Does the survey go with the boat.

[LittleSister]

For insurance purposes does it make any difference if the survey has someone else's name on it other than mine.

Yes, I have done that.

If you have a copy of someone else's survey, and whether or not you have paid for it, it will be acceptable to an insurance company, and also you can rely on it to the extent you see fit (and at your own risk).

What you cannot do is sue the surveyor if you find the survey is inaccurate or fraudulent - he or she has no obligation to you whatsoever. (Good luck with trying to do that even if you commissioned it yourself!)

In principle, you could pay a fee (usually less than the cost of a new survey) to the surveyor, if they were willing, to assign the benefit of the survey to you. Personally I think that would very rarely be worth it for a 'low' value boat.

I was for one boat I bought (of relatively modest value, but a massive expenditure/financial commitment for me) given a copy of a survey done a few months earlier by a previous prospective purchaser (I was told they'd pulled out due to a change in personal circumstances, but treated that with a pinch of salt). I also had a 10 year old survey done when the current (deceased) owner had bought it. A comparison of the two enabled me to decide not to get another survey (though i did get an engineer to do an informal assessment of the engine). The recent survey for someone else was accepted without question by the insurance company.

When searching for boats I was typically given copies of old surveys done when previous owners had bought the boat, and in one case the last survey was recent enough that it would have been accepted by the insurance company, but I had a new survey done anyway because it didn't give me as purchaser enough confidence.

 

[steveeasy]

Yes, I have done that.

If you have a copy of someone else's survey, and whether or not you have paid for it, it will be acceptable to an insurance company, and also you can rely on it to the extent you see fit (and at your own risk).

What you cannot do is sue the surveyor if you find the survey is inaccurate or fraudulent - he or she has no obligation to you whatsoever. (Good luck with trying to do that even if you commissioned it yourself!)

In principle, you could pay a fee (usually less than the cost of a new survey) to the surveyor, if they were willing, to assign the benefit of the survey to you. Personally I think that would very rarely be worth it for a 'low' value boat.

I was for one boat I bought (of relatively modest value, but a massive expenditure/financial commitment for me) given a copy of a survey done a few months earlier by a previous prospective purchaser (I was told they'd pulled out due to a change in personal circumstances, but treated that with a pinch of salt). I also had a 10 year old survey done when the current (deceased) owner had bought it. A comparison of the two enabled me to decide not to get another survey (though i did get an engineer to do an informal assessment of the engine). The recent survey for someone else was accepted without question by the insurance company.

When searching for boats I was typically given copies of old surveys done when previous owners had bought the boat, and in one case the last survey was recent enough that it would have been accepted by the insurance company, but I had a new survey done anyway because it didn't give me as purchaser enough confidence.

n principle, you could pay a fee (usually less than the cost of a new survey) to the surveyor, if they were willing, to assign the benefit of the survey to you. Personally I think that would very rarely be worth it for a 'low' value boat.

I don’t understand why what you say is correct.

What legal right does the surveyor have to assign or sell someone a report that was originally prepared for someone else.
It might happen but I’m not sure if it is right. Surely it would depend what was agreed when the surveyor agreed to do the report for the person who paid for it. There must be a contract or perhaps it’s just the verbals contract. It can’t just be that they feel they have that right.

Steveeasy

 

[LittleSister]

n principle, you could pay a fee (usually less than the cost of a new survey) to the surveyor, if they were willing, to assign the benefit of the survey to you. Personally I think that would very rarely be worth it for a 'low' value boat.

I don’t understand why what you say is correct.

What legal right does the surveyor have to assign or sell someone a report that was originally prepared for someone else.
It might happen but I’m not sure if it is right. Surely it would depend what was agreed when the surveyor agreed to do the report for the person who paid for it. There must be a contract or perhaps it’s just the verbals contract. It can’t just be that they feel they have that right.

Steveeasy

I can't think of a reason anyone trying to sell me a boat, or who had lost interest in buying it, would wish to withhold such agreement.

But as I say, I have never done it, and think it would only rarely be an advantage. It is a potential course should anyone think it were to them.

 

[Refueler]

After some detective work, I emailed several surveyors in my area and one positively replied. They are of the view that they are the copyright holder and should I want a copy they are the people to see for it.

Fair enough - that was that Surveyors answer ... interesting that others failed to reply to you. Possibly because like most matters - unless tested in actual claims - the true fact is rarely known.

I find it also interesting that in this thread - there appear to be opposing factions convinced of their views ... for me - I apply a simple rule - Clients Rights based on Client has paid for it. Whether that is accepted by others - is not my concern.

My Superintendents and Inspectors around the world conduct surveys of multi-million $ ships and cargoes. If I was to disclose / pass on any information from any survey / report carried out out to another party - my business would be blacked outright. We have a saying that is absolute :

P & C ... Private and Confidential. It has only one interpretation.

When requested - and it happens quite often - for a copy of the Report by another. My first action is to inform the Client and ask their decision to supply or refuse to the other party. Clients decision is final and theirs alone.

That same is and was applied to all Yacht Surveys I carried out.

Sorry - but I take this extremely seriously.

 

[lustyd]

When you think about it, the surveyor doesn't actually own the copyright here. In this instance, we pay for their time to produce a document on our behalf, in the same way I could hire a writer to write something for my publication. As such it is right that I own the copyright on the document I had produced. Pretty much all contractors operate under this principal, and were it not the case then Microsoft wouldn't own Windows and Reeds wouldn't own copyright on the Almanac.

 

[AntarcticPilot]

When you think about it, the surveyor doesn't actually own the copyright here. In this instance, we pay for their time to produce a document on our behalf, in the same way I could hire a writer to write something for my publication. As such it is right that I own the copyright on the document I had produced. Pretty much all contractors operate under this principal, and were it not the case then Microsoft wouldn't own Windows and Reeds wouldn't own copyright on the Almanac.

Sorry, wrong. Copyright belongs to the author unless there is a contract explicitly assigning copyright elsewhere. Employment contracts usually do this where the issue arises, but unless the surveyor's terms and conditions include a statement regarding copyright, it remains with the surveyor. You are not the surveyor's employer, you are the surveyor's client.

 

[Refueler]

When you think about it, the surveyor doesn't actually own the copyright here. In this instance, we pay for their time to produce a document on our behalf, in the same way I could hire a writer to write something for my publication. As such it is right that I own the copyright on the document I had produced. Pretty much all contractors operate under this principal, and were it not the case then Microsoft wouldn't own Windows and Reeds wouldn't own copyright on the Almanac.

As one who writes reports for Clients as a Surveyor / Superintendent Company all over the World - I find it easy to accept that I do not 'own Copyright' - to accept that Client who pays for the Service does.

My Reports are used to verify Quantity / Quality of Ships Cargoes. They detail all aspects of the ships operation - Staff / Crew as well as Terminal / Inspection Company used to determine volumes / delays / faults / in fact any factor that affects the financial and physical matters of the shipment. The Inspection Company that is nominated to provide the determination of such cargo that we have to supervise - THEY will not release any report / analysis to us without Clients instruction, even though we are appointed to supervise them on behalf of the Client. Why would we be appointed ? The Inspection Company Report is the official basis for payments for the cargo and submitted to banks. Banks after many years of claims etc. often require that a Supervisory Company such as mine is used to ensure strict application of Industry Standards.

Often I have been asked about the Fuel Blending that I mention at times on forums like this - I cannot reveal the details of the blends - despite my Company being the Blender and Reporting on such - the Rights to that lay with the Client who pays for my company services.

I only mention the above to give an idea of the seriousness I regard this matter ... not to 'blow trumpet' or 'score points' ...

 

[Refueler]

Sorry, wrong. Copyright belongs to the author unless there is a contract explicitly assigning copyright elsewhere. Employment contracts usually do this where the issue arises, but unless the surveyor's terms and conditions include a statement regarding copyright, it remains with the surveyor. You are not the surveyor's employer, you are the surveyor's client.

I applaud your PoV and I usually do not disagree with your posts ...

On this - I am not sure of the stand ...

"You are not the surveyor's employer, you are the surveyor's client"

But as Client you are employing the surveyor to carry out a service for you. Same as example Shell employs my Services to check out a ships cargo.

OK ... lets look at work you do or did ? Lets say a Seismic Survey. Lets assume Company X is client and pays for Ship MS Surveyor to survey a block. Your company assign MS Surveyor to the block - she shoots and records the results. Who gets the results ? Company X.
What if your company now insists it owns CR on those results and offers to sell to Company Y ?

 

[AntarcticPilot]

I applaud your PoV and I usually do not disagree with your posts ...

On this - I am not sure of the stand ...

"You are not the surveyor's employer, you are the surveyor's client"

But as Client you are employing the surveyor to carry out a service for you. Same as example Shell employs my Services to check out a ships cargo.

OK ... lets look at work you do or did ? Lets say a Seismic Survey. Lets assume Company X is client and pays for Ship MS Surveyor to survey a block. Your company assign MS Surveyor to the block - she shoots and records the results. Who gets the results ? Company X.
What if your company now insists it owns CR on those results and offers to sell to Company Y ?

That situation will be covered by cast-iron contracts, and is not comparable.

 

[steveeasy]

Quick search.
In the UK, when you sell an analogue copy of your work (e.g. a CD, a DVD, a book), you cannot control the distribution of that physical copy any longer (this is called the exhaustion of rights). This means that the buyer may resell or lend that copy without your consent. However, you still hold both your exclusive and moral rights. So, for example, if you produce and sell an album, the person who buys it can then resell or lend it to his or her liking. But if the buyer wants to use some of the tracks in the production of new work (e.g. a video), he or she has to get your permission and credit you, as you still hold exclusive and moral rights.

Steveeasy

 

[Refueler]

That situation will be covered by cast-iron contracts, and is not comparable.

Fair enough .. conceded.

But what about when you get a surveyor to do the survey - you are employing them to do that job.

 

[AntarcticPilot]

Fair enough .. conceded.

But what about when you get a surveyor to do the survey - you are employing them to do that job

This is turning into semantics. I am employing a surveyor in the sense that I have contracted with the surveyor to carry out a task that I cannot do myself. However, I am NOT employing the surveyor in any sense that would be recognized under employment legislation. It is a contractual relationship, not an employer/employee relationship; if it were the latter, I would be responsible for faults in the survey (an employer is responsible for the actions of employees in general), which is nonsensical. And if copyright is not mentioned in the terms of the contract, it remains with the author.
Your terms and conditions may well assign copyright to your clients; we have never done business so I don't know. But if they don't, you retain the copyright and are free to impose whatever conditions you like. Of course, you are equally free not to impose any conditions.

 

[Refueler]

This is turning into semantics. I am employing a surveyor in the sense that I have contracted with the surveyor to carry out a task that I cannot do myself. However, I am NOT employing the surveyor in any sense that would be recognized under employment legislation. It is a contractual relationship, not an employer/employee relationship; if it were the latter, I would be responsible for faults in the survey (an employer is responsible for the actions of employees in general), which is nonsensical. And if copyright is not mentioned in the terms of the contract, it remains with the author.
Your terms and conditions may well assign copyright to your clients; we have never done business so I don't know. But if they don't, you retain the copyright and are free to impose whatever conditions you like. Of course, you are equally free not to impose any conditions.

That is the problem - semantics ...

As to my Terms and Conditions - they do not require statement of such - they are part and parcel of the business ... if I was to act as you suggest in last line - I would be out of business faster than a rabbit gets ***** !!

 

[lustyd]

Sorry, wrong. Copyright belongs to the author unless there is a contract explicitly assigning copyright elsewhere. Employment contracts usually do this where the issue arises, but unless the surveyor's terms and conditions include a statement regarding copyright, it remains with the surveyor. You are not the surveyor's employer, you are the surveyor's client.

I don’t agree. The surveyor doesn’t meander about surveying boats and then selling their masterpiece reports. They sell their time to people who want reports written. Contractors almost never own the content they produce in any industry.

 

[Daydream believer]

I have not read all the posts in this thread so my comments may have been expressed already.
Some years ago a structural engineer gave calculations to a customer for an opening for a beam & associated works.The customer did not proceed but somehow the designs landed on the desk of a contractor who decided to follow the specifications to the letter.
The works subsequently failed & the original engineer was sued.
His defence was that the design was not for the contractor that did the works but for the original client.
He lost the case on the basis that his professional design had been put into the public demain & as such should be expected to be correct.

I forget the exact wording that came from the institute as it was years ago & I have long been retired.
But as result my professional institute wrote to its members advising, that when engaged (even on a casual basis) to give advice, of any sort, to clients that they should qualify that advice. They even reminded members to make sure that their advice was correct. Not, aproximate, unless so qualified as such.
They should make it eminently clear who the advice is for, the extent of that advice & the absolute limits of its use beyond that intended in the first instant.
Whether this has been further challenged since, I cannot comment.

Now whilst that is from the construction in,dustry I would imagine that under current law, the principle would apply to yacht surveys. Therefore, any bona fide surveyor working in the industry would be wise to add the necessary clauses to their survey. If someone else was to take that survey & use it one could then suggest that it would no longer be worth the paper it was written on.
Simply because it would be void of any professional backup, insurance backup etc.

 

[Refueler]

But as result my professional institute wrote to its members advising, that when engaged (even on a casual basis) to give advice, of any sort, to clients that they should qualify that advice. They even reminded members to make sure that their advice was correct. Not, aproximate, unless so qualified as such.
They should make it eminently clear who the advice is for, the extent of that advice & the absolute limits of its use beyond that intended in the first instant.
Whether this has been further challenged since, I cannot comment.

This brings to mind something I warn my Offices about every so often ... I have offices in various countries with local people - but all work is in English (UK) by International standard.

Clients are terrible in what they 'use' from statements - especially verbal. I make sure my people do not say they will TRY to do something when Client asks for 'extras'. I impress upon them to say they CANNOT GUARANTEE what Client asks.

Why ? Because when the action cannot be done - Clients tend to only remember "they will do something" forgetting the word TRY. We operate the old fashioned way - where Customer is right unless its serious that we have to remind them.

 

[steve yates]

I don’t think any obligation exists to provide either seller or broker with the survey unless its Written in the contract.
I’m not sure when a survey is given to a broker it’s intended as a gift to use at his will. It’s provided for him as information or evidence.
Steveeasy

I believe the usual reason that surveys are given to brokers, though rightly it should be just certain extracts, is to allow the buyer to walk away and have their deposit returned.
The sale contract usually has a break clause if a survey finds faults which would cost the equivalent or more of the deposit to rectify. The buyer has the option to have these sorted at the owners cost or to abort the sale and have their deposit returned.

 

[ylop]

But as Client you are employing the surveyor to carry out a service for you. Same as example Shell employs my Services to check out a ships cargo.

No whilst you are engaging them, you don't employ a surveyor just as most people don't employ a solicitor - you are paying for their expertise, but unlike an employee you don't control them. The point AntarticPilot is making is absolutely correct - if you create a report YOU personally own the copyright unless there is an explicit contract to the contrary, you formally assign the rights to someone else or you actually employ someone (even then most employment contracts include a clause to remove the ambiguity). Addressing these risks is why businesses engage solicitors to draft / review contracts! It may well be that if you deal with a bluechip they won't contract you unless you have such clauses. It can also be that you own the copyright, but that its content is confidential (so you have no way to do anything with the content), which prevents the client from exploiting the value you provided beyond the scope of work you fulfilled.

I don’t agree. The surveyor doesn’t meander about surveying boats and then selling their masterpiece reports. They sell their time to people who want reports written. Contractors almost never own the content they produce in any industry.

Because lawyers who work for the companies that engage them have drafted clauses to prevent the default position - most of us don't engage a lawyer to negotiate custom T&Cs (many probably don't even read the default terms). Contractors, may include such clauses by default, either because they believe it is morally the right thing to do or because, like Refueller they think its commercially expected. You need to read the actual T&Cs from your surveyor to see.

Here's some examples: Terms and Conditions, Code of conduct - SIMPLY MARINE SURVEYS & CONSULTANTS (clause 4.11) -- says copyright retained by surveyor.
Ben Sutcliffe marine surveyor for yacht and power boat surveys in Cardiff, Swansea and the South Wales Area (clause 4 (2)). -- says for clients use only. These are apparently YSDA template terms.

any surveyor confused by this should probably cough up £35 and watch the following The basics of copyright law - what a surveyor should know - The International Institute of Marine Surveying (IIMS)

 

[Keith 66]

Ok, so you have saved yourself a few quid by using a previous survey & purchased a boat, Your insurance company are ok with that survey.
What happens a few months down the line when you find some structural fault missed out by that survey?
And you try to make a claim?
They wil laugh at you & you wont have a leg to stand on.

 

[lustyd]

What happens a few months down the line when you find some structural fault missed out by that survey?
And you try to make a claim?

I imagine the same thing as if you'd paid for the survey. Has anyone successfully claimed against a surveyor for not finding a hidden issue?

There's nothing stopping you getting a second survey, but it might save £1000 if there's a problem reported that puts you off. I've spend over £2k on surveying boats in the past few months and have no new boat to show for it. I'd have happily found these faults in a second hand survey.