Boat buyer after money following sale - advice please

julians said:
Note, saying I'm not aware of any is very different to saying there arent any defects.

I think the op is in the clear, he stated he wasnt aware of any defects, so the buyer has two issues, first proving the defect existed at the time of sale (now that 3 months has passed), and then proving that the seller knew about the defect.
Click to expand...
Exactly.
 
jfm said:
Paul, if you have described things completely and accurately in your post, and if you were not aware of any problems with the boat, then you have absolutely no liability here. It is beyond any doubt. English law is very clear on this. I would reply telling them that you have no responsibility for any boat costs/issues now that they own it. Keep it v short unless you know your way around the law. But those are two quite important "ifs".


. Nick, I'm surprised at your conclusion. What Paul did was make a statement merely as to his awareness. If he truly wasn't aware of problems then he is in good shape. If he was aware of problems then a punchy opponent can argue that he made a fraudulent misrepresentation and unless trivial that allows buyer to rescind not merely seek damages. But in either case it seems he did not give a "warranty" that deals with breakdowns/events occurring after the sale.

There is a separate point as to timing: if Paul gave the "not aware" statement only before completion, rather than before contract, he is much less exposed because (contrary to what you say I think) the buyer cannot have relied on it in entering into the contract. If the "not aware" bit of paper was signed before completion then the buyer might say he relied on it to complete, but as he was already obliged to complete then his "reliance" claim has no legs. So I'm not totally getting your reliance point
Click to expand...

My reasoning was that the seller warranted that he wasn't aware of any mechanical issues with the boat at the time of sale. (I don't think a warranty has to cover issues occurring after a sale does it?) If an issue would be obvious to someone using the boat, like the drive trims not working, and the buyer could demonstrate that he found the fault on his first use of the boat after purchase, then isn't is possible that a court would find that on a balance of probabilities the fault would have existed at the time of sale, and the seller would have known about it?

All of the other responses were quite gung ho that the OP was completely in the clear, and it seemed to me that it wasn't that cut and dried, but i'm pleased to hear that you think he's on solid ground.
 
Gung-ho absolutely! The buyer bought without due diligence on his part. These very things had they been present would have come to light at survey and sea trial had they been there at the time of sale. Is now the OP to be beholden for every and anything else the buyer finds wrong? Where do you draw the line on this? Not getting to revs could be anything from a dirty bottom or a spent fuel filter down to major engine failure. One is a consumable the other a defect. Has the buyer determined what this is? No. Again the buyer is gung-ho and jumping the line imo. Now if the buyer had come back and gave evidence of what was wrong, that it is evidently been an ongoing issue, and that the seller must have been aware of it then possibly a case of misrepresentation might be made. But as it stands then afaic the buyer has been caught out either by his own lack of due diligence or misguided notions of entitlement
 
Every single boat have ever bought has been purchased on as seen and lying premise with no survey involved.
The risk has been entirely with me and in negociations have made this point very clear to seller when offering a price taking this into account.
This approach is probably not for the unsure or the careful whatever the value of the boat
 
Nick_H said:
My reasoning was that the seller warranted that he wasn't aware of any mechanical issues with the boat at the time of sale. (I don't think a warranty has to cover issues occurring after a sale does it?) If an issue would be obvious to someone using the boat, like the drive trims not working, and the buyer could demonstrate that he found the fault on his first use of the boat after purchase, then isn't is possible that a court would find that on a balance of probabilities the fault would have existed at the time of sale, and the seller would have known about it?

All of the other responses were quite gung ho that the OP was completely in the clear, and it seemed to me that it wasn't that cut and dried, but i'm pleased to hear that you think he's on solid ground.
Click to expand...
OK, I see you point, sorry. The word "warranty" on this forum is bandied about and you use it in the correct legal sense whereby it can only refer to facts that exist today whereas of course on here most use it to refer to a future breakdown guarantee/warranty. Anyway, yes, seller did give a warranty /representation that he knew of no faults today (I don't know timing, but let's assume pre contract). And I agree that if there is a fault three months later that a judge finds seller must have known about at time of sale then seller is on the hook. My reply was predicated in the "ifs" that I mentioned but I see that you were replying without those "ifs" in which case I agree with you.
Buyer of course has a tough battle and is on the rough end of the rule that this will get allocated to small claims track so no material costs can be won but in practice still must be paid by buyer
 
petem said:
OK, and what would you reply (if you were the seller) if asked in the early stages of a sale whether you know if any issues, defect or other problems with the boat?
Click to expand...

I would tell him of any I knew about but would reiterate that it's his business to make sure the boat is what he wants and he needs to instruct a surveyor. If his surveyor comes back with additional problems, the I'd negotiate either fixing the problems or a price reduction. But no warranties after the sale is completed.
 
petem said:
OK, and what would you reply (if you were the seller) if asked in the early stages of a sale whether you know if any issues, defect or other problems with the boat?
Click to expand...

I'd always tell the buyer about any problems with the boat that I'm aware of but I'd also remind him to get a survey done as it's his responsibility to carry out due diligence on his potential purchase. If the survey revealed any unforeseen problems with the boat, I'd either offer to repair or reduce the price accordingly. What I wouldn't do in any circumstances would be to offer any warranty explicit or implied. Once the boat is sold, it's the buyers problem, not mine.
 
petem said:
What would people do if asked to make a similar declaration at the 11th hour when selling a boat?
Click to expand...

You wouldnt be in that position, Pete, because both you and the buyer would have signed a standard form of sales contract such as the RYA agreement and you would refer him to a clause like this

The Buyer is free to inspect, survey and sea trial the boat and all gear and
equipment included within the sale and to satisfy himself as to her condition, quality
and specification. Therefore all express or implied warranties or conditions,
statutory or otherwise, are hereby excluded unless specifically included in this
Agreement, and the boat, her gear and equipment shall be taken with all defects
and faults of description without any allowance or abatement whatsoever
Click to expand...

I certainly wouldnt sign an additional document of the kind the OP signed
 
paul_B said:
... and that the engine was running below what they expected at 3.100 RPM ...
Paul.
Click to expand...
This sentence makes absolutely no sense. What did they expect at 3100 RPM from the engine, 5000 RPM ?

I would strongly urge you review what JFM has written and write an extremely brief email reply reiterating what you have already told them to be the truth and no more.

You may of course wish to perhaps remind them of the circumstances of Anglo German relations in 1918, 1945 and of course 1966. Do they require a repeat engagement ? Or to quote Basil Fawlty - "you started it !"
 
superheat6k said:
You may of course wish to perhaps remind them of the circumstances of Anglo German relations in 1918, 1945 and of course 1966. Do they require a repeat engagement ? Or to quote Basil Fawlty - "you started it !"
Click to expand...

.....or go further and inform them that you will never gain ride in any form of transport which has any connection with Germany....however looking at the vehicles in most marina car parks this may involve rather a lot of walking :):):)
 
Do not bother replying them , they will run out of steam and shut up as they know that they have no case and are only counting on your gentlemanly conscience to save them a buck.

If as you say , it was buyer who didn’t think a surveyor was nesscessary.

Problems can develop on boat 2days after a sale which were not apparent at the time of sale. It is the buyer responsibility to inspect for these.

I have sold and bought 4 boats in the last 3years. None involved a surveyor, all contract agreements had the clause ‘ that seller does not know of any defects/faults at time of sale’. And ‘ buyer has inspected and accepted the boat in the condition it is at the time of handing over’ .
No warrantes in private sales unless specifically stated in the agreement.
 
doug748 said:
Sounds a familiar story; some may not have followed this:

http://www.ybw.com/forums/showthread.php?471374-PITA-new-owners

The sting comes at post #133. A lesson for us all
Click to expand...

Will never happen to me again. My post sale helpful days are over. we have one more boat purchase to make and one of us will have an executor's sale

The R-sole we sold to has soured many wonderful years of boating. Every other buyer of our many previous boats expressed gratitude and delight. One even sent me a half model he made, as a Christmas present and still we get cards 30 years on.

we always bought and sold via a licensed brokerage and a surveyor was always involved There really should not have been any dispute, but as the saying goes 'stuff' happens.
 
Thanks all for the advice.

I replied a very short response saying it was sold over three months ago and no warranty was offered or implied. I got a shorty email back saying he can’t wait for Brexit and will never deal with the English again. Safe to say I ignored that one...
 
Hi,
You should respond and bear in mind your response could be used in court. so from the onset make sure it is polite and pleasant. Just advise them you were not aware of any faults whatsoever. Thats it, no big deal.

Steveeasy
 
paul_B said:
Thanks all for the advice.

I replied a very short response saying it was sold over three months ago and no warranty was offered or implied. I got a shorty email back saying he can’t wait for Brexit and will never deal with the English again. Safe to say I ignored that one...
Click to expand...
You sure he’s not on the Brexit forum in the lounge?
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

Other threads that may be of interest

C
Sealine SC42/450
Replies
9
Views
403
Momac
Momac
steved
Original boat paperwork
2
Replies
30
Views
1K
steved
steved
ari
What is your lifejacket policy?
3 4 5
Replies
86
Views
3K
Greg2
Greg2
C
ENVIRONMENTAL COMPLIANCE - EIAPP CERTIFICATION
Replies
8
Views
392
Tranona
T

Share this page

Top