Changes to a Standard Sale Contract through a Broker

[MapisM]

a professional broker is not there simply to stick and advert in MBY and collect his commission, there is a lot more to it than that.

Mmm... You're describing a role that in my experience goes far beyond what many (most?) boaters would expect from a broker - at least down here.
I for one would rather trust my own advisor to check all those things, if I weren't confident to be able to handle that myself, rather than a broker. Even as a seller, not to mention as a buyer!
Otoh, if anyone in a transaction expects the broker to act also as a sort of personal consultant, and to assume a duty of care on top of that, well, I guess it comes with the territory that this Mr.anyone has to stick to whatever the broker suggests...
But that's not because of a "need" to do so, it's rather a "will" in this case, so to speak.

 

[Nautical]

Just an advertiser of boats and a collector of commissions then . Money Laundering is one of the areas for example (here anyway) a broker can find himself embroiled in if he isn't scrupulous following guidelines and regulations and acting in his clients interests. To say later I didn't know or didn't at least make some basic inquiries is not an excuse and doesn't let you off the hook. Obviously if someone is intent on criminal behaviour or fraud there isn't much a broker or client can do but it is at least comforting to know that the broker knows what he is doing (most of the time ) and has enough experience and intellect to at least head off problems / trouble before it gets any further than prelims.

 

[MapisM]

(here anyway)

Well, I can't speak for what is customary to expect and/or legally required from a broker north of the Channel.
In fact, I also specified in my previous post "at least down here" - where "boats advertiser and commissions collector", rude as it might sound, is not far from the average perception of a broker role, I'm afraid.
Just a matter of different contest/mentality/background/law, I suppose.

That said, my understanding of the last jfm post is that at least some of the due diligences which you are mentioning are not really "due", also under UK law...
But I'm neither willing nor interested to open up a can of worms on that matter anyway!

 

[jfm]

That said, my understanding of the last jfm post is that at least some of the due diligences which you are mentioning are not really "due", also under UK law...

Yup. I also do not want to dig deep into cans of worms, but I have no clue/am curious what Trev's "VAT, yup that does get covered under clause X, sub para X section X caveat X" clauses say or think they do (and Trev you don't say whether they are in the contract twixt seller and broker or twixt buyer and seller). VAT risk in the context of boats is rarely something that can be cured by contract

 

[Nautical]

Ha that would be a can of worms indeed, no, my comment was meant to say that I direct a client to discover and get from what ever authority he needs to have comfort. Some clients are not even aware of VAT status or where to even start. So one guides them in the right direction to appropriate professionals. They contract their services with the client direct, my clauses specifically excludes my risk on VAT / advise thereof or liability. due diligence is probably the incorrect verbiage, reasonable care would be more appropriate or at the very least making the client aware of the requirement for establishing vat status.

 

[jfm]

It's interesting that you say "client" when you mean the buyer of a brokerage boat. I'm intrigued. You must have a contract with the buyer because you refer to "clauses" in a context that can only relate to a contract with the buyer. Yet you must also have a contract with the seller or the seller's CA, else you wouldn't get paid any commission, right? So you have a contract with both sides? Does your documentation include informed consent from each of buyer and seller to your acting for the other side? If not, surely you are cruising for a bruising much bigger than a VAT liability?

I would never regard myself as a client of the seller's broker - in fact I'd regard him/her as very much on the opposite side of the table

 

[Nautical]

I can and do work as a broker for a seller and at times a broker / agent for a buyer but never for both parties at once. In other contexts I am a builder selling to a buyer and there is a contract between builder and buyer.

 

[jfm]

Fair enough!

 

[Nautical]

Fair enough!

No worries my fault , I didn't make that clear, I guess this side of the pond it's not that common for a buyer to engage a broker to look after his interests , in the US it is very common for a buyer to arrive at show/viewing/office with his broker .

Although with my builder hat on I have seen a slight move in that direction, personally I think it works well, much easier to get hard nosed with a seller/ builder when you have a third party working your side of the deal. Not everyone is up for a roughty toughty back and forth, some people find that part of the experience is a bit of a spoiler in the whole buying / building your dream / retirement project. Others love to get stuck in.