Gludy's New Mainsail Reefing System - Dispute

[Ubergeekian]

In fact even when we called in electricians after the crossing who worked on the boat replacing undersized cables etc, they did not notice either. It was the third electrician who noticed

The boat was checked through by a number of specialist in Cape Town and rewiring was done to correct the errors of St Francis. Two electricians inspected the boat In Granada and did not notice.

Or as the builder might see it, their own electrician saw no problem with the wiring, specialists who saw the boat in Capetown saw no problem with the wiring, two electricians in Grenada saw no problem with the wiring - and then suddenly another electrician charged a high hourly rate to fix a problem which at least four other people didn't think existed

Not saying that's how it is, just pointing out how it might look ....

 

[Gludy]

How wrong can you be?

What you say is factually true but the implied conclusion wrong.

The fact that the RCD's are missing and were never installed is a fact that is not in dispute between St Francis and myself - they were not even on the schematic and Duncan called the omission "inexcusable".

So no it cannot look the way you imply.

The undersized cables and components were replaced under warranty in Grenada - there was no dispute on them.

The point is that all that St Francis failed to install the RCD's, the electrician system checks in Cape Town before hand over failed to spot they were missing, my first two electricians failed to spot them missing .... the conclusion is that all the system checks in the world cannot replace actually cruising a boat to find out the problems.

 

[Gludy]

Rb_Stretch
Thank you for your well thought out post.

The builder has provided a totally non-functional system by any reasonable use of the word.
We did not specify the the design - only to use the best options.
The builder never indicated a problem or explained a limitation.
The system could easily have been installed without the issues and be functional - that is happening now.

Your points about bearing are valid but they have no bearing (sorry for that) on the issue because the fact that we can re-design the system to be functional takes all that into account which the builder did not. You do not use a small plastic wheel organiser to turn a high load line through 60 degree ... period.

In a nutshell I expected the builder to provide enough building expertise to provide a functional system - that is why I do not build the boat myself

 

[fireball]

<snip>
How would you have reacted in the same situation?
What would you do now that the builder stone walls even discussion on this?

Paul - I don't know how you started these 'discussions' with the builder - but your posts come across like a wounded cat - lashing out all over the place - it reads as though you are very aggressive - which I know you're not (well - you weren't when you showed me around the Trader!).
Perhaps it's time to put the whole monetary claim into the hands of solicitors and go back and enjoy your boat (once the pro's have finished re-building it!).

As for what I would do ... ah - well only having dealt with UK based companies I have been able to tell them a secret or two ... the first was that I worked on the third floor .... the significance being that trading standards were on the fifth! and the second (now that I no longer work at the council) is that my friend does .... concentrated their minds somewhat ...
Oh - I did have occaission (helping out my brother) to tell a letting agent that I studied law at uni ... (I didn't let on that it was contract law for recording contracts) ... that helped somewhat too!
I don't have people working on our boat - I do it all myself (or with family/friends) - the only bit I did get done was the standing rigging - but even that was done by a firm that does a load of racing boats ...

As a final suggestion - if you do ever get another boat or anything large built that isn't a roll off the production line - you may just want to get a Pro in to inspect periodically - or even supervise if necessary .. unless you know enough about the subject yourself of course.

 

[Gludy]

I wonder what lesson Paul feels he has learnt from this experience......?

Yes I have learnt.

To date with this builder I have learnt that they only chance of getting any customer support is to go public. The first $23,000 worth of bills was refunded to me according to the builder because the felt "blackmailed" - I would use the word exposed. His resentment on that payment is very clear in his posts. So he basically admits that he never would have paid me.

So, regardless of all the **** thrown at me by some, its worth it because to date it has worked. Trader - I was the only one who managed refunded plus £100k expenses on top. All the other lost, some lost all. So far with St Francis Marine it has worked.

I do not think it will work this time - St Francis Marine cannot afford to discuss these issues because the logic is so clear that they should pay. To avoid paying they throw all sorts of diversions out - then insult their client time and time again. Its like watching a 5 year old child who knows he is guilty doing every excuse under the sun to avoid the cost of what he did

So I have had to go ahead and get the work done anyway just so I can sail.

All I can do this time is make sure the forthcoming video on the subject is sent to every sailing forum in the world. At least then I can feel they have had to pay for their deplorable after sales service.

I would of course much rather private and confidential discussions worked to settle the matter and then just forget it .... I do not hold my breath on that one.

So the final answer to your question is that if you put all emotion to one side and just look at the facts public disclosure works better than anything else when you meet that brick wall in private discussions.

 

[Gludy]

Paul - I don't know how you started these 'discussions' with the builder - but your posts come across like a wounded cat - lashing out all over the place - it reads as though you are very aggressive - which I know you're not (well - you weren't when you showed me around the Trader!).
Perhaps it's time to put the whole monetary claim into the hands of solicitors and go back and enjoy your boat (once the pro's have finished re-building it!).

I think I do come over like that - you are right. Yet I am not like that, I do a clinical job yo get a result but unless you know me you will probably not appreciate that. The forthcoming video on St Francis After Sale support will maybe correct that.

Its not worth going the legal route for these problems - it easier to pay, expose the builder for what they are then move on.

If the builder was UK based there would be no issue at all. So many tools, so easy. The Trader thing only happened because of who they were

As a final suggestion - if you do ever get another boat or anything large built that isn't a roll off the production line - you may just want to get a Pro in to inspect periodically - or even supervise if necessary .. unless you know enough about the subject yourself of course.

This boat was a roll off the production line - not the first to have cockpit reefing, not the first to have a hard top etc. The extra equipment which is not an issue is just that extra equipment. However taking your point I would have occasional drop in inspections during build if it was viable. In this case the location and how St Francis Marine operated did not make it viable.

I would have a final survey.

I would not expect the inspections or survey to overcome most of the historic problems of Suliere. Although it would have avoided the reefing problem.

Than you for your constructive post.

 

[taz]

I`d just like to know what others would do it they were in this position, with all doors seemingly closed..........I`d do the same as the op, unless shooting the people responsible was an option.

Hope you get what you want or as near to as possible.

Good luck.

 

[Gludy]

Thanks you for that Taz.

You know if they would simply discuss the actual issues I would feel better regardless of the outcome.

When I made the decision to get Suliere right regardless I knew that the chances were that this time around it would end like this.

I see the problem for them .... if you answer my questions step by step they end up paying out so they choose to ignore the questions that way they do not pay out.

They also think that I am harming them with the publicity when in fact it is there response that is harming them ... they cannot see that.

I often have post telling me to pack it in bla bla that nobody is intersted anymore but all I do is look at the views on the threads which get large very quickly and continue to grow.

Fireball's analysis is spot on I come over different to who I am but that does not bother me too much as my objective is just name and shame.

 

[taz]

Thanks you for that Taz.

You know if they would simply discuss the actual issues I would feel better regardless of the outcome.

I often have post telling me to pack it in bla bla that nobody is intersted anymore but all I do is look at the views on the threads which get large very quickly and continue to grow.

Fireball's analysis is spot on I come over different to who I am but that does not bother me too much as my objective is just name and shame.

One big difference, the people telling you to "Pack it in" haven`t spent $1.3 million on a boat with issues, nor having to pay to correct those issues.

Like I said "Good luck" and I for one hope you get satisfaction.

 

[Gludy]

Thanks but I doubt if I will get paid this time.

St Francis Marine say they feel sour about paying out before and they have really dug their heels in. So this one may go all the way and hence the exposure of their after sales policy has only just begun. With Trader I managed two UK TV shows but the St Francis Marine customer base is world wide so I make my own video show and distribute it on the web worldwide to all possible sailing forums. It may also make it onto SAT TV later. That is how fed up I am with their attitude of stone walling.

Customer from hell meets after sale service from hell

 

[Magnum]

Good luck Gludy.

I have a feeling St Francis Marine are going to really regret their present position.

 

[Gludy]

I have taken a South African Legal Opinion on the RCD's issue.
St Francis failed to fit RCD's and hence failed to provide a safe boat and failed to meet the CE classification for the CE plated boat.

I was aware of UK law and knew SA law was based on it but just to be sure I employed an SA lawyer provide advice on the issue.

Here it is.

Whether or not a person can contract out of liability for negligence is debatable. The law is not clear on that. However, one cannot contract out of liability for gross negligence. The builder's actions in your case seems to be a clear example of gross negligence.

So the law is clear and gross negligence means that the builder is liable for all the consequences of their negligence.
I have not claimed for compensation for the electric shocks, nor for the lost time cruising. I have simply claimed for the bills I paid to rectify the problem and the marina fees whilst it was done and that has been refused.

I think this is a good lesson for everyone - if a builder has been grossly negligent he cannot be protected by any contract with him. He has the full weight of the law against him yet he will not discuss the issue other than to refuse it.

Magnum
I think you appreciate that this issue with the builder is not just about the money. In fact I do not even expect to be fairly treated by them and hence will end up paying out of my own pocket as I have done so far. Its about simply justice and I cannot tolerate their attitude which I also know other owners have to put up with. You are right, they have no idea how well I can promote their answers to my problems world wide. If I lived in SA I would take them to Court and any lawyer would advice them they are onto a loser and hence would better settle. I am not in SA so I choose the other path.
Best wishes for your day in court.

 

[Steve Clayton]

Just a bit of light relief. Way back on about page 9 or therabouts there's the statement:

"...because its always best to finish off manually".

Each to his own says I

 

[Gludy]

Just a bit of light relief. Way back on about page 9 or therabouts there's the statement:

"...because its always best to finish off manually".

Each to his own says I

:

Yes some prefer it to be all manual and I am sure there are a few of them on this forum.

 

[Gludy]

More SA legal Opinion:-

Whether or not a person can contract out of liability for negligence is debatable. The law is not clear on that. However, one cannot contract out of liability for gross negligence. The builder's actions in your case seems to be a clear example of gross negligence.

One of the principles of our law is that a person is expected to mitigate his damages. That is exactly what you did. Under the circumstances, it would not have been reasonable to expect of you to carry on using your boat until the builder was able to do the work himself as the risk of severe damage (even the total loss of your boat) or the loss of life would have remained. It was therefore necessary that you acted immediately to limit the damage that had already occurred and to prevent further damage, which is what you did.

It is a further principle of our law that a person who negligently causes damage to another person, such as the builder in this case, is not only liable for the direct loss, but also the reasonable costs of placing the person in the position he would have been had the negligent act (or omission) not occurred. Therefore, the builder would be liable for all costs that resulted from his negligent act, such as marina fees for the time when you were unable to use the boat and had to have it repaired, as well as for such reasonable costs of repairing the boat to the standard it should have been in the first place.

If the builder refuses to compensate you for all your reasonable expenses resulting from his negligence, your recourse would be to issue summons against the builder to claim damages.

I hope St Francis Marine see the clear issues here.
Its the same law in the UK and there are even stronger safeguards over here.

 

[Monique]

Hey Paul,

i hate to say it; but you have yourself an Afro engineered problem.

 

[Gludy]

No not really - more of an Afro Payment problem!

 

[Ubergeekian]

I have not claimed for compensation for the electric shocks, nor for the lost time cruising. I have simply claimed for the bills I paid to rectify the problem and the marina fees whilst it was done and that has been refused.

I quite agree about the RCDs. But how about your electrician's decision to upgrade the wiring after many other had passed it? That doesn't seem nearly as clear cut.

 

[Gludy]

What upgrade are you talking about?
Do you mean the earth to the dynaplate?

Without it the RCD's would not trip.

This is being discussed here:-
Here

I am not claiming for the cable to earth anyway.

Others had not passed it. All the electricians who have looked at Suliere have been very unhappy about the earthing on the boat. As the jury is still out on this I am not making it an issue between St Francis Marine and ourselves.

I am claiming half the marina fees - we had to go into a marina for the emergency work and the bills for doing the survey so he could identify the issues and work in making the boat safe plus the work replacing the damaged cables and components.

They are for example saying no to the marina fees and they reserve the right to reduce the labour rate not to what I paid but what they wish to pay.
They point blank refused to pay for the damaged cables and components that burnt out as a result of no trip.

I was getting electric shocks and I had to act quickly. Upon inspection I was told the boat was dangerous and we had to fit RCD's. They fitted 3 RCD's but St Francis will only pay for two because they think that is all that is required.
All these costs I incurred were as a direct consequence of their negligence. The boat is CE plated and breached CE safety rules.

 

[Scotty_Tradewind]

My new Jeanneau took me over a year to sort out, and that included new deck organisers, clutches, moving winches, changing lines for different diameters, adding brackets and sheave blocks to the mast.

If you buy cheap you are likely to buy rubbish!
Not so cheap in Gludys case though.
My GCSE students would have come up with better solutions than those in the photos shown, but I'm surprised it took an Atlantic crossing to discover the failings.