that the boat was perfectly ready to sail was likely also a misrepresentation.

Up to a court to decide really... But I think the seller and buyer probably know what he did was a bad thing....and I suspect so do many on here...

As to your question about a mistake. If you were induced by untruths into making the mistake and were thereby caused a loss, that might be actionable.

I have been on the wrong end of misrepresentations on this forum by unscrupulous sellers and whilst I know I could go to the small claims court, I have no interest in doing so, but I do feel a little guilt at my selfishness in not sticking it to the bad guy so that he will no doubt do the same to someone else, possibly someone who cannot afford to take the loss.

Edited to remove some really bad english

 

[SaltIre]

Of them all! ?

Or just those who had the joy of having as a client someone who would insult an entire profession.?

You do not know that this is the entire story, the OP bought the boat having seen an on line a restoration, if the seller told them about that video in a manner that suggested that it represented the boat then the silence about his subsequent removal of an essential part could be a misrepresentation.

The exact timing of the removal or what was actually said or done is not readily aparent from the posts.

His statement that the boat was perfectly ready to sail was likely also a misrepresentation.

Up to a court to decide really... But I think the seller and buyer probably know what he did was a bad thing....and I suspect so do many on here...

As to your question about a mistake. If you were wrongfully lead into making the mistake and were thereby caused a loss, that might be actionable.

I have been on the wrong end of misrepresentations on this forum by unscrupulous sellers and whilst I know I could go to the small claims court, I have no interest in doing so, but I do feel a little guilt at my selfishness in not sticking it to the bad guy so that he will no doubt do the same to someone else, possibly someone who cannot afford to take the loss.

wrongfully lead

 

[pandos]

Someone is paying attention ??

 

[davidej]

Why do boats attract so many clueless dreamers?

 

[pandos]

Why do boats attract so many clueless dreamers?

Because it weren't for boats we would have to tinker with MG midgets and other Noddy style cars.?

 

[PaulRainbow]

You do not know that this is the entire story, the OP bought the boat having seen an on line a restoration, if the seller told them about that video in a manner that suggested that it represented the boat then the silence about his subsequent removal of an essential part could be a misrepresentation.

Neither do you.

What we do know is, the small amount of lead was for trimming the boat and is not necessarily essential.

The exact timing of the removal or what was actually said or done is not readily aparent from the posts.

Incorrect, the OP has posted that the lead was actually sold to the scrapyard well beforee he purchased or even viewed the boat.

His statement that the boat was perfectly ready to sail was likely also a misrepresentation.

We don't know if that was said, or not, but irrelevant, as the lead doesn't stop it being sailed.

Up to a court to decide really... But I think the seller and buyer probably know what he did was a bad thing....and I suspect so do many on here...

Plenty of people have removed trimming ballast from boats, see previous posts.

As to your question about a mistake. If you were induced by untruths into making the mistake and were thereby caused a loss, that might be actionable.

The OP claims to have "carried out due diligence", yet didn't pay for a survey, when he admits not knowing anything about boats, BIG mistake on a 74 year old wooden boat, which he now won't get insurance on, other than possibly 3rd party, if very lucky.

 

[syvictoria]

I have been on the wrong end of misrepresentations on this forum by unscrupulous sellers

Here, on YBW?

 

[pandos]

Here, on YBW?

Yes

 

[Tamar]

I'm a lawyer, but not an arse lol, but I hear what you are saying. I know that I can sue this man, only if nothing but to make his life miserable, but I'd rather spend the money on our boat tbh, really what I wanted were opinions on is the criminal aspect and to canvass what people felt. I have called 101 in any event and am waiting for an officer to call us, from the fraud time. I am hoping for a sympathetic officer that although may not charge our hero, but will at least contact him and let him know that he is sailing close to the wind (pardon the pun)

This is what is wrong in this world. Move on, forget about it, try to be a nicer person ?

 

[pandos]

Neither do you.

What we do know is, the small amount of lead was for trimming the boat and is not necessarily essential.



Incorrect, the OP has posted that the lead was actually sold to the scrapyard well beforee he purchased or even viewed the boat.



We don't know if that was said, or not, but irrelevant, as the lead doesn't stop it being sailed.



Plenty of people have removed trimming ballast from boats, see previous posts.



The OP claims to have "carried out due diligence", yet didn't pay for a survey, when he admits not knowing anything about boats, BIG mistake on a 74 year old wooden boat, which he now won't get insurance on, other than possibly 3rd party, if very lucky.

I have not claimed to know the story,

We do not know how much lead was removed, merely that a local scrappy recorded some 300kgs. Who really knows if this is the total removed.?

We know the lead was sold and removed before the purchase but not whether the OP was induced to buy, by the seller through the content of the video, which was definitely made before the lead was removed.

We know the buyer relied on the video and we know the seller offered to make amends which is crucial.

Not knowing anything about boats does not entitle those who do, to take advantage.

Not having a survey strengthens the OPs situation as there is no question of the purchase being made in reliance upon the surveyor.

Insurance is nothing to do with the issue.

 

[NormanS]

I have not claimed to know the story,

We do not know how much lead was removed, merely that a local scrappy recorded some 300kgs. Who really knows if this is the total removed.?

We know the lead was sold and removed before the purchase but not whether the OP was induced to buy, by the seller through the content of the video, which was definitely made before the lead was removed.

We know the buyer relied on the video and we know the seller offered to make amends which is crucial.

Not knowing anything about boats does not entitle those who do, to take advantage.

Not having a survey strengthens the OPs situation as there is no question of the purchase being made in reliance upon the surveyor.

Insurance is nothing to do with the issue.

EH? Not having a survey strengthens the OP's situation. How on earth does that work?
Watching a video made at some time in the past, by a previous owner, would seem to be a very tenuous way of judging the present state of any boat for sale. My sympathy ran out pages ago.

 

[PaulRainbow]

We know the buyer relied on the video and we know the seller offered to make amends which is crucial.

The OP states: "we did not do a survey, we looked the boat up online, the previous but one owners had displayed their restoration journey with the boat on a Facebook page. "

So rather than a survey, the buyer relied on a facebook page from the previous but one owner, that's just totally insane.

Not knowing anything about boats does not entitle those who do, to take advantage.

Again, the seller advertised a boat, the buyer looked at the boat and bought what he saw.

Not having a survey strengthens the OPs situation as there is no question of the purchase being made in reliance upon the surveyor.

I feel like i've stepped into an episode of The Twilight Zone.

Insurance is nothing to do with the issue.

The OP chose to skip the survey, even though he knew nothing about boats. He won't be able to get insurance without a survey, so that was a major mistake.

 

[PaulRainbow]

More than a few people, more than a few times, have asked for some boat details and pictures, but none have been forthcoming.

The OP states in post #1 ;

the question I would like to pose is, is what he asserted to us a criminal offence, ie, a fraudulent deception? As we think this man is a fraudster, and that he tells any lie to induce you to buy his boats and boating paraphernalia. We believe something must be done, but what? Any ideas would be appreciated.

Then in post #70

I'm a lawyer,

Alls seems very odd to me, are we sure this isn't a troll ?

 

[pandos]

EH? Not having a survey strengthens the OP's situation. How on earth does that work?
Watching a video made at some time in the past, by a previous owner, would seem to be a very tenuous way of judging the present state of any boat for sale. My sympathy ran out pages ago.

If I tell you that you can see how good the boat is by looking at a video on YouTube and the content of that video induced you to buy the boat, without having a survey done,
But unknown to you I have removed something so that the video no longer represents the true condition of the boat...which I obviously know, but I choose to remain silent, then I have deceived you as to the condition of the boat,

As you have not had a prepurchase survey, and instead you relied upon my representation that the boat was as described in the video, your case against me is strengthened.

Not the twilight zone just a case of the law not liking fraud or deception..

I doubt it's a troll probably someone who realises that victim blaming maybe ok on here..?