Boat valuations and action available.

[chriss999]

Seems a great boat. Why not keep it and use it when you’ve recovered from the op. Something nice to look forward to.

 

[ylop]

Getting a survey on a boat is a bit like having a survey when you buy a house. It may not tell you much that you don't already know (although in this case it would), but is there to satisfy your lender that the house is sound and value greater than the loan. So if you want to insure your £25k you may have no alternative but the spend the £500 and get a survey.

And often are pointing out things which you might not care about but future buyers might - and so affect your ability to sell quickly for maximum price.

 

[steve yates]

Why criticise? I have no issue with the vessel itself. I was aware of its condition before doing the deal, it is only the date of manufacture which is the fly in the ointment.

But I’m sure that part of your original complaint was that there were a lot of defects which you had to spend time and money on sorting?
The only issue with the age really is that you need a hull survey you were not expecting to have, its no big deal unless you know you have a hull problem? So why on earth are you bothering about minor crap like this when facing such major surgery? You have a nice wee boat now, stick it on its mooring, get your op and recovery over wi5 then go out and enjoy your boat. The boat itself is just the means to an end, pottering around on the river will do your op recovery amd stress levels no end of good.
(Ed for sp)

 

[Black Sheep]

The only issue with the age really is that you need a hull survey you were not expecting to have

But does he really need to have a hull survey? Or is it just the particular policy he chose that would require one? Other policies are available. Not all will need a hull survey.

 

[dunedin]

But does he really need to have a hull survey? Or is it just the particular policy he chose that would require one? Other policies are available. Not all will need a hull survey.

Yes, I think that is just another of the OP's misunderstandings due to lack of experience (a case of Rumsfeld's "unknown unknowns" springs to mind).

There is no blanket rule, as the Op suggests, that a survey is needed at 30 years for insurance reasons - it depends on company and policy. Many require at 25 years - which would have applied even with a 2000 build date. Some policies don't seem to require this. But it is a variable factor based upon insurance policy.

And again as often said on here for first time buyers and older boats, the advice is generally "get a pre purchase survey done as may be needed for insurance purposes anyway".
Plus if there were any significant defects, a survey report can generally result in a price reduction that more than covers the survey fees.

Lessons learnt, but hopefully it looks like the actual financial cost / loss might be minimal anyway - at least compared to selling within a year of doing so many upgrades, which always tends to be a loss maker.

 

[potentillaCO32]

I am very au fait with Small Claims litigation so will need no advice with that. ;-) I have a dozen or so cases under my belt and won every one, including taking on the NatWest who tried to financially destroy me after the 2008 crash.

Gosh...
I have managed to luck through life without ever having to take out small claims litigation. Must be the odd one out.

 

[Otter]

I don't want it to turn into a legal fight, it should not be necessary; just a 'bullet in reserve'. Besides that, I am waiting to go into hospital for open heart surgery and don't want the stress of having to brush up on my knowledge, my last case was a few years ago (invoices owed by a Housing Association).

All of the undeclared faults point to is being deliberately mis-described but I'll keep my powder dry for now. It may all be able to be resolved amicably, or the broker might get far more than I expect on its sale.

All the best with the operation, hope everything goes brilliantly with that

 

[Purple Velvet]

Gosh...
I have managed to luck through life without ever having to take out small claims litigation. Must be the odd one out.

Have you been a car restorer, contractor and retailer for the last 45 years? Tragically litigation is sometimes necessary as a last resort, when all other methods have failed. Examples include unpaid invoices, tenant arrears / damage, eviction and defending myself against the Natwest who tried to financially destroy me in 2011. That one cost them £24k plus all costs. Which was nice but a very stressful two years. That was when I became skilled in the art of litigation in person. Now? I would definitely need to brush up. ;-)

 

[Purple Velvet]

Little update. The broker suggests that with a survey and cleaning / finishing, they would list it at £24950 with a commission of £2400 inc. I think that is a bit ambitious, but let's see. Commission includes up to six months on their mooring / sales area.

 

[Tranona]

Have you been a car restorer, contractor and retailer for the last 45 years? Tragically litigation is sometimes necessary as a last resort, when all other methods have failed. Examples include unpaid invoices, tenant arrears / damage, eviction and defending myself against the Natwest who tried to financially destroy me in 2011. That one cost them £24k plus all costs. Which was nice but a very stressful two years. That was when I became skilled in the art of litigation in person. Now? I would definitely need to brush up. ;-)

Going to court under the law of contract, common law against a private individual or even consumer legislation against a trader are in a different league from the sort of things you mention. Like you I have had success in the small claims court on 2 occasions, and both were settled without a hearing simply because the other parties knew they would lose and filing a claim was just a tactic to get them to recognise the claim was valid under the legislation. Still took a lot of pressure to get them to actually pay up.

Even if you think you have been screwed in a transaction like buying a boat constructing a case that would satisfy a court is next to impossible - and even if you do actually succeed getting redress from a private seller is a challenge

 

[Jim@sea]

I once bought a boat which was advertised as having a Carbon Fibre Hull. Could I have got a price reduction because it obviously was not.

 

[Purple Velvet]

Going to court under the law of contract, common law against a private individual or even consumer legislation against a trader are in a different league from the sort of things you mention. Like you I have had success in the small claims court on 2 occasions, and both were settled without a hearing simply because the other parties knew they would lose and filing a claim was just a tactic to get them to recognise the claim was valid under the legislation. Still took a lot of pressure to get them to actually pay up.

I have never yet had one cave like that, maybe because I exhausted all options before issuing a summons. One even went to enforcement; another story but very satisfying that I chose "oral examination" which scared the pants of the defendant because it meant laying open all of their financial affairs to the court, under threat of imprisonment.

Even if you think you have been screwed in a transaction like buying a boat constructing a case that would satisfy a court is next to impossible - and even if you do actually succeed getting redress from a private seller is a challenge

Well we will have to agree to disagree. The Small claims court works on "Preponderance of evidence" and not "Proven beyond reasonable doubt.". All that is necessary is for the Judge to prefer your story to that of the other party. Of course, all your ducks have to be nicely lined up and the court LOVES great reams of paperwork to be generated. Still, one of my defendants turned up with nothing whatever bar his 'character'. ;-)

 

[PaulRainbow]

I have never yet had one cave like that, maybe because I exhausted all options before issuing a summons. One even went to enforcement; another story but very satisfying that I chose "oral examination" which scared the pants of the defendant because it meant laying open all of their financial affairs to the court, under threat of imprisonment.



Well we will have to agree to disagree. The Small claims court works on "Preponderance of evidence" and not "Proven beyond reasonable doubt.". All that is necessary is for the Judge to prefer your story to that of the other party. Of course, all your ducks have to be nicely lined up and the court LOVES great reams of paperwork to be generated. Still, one of my defendants turned up with nothing whatever bar his 'character'. ;-)

One thing you have not said , what evidence do the CRT have for dating the boat ?

As you have no chain of ownership, what evidence do you have for the age of the boat ?

Have you checked for a HIM number, what does that tell you ?

 

[Fr J Hackett]

I have never yet had one cave like that, maybe because I exhausted all options before issuing a summons. One even went to enforcement; another story but very satisfying that I chose "oral examination" which scared the pants of the defendant because it meant laying open all of their financial affairs to the court, under threat of imprisonment.



Well we will have to agree to disagree. The Small claims court works on "Preponderance of evidence" and not "Proven beyond reasonable doubt.". All that is necessary is for the Judge to prefer your story to that of the other party. Of course, all your ducks have to be nicely lined up and the court LOVES great reams of paperwork to be generated. Still, one of my defendants turned up with nothing whatever bar his 'character'. ;-)

And that is very much a double edged sword, It very much depends on the judge as an example I used the SCC once and was fortunate enough to know and also work with people who were lawyers from a circuit judge, barrister to solicitor. asked all for opinions and how to proceed. The consensus was to not become legalistic but simply quote any relevant legal precedent, how your case complied with the SCC requirements and to submit your case in writing and agree to arbitration. Opinion was of all except the circuit judge that I had a case and should win ( I did the defendant caved on the day before the hearing) The judge who was a very good friend opined that I should have read the small print and it was my own fault for not having done so despite that being a fundamental point of unfair contract. So you should you pursue your case you could find a judge of the same opinion as my friend.

 

[Tranona]

I have never yet had one cave like that, maybe because I exhausted all options before issuing a summons. One even went to enforcement; another story but very satisfying that I chose "oral examination" which scared the pants of the defendant because it meant laying open all of their financial affairs to the court, under threat of imprisonment.



Well we will have to agree to disagree. The Small claims court works on "Preponderance of evidence" and not "Proven beyond reasonable doubt.". All that is necessary is for the Judge to prefer your story to that of the other party. Of course, all your ducks have to be nicely lined up and the court LOVES great reams of paperwork to be generated. Still, one of my defendants turned up with nothing whatever bar his 'character'. ;-)

But your story as you have told it would not stand a chance and you have no "reams of paperwork", evidence of fraud, nor of any material loss. You inspected it before you bought it and by buying it you have confirmed it was what you wanted. The boat was "fit for purpose" at the time you bought it. Based on the asking prices of the same model boat there does not seem to be much difference in value depending on age, but on equipment and condition. Anything you have done or spent on it since you have owned it is irrelevant as is its current value. How can a seller be responsible for your actions?

In my cases, I quoted the legislation that covered my claim (I have some legal training) and the companies involved recognised they were in the wrong and would lose if they went to court. The court is a last resort and not only should you have a rock solid story, but as in post#74 you would have to show that you have taken steps to resolve the dispute. You don't have a story, and you seem to have done nothing other than tell the seller you are not happy.

Move on - either keep the boat, use it when you have recovered from your op to get value out of what you have spent or sell it.

 

[ylop]

Little update. The broker suggests that with a survey and cleaning / finishing, they would list it at £24950 with a commission of £2400 inc. I think that is a bit ambitious, but let's see. Commission includes up to six months on their mooring / sales area.

Kind of ruins your argument that you suffered a financial loss though? The broker has said it’s “worth” £5k more than you paid, you wouldn’t expect to get back all of the improvements you made and the market had generally been in decline.

Check the contract with the broker - you don’t want to end up in another dispute! What happens about “mooring fee” if it’s unsold after 6 months? Most brokers will also expect their fee if you sell it through another channel. Some might want an advertising fee especially if you get offers but don’t conclude.

 

[Purple Velvet]

you would have to show that you have taken steps to resolve the dispute.

Exactly, a point I have made a couple of times and I have also said that I have never issued a claim without exhausting all possibilities first. Those actions also help to build the file of course.

 

[Purple Velvet]

Kind of ruins your argument that you suffered a financial loss though? The broker has said it’s “worth” £5k more than you paid, you wouldn’t expect to get back all of the improvements you made and the market had generally been in decline.

A very strong point and one that has amazed me. However just like estate agents, it may not attract that sort of money but we will see. Whatever it sells for will give me more idea of the future.

 

[Purple Velvet]

And that is very much a double edged sword, It very much depends on the judge as an example I used the SCC once and was fortunate enough to know and also work with people who were lawyers from a circuit judge, barrister to solicitor. asked all for opinions and how to proceed. The consensus was to not become legalistic but simply quote any relevant legal precedent, how your case complied with the SCC requirements and to submit your case in writing and agree to arbitration. Opinion was of all except the circuit judge that I had a case and should win ( I did the defendant caved on the day before the hearing) The judge who was a very good friend opined that I should have read the small print and it was my own fault for not having done so despite that being a fundamental point of unfair contract. So you should you pursue your case you could find a judge of the same opinion as my friend.

I can't argue with a word of that, it all hinges on getting the judge onside to prefer your evidence.

One interesting case was against the local "Gypsy King" who owed me a lot of money. He employed a junior Barrister to defend his case, but I still won because the Judge will not allow "Legal bullying" and the case stood on its merits. That was one case where I didn't recover the money though because at that time I had not studied options like High Court escalation and the CC bailiffs flatly refused to attend the premises. Still a "notch on the stick though"!

 

[ylop]

. I am very au fait with Small Claims litigation so will need no advice with that. ;-) I have a dozen or so cases under my belt and won every one,

Most people do go through life without ever setting foot in court so to have been there a dozen times does suggest you aren’t very good at out of court resolution or doing business in a way that avoids the dispute in the first place!

Which was nice but a very stressful two years. That was when I became skilled in the art of litigation in person. Now? I would definitely need to brush up. ;-)

There’s a famous quote the “the lawyer who represents himself has a fool for a client” - it’s certainly possible to represent yourself but it’s not necessarily the quick way to an easy resolution. Nobody likes lawyers but they can actually save you a lot of stress and time.

Have you been a car restorer, contractor and retailer for the last 45 years?

I doubt most people in that situation have gone to court so often.

Well we will have to agree to disagree. The Small claims court works on "Preponderance of evidence" and not "Proven beyond reasonable doubt."

No it works on the Balance of Probabilities - it’s a dangerous assumption that this means the side with the most evidence wins.

. All that is necessary is for the Judge to prefer your story to that of the other party. Of course, all your ducks have to be nicely lined up and the court LOVES great reams of paperwork to be generated.

You missed out a critical part - and for the law to support that there is a liability. Small claim cases are often not about believing all of one persons evidence and disbelieving all of the other persons.

Still, one of my defendants turned up with nothing whatever bar his 'character'. ;-)

All the judge had to do was prefer his story (in your words). Some people, even with paperwork to back up their story can’t present a convincing case - this may well be one of those cases. Past success is not a good indicator of future success - indeed it might make you overly confident about how strong your argument, or persuasive skills are. Nobody on this thread is the judge in your case, but without even hearing from the other side everyone seems to be doubting if you have the basis of a case.

£24k is peanuts to a bank - they probably used a trainee solicitor on it as a learning exercise. £5k could be loads to the seller and he may have insurance which can cover legal representation - who’s going to fight harder then?