PaulGooch
Well-Known Member
Sorry Tom, but i don't like "most brokers", "i would expect", etc etc
From your description above, it is not at all clear whether the broker is going to be obliged to return all or any of the deposit, unless he sees fit.
Buying from a broker, what's at risk ?
- Thread starter PaulGooch
- Start date
Sorry Tom, but i don't like "most brokers", "i would expect", etc etc
From your description above, it is not at all clear whether the broker is going to be obliged to return all or any of the deposit, unless he sees fit.
gjgm
Well-Known Member
Well, quite how many cases has anyone heard of where a deposit was not returned, less maybe some nominal costs? Anyone know ?
This seems to suggest that the present process is quite self regulating- the threat to a time waster losing his 5-10pct deposit is enough to put him off, and seller/brokers are reasonably proficient in weeding out those they do not believe are genuine.
That still leaves adrift those buyers who do not know what they want and would like to try a few boats, but I really dont see that is a service private sellers need concern themselves with.
I really fail to see any problem at all. You can make the sea trial subject to anything you like, as long as both parties agree. Even a subjective "wobbly".
Those terms agreed, why wouldnt a prospective buyer then put up a significant deposit? Ah.. because he isnt a prospective buyer after all, maybe.
And if the seller wont agree to a totally subjective sea trial, that is entirely his perogative .. it is his boat for sale after all.
Paul
You not liking the answer is rather tough really as that is the answer I can give.
How the hell do I know as it isn't happening and if it was, I would need to be there to see exactly what was going on.
I would be at pains to only do the trial once the buyer knew exactly what he was buying and therefore I would be and are extremely unlikely to get into a situation where a deposit needs refunding due to the boat not being what was expected.
If it happened, the chances are it would be my fault as I wouldn't have done my job properly and so I would return the deposit and apologise to the vendor for getting his hopes up.
If by being tough on running willy nilly sea trials on the whim that someone thinks they may like a boat, but are looking at half a dozen others I lose the odd deal due to being so nasty then so be it, but I suspect that in my entire career I have only lost two or three deals for that reason.
This thread is becoming farsical now.
There is an extremely good process that is in place and operated by professionals within this industry working to excellent guidelines set up over decades and thousands of boat sales resulting in happy buyers and sellers.
Bend this process by all means, but be aware that the one in place is the one that works.
Each and every sale is different and unless you are the broker sat at the helm of that particular sale how on earth can you expect to say in black and white what the answer will be.
As a broker I believe I work ethically and correctly. I am working for the vendor, but I will do my best to keep a deal together (to broker the deal) and will do everything I can to help the purchaser be 100% sure of what they are doing.
By working like this, buyers and sellers return, time and time again and learn to work with and trust us to do the best job we can for them.
I am fully aware as you are always at pains to point out, that, like in any industry, there are still a number of crooks or at least cowboys within the marine industry.
Looking at the answers on this forum from those associated with brokerage I get the feeling that they feel very similarly to me. But every case is different and each must be judged on its merit.
I truly can only remember the one time that I had someone in my office who didn't agree to the established process. With the vendors consent we bent the rules and both the vendor and I had our time wasted and suffered serious out of pocket expenses.
The rules work and I will continue to use them even if the odd person walks away.
End of
PaulGooch
Well-Known Member
It's not suggested that it works that way Ari. But as it happens, i walked away from one last time i was buying because the broker flat refused a trial without the offer, 10% deposit etc. I'd have happily paid the cost of a trial, the boat was in the water, so just some fuel. The boat i did buy, the owner volunteered a trial, he was already at the boat and the boat was in the water. He refused payment for fuel. We used maybe 10-12 litres out of the 150 in the tank, which was still there when i bought the boat, so the trial cost him nothing anyway.
It clearly isn't refundable if you don't like the boat for any reason. You're now obliged to pay the other £90k for the £100k boat that you dislike.
Not at all. You want to buy boat, you like all you can see/hear/feel without a sea trial. You either :
a) Pay the 10% as now, with the agreement that it's all refundable (less out of pocket expenses for the trial) for any reason you choose.
b) Pay a smaller deposit, with the agreement that it's all refundable (less out of pocket expenses for the trial) for any reason you choose. At the conclusion of a successful trial, you pay the balance of the 10% and sign the usual contract.
c) Do it as now.
The choices are yours. No one loses out, the seller isn't out of pocket, the buyer has spent some money to find out if he really likes the boat. If he does, he's lost nothing either, if he doesn't, the cost of the trial saves him buying a boat he doesn't like.
You cannot argue that it's unfair for the buyer to pay the cost of a sea trial if he doesn't go ahead, with the currents system, he's forced to buy a boat he doesn't like or lose the whole 10%.
Why ? You regularly argue that the system needs an HPI type register for boats, yet we don't have one.
Last edited:
PaulGooch
Well-Known Member
Sorry then, i'll have to cross you off of my list of brokers that i'd deal with. I wouldn't be prepared to pay a deposit "subject to satisfactory sea trial" when it's a broker (acting for the vendor and having a vested interest in the sale, ie commission) who gets to decide what is satisfactory.
ColdFusion
Well-Known Member
That's all sounds very 'maybe, maybe not' and IMHO is a complete fudge.
Who would willingly put down a deposit on a boat not knowing for sure if they would have a battle on their hands trying to get the deposit back, depending on how 'reasonable' the broker was, depending on the circumstances? Oh, thousands per year, some of you will say, as evidenced by the thousands of boat sales that successfully take place, blah, blah, blah. My point is, what about the unquantifiable number of boat sales LOST per year because of the mechanics of the present boat buying process?
As I've said before, I have no axe to grind, but my feeling is that the present system puts a lot of potential boat buyers off. Especially newbies and/or those that don't know the characteristics of a particular boat model. Frankly, having the handling/noise/whatever characteristics explained to you by a broker is worthless - firstly, they (you) are working for the seller and are biased in a achieving a sale and secondly, no two opinions are the same and what is acceptable to one person may not be to another. Who decides whose opinion is valid - the broker holding several thousands of pounds of the buyer's money? And that's fair and unbiased is it???
I maintain that the present system is biased against purchasers and flawed in terms of attracting the maximum number of buyers and achieving the maximum number of sales. There are now several posts in this thread that illustrate lost sales opportunities. No one has yet come up with a better alternative buying process to the one I suggested in post #90 ...Oh apart from those that maintain that there is nothing wrong with the present process
PaulGooch
Well-Known Member
Yes, i agree. But it isn't always how it works, especially with brokerage boats (which is what the thread should be about).
If you have your boat for sale privately, you can easily choose to take a prospective buyer for a sea trial. It shouldn't be a big deal, if the buyer is prepared to pay the cost and there is no commitment from you to hold the boat for him. You don't lose any money and if someone comes along in the meantime and buys the boat, it's his tough luck. But as you say, it's your choice.
You don't usually get that choice with a brokerage sale. It's already clearly established that brokers "do it their way", with no legal recourse to do any other.
Perhaps they should be required by law to submit all offers to the vendor. Possibly some of the vendors might be happy to pop down to the marina Saturday for an hour and take someone for a spin. Obviously being reimbursed for costs (offset against the deposit in the event of a sale). It might result in a quicker sale, the seller might be very keen to shift it, who knows, he doesn't get the choice.
gjgm
Well-Known Member
The broker is an agent in the deal. Please get that clear- the contract is between buyer and seller. If those two agree a totally subjective survey, then of course the agent returns the deposit. IT WOULD BE ILLEGAL FOR THE SELLER AND BROKER NOT TO DO SO.
That is the whole friggin point of the agreement.. to set out legal terms.
Now, if the agreement says the sea trial relates only to a mechanical testing, then THAT is what is agreed.
All the buyer has to do is show some commitment that he at least a prospective buyer, and put up a deposit.
If he is not a prospective buyer, why is he wasting everyone's time?
That is the whole friggin point of the agreement.. to set out legal terms.
Now, if the agreement says the sea trial relates only to a mechanical testing, then THAT is what is agreed.
All the buyer has to do is show some commitment that he at least a prospective buyer, and put up a deposit.
If he is not a prospective buyer, why is he wasting everyone's time?
To be fair Paul I probably would rather not sell you a boat anyway so I think we can both be pleased I am off your list.
The many hundreds of people whose list I have been on are very welcome back anytime.
Subject to deposit, they can have a survey and sea trial assuming we are all sure that the boat they are interested in is what they want.
And assuming the boat is clearly the right one or the closest possible then I would be happy to refund their deposit if something went wrong.
All those hundreds of people whose list I am know that this isn't fudge and know that we are not trying to sell them a boat regardless. We are trying to sell them the right boat. So all those hundreds of people are quite happy that their money is safe with me.
End of... again AGAIN!
PaulGooch
Well-Known Member
Sorry, you lost me. What is it you are replying to here ?
PaulGooch
Well-Known Member
That's excellent news all round Tom. I would never buy anything off of someone who tells everyone that the deposit was "subject to satisfactory sea trial", which makes them think they can decide if the boat is satisfactory, when in fact it's you who get to decide. That's pretty sneaky in my book.
By the way, you don't get to decide when it's "end of", IMO.
ColdFusion
Well-Known Member
I note that no one has yet responded to one particular point in my earlier post. Is it because there is currently no insurance indemnity by any broker's professional body and that a buyer's money currently has no protection in the event of a broker going out of business and dipping into the client account?
Genuine question. Could someone please enlighten me?
Genuine question. Could someone please enlighten me?
capsco
Well-Known Member
This is getting a bit strong now, I believe that broadly speaking all main contributers are right but it is impossible to word a watertight contract to reflect everyones ideas, for instance Nautibusiness I can hardly see you encouraging a new inexperienced buyer to rewrite a standard contract and I doubt that the same prospective buyer would be confident enough to request you do so, if he did I do not doubt that you would, but this does leave room for an argument re unsatisfactory, in this case.
PaulGooch
Well-Known Member
Correct, there is no insurance. If the broker is a sneaky crook, you lose your money.
ColdFusion
Well-Known Member
Yes, exactly. All the power is with the broker once the 10% deposit is handed over and it comes to interpreting the terms of the contract. And they think we don't know that! And they think this doesn't put people off buying boats!
Is it any wonder that many people try to avoid using a broker and buy/sell privately. I think brokers need to wake up to customers' needs - and recognise that 'customers' consist of buyers too.
PaulGooch
Well-Known Member
Indeed. From what i've read, one such company is growing very, very fast and has an excellent reputation. I'm talking of Essex Boat Yard. They do weird and unorthodox things, like taking part exchanges, or even having boats in stock, that they bought in.
We've also read on here from a couple of other brokers who think outside the box and no doubt secures extra/quicker sales for their customers, well done to them too.
Tranona
Well-Known Member
I think what you are referring to is a compensation scheme run by the professional body. Thuis, again has been done to death over the years asnd there have been proposals in the past. However, it seems that there are no cases of a broker taking money from a client account and running off with it so no need for a compensation scheme.
And before people start spouting on about the cases where people have lost money in failures of boat related businesses - it has NOT involved money taken from brokers client accounts.
Your protection is that the money in a proper client account is always the property of the client, so if the broker takes it then it is theft. If you just paid a deposit to a dealer who did not hold it in a client account, then the money is his and you are an unsecured creditor - not a nice thing to be if he goes bust!
So, your check when you pay a deposit is that it does go into a proper client account, which a broker should maintain in accordance with good practice.
ColdFusion
Well-Known Member
Could you clarify exactly what the process is to check that a client account is a "proper client account"?
Also, if a broker takes money out of a proper client account, which is theft, how would the client go about getting his money back? What protection is there for the client's money if this happens?
Tranona
Well-Known Member
These are just sweeping generalisations - might be your opinion. You can always find examples to "prove" your point. People choose to use brokers for a variety of reasons and there can be just as many (but maybe different) negative aspects of private sales.
The issue is whether the current system sytematically favours one party over another and it does not. You need to have a broad and robust framework within which to work and the cuurent system is just that. It is designed to cover the transfer of private property from one person to another. It is not designed for consumer transactions such as trading in boats (or cars, bikes or whatever) where a different set of rules apply mainly because such transactions are not between equals.
It is not easy to word a condition that defines satsfactory sea trials that will cover all areas of satisfaction - simply because (as many have said) "satisfaction" is subjective. So it is better to limit the condition to things that are concrete and not subjective things such as noise and rough ride etc as they are bound to lead to dispute. So it is hardly surprising that sellers try to get those things out of the way and concentrate on determining whether the boat is as described.
There really isn't a simple and foolproof way of resolving this to everybody's satisfaction, so you have to rely on individual negotiation and recognise that even with this there may still be a lack of resolution because the two parties cannot agree on a way forward - so move on.
