Buying a boat - this can't be right, can it??

[Lakesailor]

The crucial difference is that you are buying somebody's private property (whether direct or dealing with the owners agent, the broker) rather than dealing with somebody who is selling it by way of business. If you are interested in a house, would you get permission from the owner to try living in it for a period to see if you like it? Of course not -

If I was buying a secondhand Porsche or Ferrari I would certainly want a drive in it. Not just to see if it was OK but to determine whether I could drive it without crippling my back and that I actually did want it.
Makes no difference to me if it is private or a trade sale. My requirements are the same.

Anyone who won't accommodate that won't sell to me.

 

[Biggles Wader]

I think the deposit is fair enough to deter time wasters,but having to pay out for lifting and cleaning off needs to be factored into the purchase price.Just make sure the deposit is refundable if there is something wrong with the boat that would be enough to require renegotiation of the purchase.

 

[maby]

If I was buying a secondhand Porsche or Ferrari I would certainly want a drive in it. Not just to see if it was OK but to determine whether I could drive it without crippling my back and that I actually did want it.
Makes no difference to me if it is private or a trade sale. My requirements are the same.

Anyone who won't accommodate that won't sell to me.

I agree, though I must say that the dealer who is in the process of relieving us of a very large amount of money did express some surprise that we wanted a test sail in a brand new boat - he said that he sells a lot of boats off the price book to owners who have only seen them out of the water at the Boat Show.

 

[xeitosaphil]

What you could do, is reduce the offer price to include the cost of the lift out, survey, pressure wash and deduct it from what you think the boat is worth, and then put an offer in subject to sea-trial and a successful survey.
When I bought my boat, I had to pay for a survey, boat lift off the hard into the water, and back again if the boat failed the sea trial and survey.
Deposit was refundable but you have to stand the cost of lift in and lift back out again.

Broker did not want to do the sea trial himself as he said he had not got insurance to do so, you need to also check that the surveyor has the necessary insurance also, as some don’t.

Issues arose from survey and sea trial so I made an amended offer which was refused. Instructed broker to re-instate boat ashore at my cost and refund the difference from the deposit.
This made him think I was serious about the offered price which made him advice client to reconsider the offer.
Eventually he accepted and I paid the 90% balance of the revised offer and completed.

Surveys and sea trials, do actually give you the opportunity to negotiate, but it is a good idea to know roughly what the boats state is before parting with any money. I spent 6hrs aboard the boat in the boat yard prior to survey checking the obvious and the broker was happy for me to do so , even before getting the official survey done.

 

[KellysEye]

The normal route is: lift out and wash paid by the buyer; offer subject to survey and sea trial, no deposit. That's what we did. There is no way you will get a sea trial up front, the most important thing is the survey then the trial.

 

[maby]

The normal route is: lift out and wash paid by the buyer; offer subject to survey and sea trial, no deposit. That's what we did. There is no way you will get a sea trial up front, the most important thing is the survey then the trial.

I would prefer to see the sea trial first, survey second if possible. In our case, the sea trial uncovered things that we were concerned about and the survey confirmed them - if it had been the other way round, they may have gone unnoticed.

 

[ianj99]

The normal route is: lift out and wash paid by the buyer; offer subject to survey and sea trial, no deposit. That's what we did. There is no way you will get a sea trial up front, the most important thing is the survey then the trial.

I don't agree. I did the exact opposite, No deposit, brief trial, haul out, wash off and survey at my expense, and then made the offer. It was a 30yr old motor sailor so no way would I have had it surveyed first and then found the engine & / or gearbox was junk. I was suspicious when I arrived for the trial to find the engine was already warm...

 

[Tranona]

If I was buying a secondhand Porsche or Ferrari I would certainly want a drive in it. Not just to see if it was OK but to determine whether I could drive it without crippling my back and that I actually did want it.
Makes no difference to me if it is private or a trade sale. My requirements are the same.

Anyone who won't accommodate that won't sell to me.

You may well find a seller will accommodate your requirements if he believes it will result in you buying his car. Just the same as I have said about sellers of boats. It is the starting point of negotiation that is key. You have to show some commitment to buy before the seller shows some commitment to allow you to use his private property. Unlike a car there are often significant costs involved in trying a boat as in the case that started this thread.

Just the same as buying a house rather than a consumer product. You buy what you see based on your assessment about whether it is suitable for your needs. If you don't like those conditions walk away - but it limits your choice.

 

[gjgm]

I am looking to buy a boat, and have seen one that interests me. It is in the water (and has been for some time). The agent has said it cannot be taken for a test drive until I make an offer that is accepted by the seller, and have paid 10% of the price agreed. Then it has to be taken out of the water, have its bottom and outdrive pressure washed (all at my expense), and only then can it be taken for a test drive. This means I have to effectively commit to buy the boat without the opportunity to inspect the hull or underwater fittings, and without taking it for a test drive to see if the thing even works. And run the risk of losing 10% of the price (and the cost of lift out, pressure wash and relaunch) if I don't like what I see. This does not seem right, but the agent assures me it is standard practice. I should say this is my first attempt at buying a boat through a dealer, previous purchases have been private (which seemed a lot easier and far less risky). I would welcome any advice at this stage, thank you (in advance).

One thing to bear in mind is that you are demonstrating to the broker and buyer that, without being rude, you do not know what you are doing. Often, I would imagine, this is the worst sort of potential buyer.
As stated elsewhere, these standards have evolved because they are,broadly,reasonable and protective to both parties. If you want to change them more to your advantage, maybe the seller agrees, or maybe he doesnt.
Having said that, yes, it is a potential problem that you dont know if you like the boat if you dont try it, but you are supposed to know what you want, not use someones private property as a test case.
That is why, broadly, you are making an offer along the lines that you already know that you want to buy the boat, and the sea trial is to confirm that there isnt something wrong with the boat that you cant tell by it sitting up on the concrete. You might get a positive response from a seller if you say you are concerned about the engine power choice, and so would like to test that.
It is up tp you to do your research to the point that you want to buy this boat, not that you should be entitled to drive about in other people's property so you can find out what you like.
Yes, you can alter from a standard contract, but it could be the seller isnt interested.
So it is a cracker of a boat, but you refuse to put a deposit down, and the boat sells to someone else. Now you are all upset because you thought you had some "agreement" about buying the boat. Not from the seller's point of view.. you actually refused to make any commitment at all.

 

[dunedin]

Unless it is a very rare bargain I would walk away in these circumstances.

With the boat already afloat a brief trial sail should be quite in order (provided you can demonstrate some real interest and ability to conclude a sale promptly). Needing to lift a boat already afloat prior to going out suggests worried about poor maintenance - another walk away factor.
This was the approach with the boat we bought - brief trial sail (with friendly local sailmaker on board with us as bonus). Then haggled over price and made offer subject to survey. We then paid for lift and survey costs, which was fine and normal.

Different matter if boat laid up ashore.

 

[William_H]

In this sales transaction you as the purchaser need to look at the deal or potential deal from the sellers point of view.
Seller will get many who want a free sail around with no or little intention of buying the boat. It will cost the vendor or agent money and effort to accomodate these sight seeers. We get used to large chains of commercial selling of cars or Tv etc who will go overboard to sell their wares. Boat selling is not quite the same thing.

You can not expect a vendor to go to a lot of trouble and expense because he thinks you might be interested.
On the other hand as said you would find it difficult to get your 10% deposit back. You might do well to negotiate a lesser deposit comensurate with costs and effort vendor might make to finally close the deal.

So I would suggest you make a close examination of the boat. Run the engine check what can be checked. (at little cost to the vendor) Actual sea trial is unlikely to show anything unusual unless it is a failure of engine or similar. A common type of boat should produce fairly predictable handling and performance. After a couple of visits you might convince the seller (agent) that you are a serious buyer and so get more concessions ie a sea trial without laying out a deposit.

Obviously the expense of a lift out would only be made by a seller If he was really convinced you are serious. Even then he will want you to pay up front for the lift out.

So assume that you will not get the deposit back easily if the sale falls through. So perhaps reduce deposit offer to a fair amount to offset sellers costs if you don't go ahead but low enough for you to be able write it off.
If he wants to play hardball on the deposit etc then you can reduce your total offer so that any shortcomings of the boat can be fixed by you or just look for another deal. There should be no standard conditions arguments that are non negotiable.
You the buyer should know by now if you want a boat and if you want this kind of boat. If you have nay doubts do a sail training course which will help you decide what you want. good luck olewill

 

[jonic]

http://www.jryachts.com/guidetobuyingaboat.html

Skip the first few paragraphs of the above and you will get to the usuall sequence of events.

Remember these are secondhand privately owned (very expensive) goods -not dealer demonstrators. There has to be a legal framework to cover damage during any inspection or trial a buyer undertakes or any costs he incurs that the marina could charge to the owner.

An unknown boat being driven by an inexperienced person has potential for all sorts of insurance mayhem if something goes wrong and the boat is damaged or worse someone is injured. These frameworks are in place for very very good reason.

Additionally there are many many people who think nothing of having a jolly day out week/end after week/end "researching" or taking out boats at the expense of others. The deposit stops that dead in it's tracks. It is not like a car test drive where you can toss someone the keys and say see you in five minutes.

A boat test may involve launching or lifting in, a crew, safety and risk assessment, fuel, a skipper and a couple of hours at sea.

80% of the boats I sell are not sea trialed. If they are it is because the surveyor recommends one because of something he finds during the survey.

The purpose of the sea trial is to see if there are faults in that particular boat. Not to see if you like that particular model.

For that, if you are not prepared to pay a deposit you need a different arrangement or to charter one first.

 

[jonic]

I ought to add that another reason the boat goes under contract and offer is to ensure there is in fact an offer acceptable to both parties before anyone hires skippers and surveyors etc.

As a buyer you have the assurance of knowing that whilst you are spending money on trials or surveys you can't be gazumped like in a UK house sale.

The boat is yours, at the agreed price, until you complete your trials or survey even if someone comes along the next day and offers 10K more.

 

[Rossynant]

One thing to bear in mind is that you are demonstrating to the broker and buyer that, without being rude, you do not know what you are doing.

I'd say then: broker clearly demonstrates he doesn't know what he is doing.
Deposit - this shows that buyer is serious, and nothing more; but deposit should be refundable if he is not satisfied with the boat. So deposit and some form of preliminary contract is perfectly reasonable and logical.
No other expense is reasonable.
And in this case: requesting the buyer to pay for anything while refusing him the opportunity to check the boat first, as much as can be done in the circumstances - is plain stupid. This boat can be checked to satisfy buyer he wants to proceed further.

There is absolutely no reason to expect potential buyer to make offer or contract without satisfying himself that the boat is worth buying. Nothing to do with "liking the boat" - boat must be checked and proven as for her condition. As far as is possible, of course. Boat is on water so only logical way is to look her over as can be done and make sea trial. Then - only if trial goes well - buyer may be expected to continue, and make some expenses.

So either this boat goes for sea first, buyer also provided with possibility of looking her over as much as possible on water - or he can only walk away... This is only reasonable think he can do.
Perhaps this boat is not for sale?
Reasonable surveyor will also help with this, and buyer may employ him at this stage if he is not good at technicals himself. A lot can be checked on board, even in marina.

It was already shown that boat is unfit to go out on the water - if it is in working order then sea trial should logically be offered first.

 

[gjgm]

I'd say then: broker clearly demonstrates he doesn't know what he is doing.
Deposit - this shows that buyer is serious, and nothing more; but deposit should be refundable if he is not satisfied with the boat. So deposit and some form of preliminary contract is perfectly reasonable and logical.
No other expense is reasonable.
And in this case: requesting the buyer to pay for anything while refusing him the opportunity to check the boat first, as much as can be done in the circumstances - is plain stupid. This boat can be checked to satisfy buyer he wants to proceed further.

There is absolutely no reason to expect potential buyer to make offer or contract without satisfying himself that the boat is worth buying. Nothing to do with "liking the boat" - boat must be checked and proven as for her condition. As far as is possible, of course. Boat is on water so only logical way is to look her over as can be done and make sea trial. Then - only if trial goes well - buyer may be expected to continue, and make some expenses.

So either this boat goes for sea first, buyer also provided with possibility of looking her over as much as possible on water - or he can only walk away... This is only reasonable think he can do.
Perhaps this boat is not for sale?
Reasonable surveyor will also help with this, and buyer may employ him at this stage if he is not good at technicals himself. A lot can be checked on board, even in marina.

It was already shown that boat is unfit to go out on the water - if it is in working order then sea trial should logically be offered first.

I think it is reasonably obvious that the buyer doesnt know the process used to buy a boat. Whether therefore he has understood what the broker is saying is questionable.
I dont think the broker has refused the buyer permission to look at the boat. Are we reading the same post ?The broker has refused to let the buyer sea trial the boat without a deposit, and therefore a commitment to buy it (under the usual t+c of that).
The broker has also advised him that he would need to make such a commitment before being allowed to lift and survey the boat, and that such costs would be the buyers.
So , although you dont feel there is any requirement to make any commitment, the RYA and all serious brokers disagree with you.
Of course, you could possibly buy the boat through any means -I have sold one sight unseen to someone abroad who just took my word and he paid me a telephone sized number fully upfront. However, for the reasons Jonic explains above, there is an accepted, common and reasonably legally fair method of buying and selling a boat.Most people can see it from both sides, and go along with that.
Now it might be that you are so experienced and knowledgable and certain about a boat that you convince the seller that you expect to be able to complete in a number of days, and so wish to go ahead without a deposit- still paying the direct costs yourself. I have also done that myself. That might be acceptable, but unlikey if in fact you demonstrate you have little clue about the boat or what needs to be done in order to buy it.
One last point about deposits. They are also sometimes used as security against costs involved;maybe there are some,maybe there are none. I think that where most people behave fairly, if there is an issue, the deposit would be returned if the deal falls through.
I guess Jonic has sold more boats than most of us. I would imagine that he finds where people follow the established practice, everyone then knows where they stand in the process and what their legal undertakings are, and the process has a better chance of running smoothly. I would imagine that as soon as you start to do it "your way", the risk of problems arise.

 

[jwilson]

http://www.jryachts.com/guidetobuyingaboat.html
The purpose of the sea trial is to see if there are faults in that particular boat. Not to see if you like that particular model.

I agree entirely, with one small proviso/exception:-

In general you should be able to decide on which boat you want to buy based on a static inspection, and survey. Just occasionally, with a boat of unusual design, a sea trial may be of value. This is rather more likely with fast powerboats rather than sailing yachts, as unless it is a well known design you might, for instance suspect it of being prone to chine-walking. Occasionally a sailing yacht might have an really unusual rig causing a similar desire for a sea trial.

Do not underestimate the potential costs and complications of a sea trial - the boat may need to be de-winterised, put afloat and commissioned, skipper hired, fuelled, and then put back ashore and decommissioned and winterised after the buyer's wife says "Don't like the way it wobbles about on the water..." after a nice smooth run round the bay.

Equally however with a boat on a pontoon mooring on a nice day, and the owner around, why not go out for a motor/sail for half an hour once there is some indication that the "buyer" is genuinely interested in buying. There really are serial "non-buyers" around who find looking at boats for sale an interesting hobby.

 

[maby]

I agree entirely, with one small proviso/exception:-

In general you should be able to decide on which boat you want to buy based on a static inspection, and survey. Just occasionally, with a boat of unusual design, a sea trial may be of value. This is rather more likely with fast powerboats rather than sailing yachts, as unless it is a well known design you might, for instance suspect it of being prone to chine-walking. Occasionally a sailing yacht might have an really unusual rig causing a similar desire for a sea trial.

Do not underestimate the potential costs and complications of a sea trial - the boat may need to be de-winterised, put afloat and commissioned, skipper hired, fuelled, and then put back ashore and decommissioned and winterised after the buyer's wife says "Don't like the way it wobbles about on the water..." after a nice smooth run round the bay.

Equally however with a boat on a pontoon mooring on a nice day, and the owner around, why not go out for a motor/sail for half an hour once there is some indication that the "buyer" is genuinely interested in buying. There really are serial "non-buyers" around who find looking at boats for sale an interesting hobby.

We've always asked for a sea trial and never been refused. The first boat was second-hand and about twelve years old - an engine defect was exposed which could have been a problem, we liked the boat and made an offer subject to the defect being resolved - everything went well and we enjoyed the boat for a couple of years. The second time was also a second-hand boat and about five years old. The sea trial uncovered issues that were confirmed by the survey, the owner was unwilling to address them and we pulled out with a refund of the 10% deposit via the broker.

Since then, we have bought new boats which have not been long on the market, so have not been widely reviewed and there have been no examples around the marina to beg a ride on. We have asked for sea trials on the dealer's demonstrator and these have been granted subject to a refundable deposit. The boat that we are about to receive is costing more than our house - not unreasonable to expect an hour or two demonstration, I think.

 

[gjgm]

Since then, we have bought new boats which have not been long on the market, so have not been widely reviewed and there have been no examples around the marina to beg a ride on. We have asked for sea trials on the dealer's demonstrator and these have been granted subject to a refundable deposit. The boat that we are about to receive is costing more than our house - not unreasonable to expect an hour or two demonstration, I think.

Yes, I think we all agree that a dealer is a different proposition. In this case, he actually owns the boat, so the legality is different for one thing.

 

[Lakesailor]

It's a never ending discussion.
Let's just say that if I am in a position to buy a considerably more expensive boat than I am used to I will be the man with the money and if the vendor isn't prepared to accommodate me I will look elsewhere.
The costs involved in a "run around the bay" wouldn't be an issue. I can't see why a prospective purchaser wouldn't be willing to cover the costs of a short trial trip. (without straying into the murky legal waters of chartering). This could avoid getting into the expense of the lift and survey and sea trial.

The point about the "wife not liking the motion after a run round the bay on a calm day" may be dismissive, however it is of vital importance to the prospective buyer in the buying process.
I can see that if a prospective buyer rejected the boat after this the vendor could regard them as messers, but in fact they have made an early decision not to proceed. It's a matter of perspective.

This adherence to the "way it is done" is somewhat akin to the "sorry mate, Health and Safety" or "it's the insurance" excuses that people use to avoid doing things that don't suit them. However if the vendor can't differentiate between messers and serious purchasers they will possibly be losing a chance to sell.

Still. If that's the way people wish to handle the sale of their boat it's up to them.

 

[duncan99210]

We've bought and sold a number of boats over the years. In all cases we've followed the same pattern: offer accepted, deposit paid, lift out and survey, sea trial then completion. On one occasion the survey identified faults that we asked to be recitifed or the price reduced; the vendor refused so we pulled out of the sale and had our deposit refunded by the broker who was a tad upset that we'd pulled out but understood our position. Otherwise, it has always been the case that a bit of negotiation between ourselves and the vendor/broker about fault rectification/price adjustment leading to a succesful sale.

We've always regarded the sea trial as final confirmation of the boats sea worthiness, that any faults found in the survey had been rectified and that all the boat systems worked at sea. Not some sort of confirmation that we liked the boat but that it worked properly, it is the final step in the process; if the sea trial demonstrates some faults then it represents the final opportunity to withdraw from the sale within the terms of the contract. I see nothing wrong with the sequence nor do I have a problem with the usual burden on the buyer for all the costs associated with the process; after all, it my interests that are being protected by the survey and sea trial should I choose to follow that course not those of the vendor.