EU Recreational Craft Directive

[CharlesM]

Hello all

I am in the process of purchasing a boat. She is located in spain, but has not have VAT paid on her although she has been sold at least once in the EU. (The owners were planning to export to NZ, but have changed their minds) Well, VAT is not an issue since I will be paying it, and it has been taken into account re the purchase price.

I have, however, just determined I may well fall foul of the RCD. The vessel was built in Australia around '79 or '80. It is unclear whether she is professionally or owner built. I do not know how long she has been in the EC.

I have asked the current owners for clarification re the RCD status, or if there are any receipts proving she was in the EC prior to 16 June 1998 (for exempt status).

Should there be no such proof can anyone indicate what I may need to do, who do I go to for compliance, and is this likely to cost me money.

The vessel is a Mk I Ferro Cement Harltey Fijian

Thanks for any assistance

Regards
Charles

<hr width=100% size=1>

 

[AndrewB]

(My knowledge is now rather out of date, but I'm responding in case your query drops out of sight before anyone else comes in).

In theory, yes, if it was never in the EU prior to the qualifying date then it would be liable to establish RCD compliance and that could be very expensive.

In practice, it doesn't seem like the authorities are actually taking a great deal of notice of older yachts. There are a good many loop-holes to avoid certification. The appropriate authority for a UK registered yacht, which presumably is what it would become, is the Trading Standards Office. However in the past they have had a poor record at providing advice. If you are a member you would do well to approach the CEProof that can be found via a web search.

 

[cliff]

Four words of advice " DO NOT BUY IT"
Who wants a concrete boat?

<hr width=100% size=1>

 

[webcraft]

What is your personal experience of ferro boats that makes you so negative? Have you ever owned one? Sailed one? Even done any research into the subject?

Hartleys have a very good reputation. I hardly think this was a helpful or relevant comment in response to the original post.


- Nick

<hr width=100% size=1><font size=1><A target="_blank" HREF=http://www.bluemoment.com>http://www.bluemoment.com</A></font size=1>

 

[MainlySteam]

An existing concrete boat might have greater difficulty if inspected for compliance of the hull with the directive (or for anything else for that matter) and I would advise checking on that.

Insurers don't like them, and until recently I had 35 surveyors of ships working for me and we would not touch any concrete boat at all 'cause who knows what is inside? All you can say about a concrete hull is it looks ok or it doesn't - if it looks ok, who knows if it is? The often quoted "They are alright if professionally built or if inspected by an experienced ferro cement surveyor" is not correct - from the home of many professionally built such vessels I can say that the surveyors and builders generally did not know what they were doing - much of the basis for their surveys or build procedures was based on anecdote and assumption - little science involved.

If buying a boat which was required to be inspected for any reason before acceptance into the nation's maritime rules or other legislation associated with build, I would give a concrete boat a miss myself.

John

<hr width=100% size=1>

 

[cliff]

Precisly, I am very curious as to why one would go for ferro concrete. My only experience was a friend had one several years ago and it suffered terribly from spalling of the 'crete due to internal corrosion. Perhaps modern vessels have better protection - I don't know hence the question. I am sure there must be some benifits but I personnaly cannot see any maybe except cost of manufacture

<hr width=100% size=1>