Great Debate

10-50% failed

  • yes

    Votes: 0 0.0%

  • no

    Votes: 0 0.0%
  • Total voters
    0
S

StewartC

Well-Known Member
Joined
14 Dec 2005
Messages
358
Location
London
www.mby.com
As the rumbling continues from the collapse of Peters Opal, the inevitable question arises: Is there enough protection for the British boat buyer?

Are instances like the demise of Peters Opal, as Dominic Smulders argues in this month's MBM, so few and far between that the boat buyer should keep faith with the industry?

Or is the boat buyer way too overexposed?

Cast your vote below, and let's hear your thoughts.
 
Too over exposed, always has been, time for proper registration like cars on HPI system it can be done its up to the dealers to sort it out, it would be easier for brokers to do there homework on deals they do, all done via internet no chasing around ringing previous owners about vat and finance, original bills of sale etc.

We have seen 2 companies go bust this year alone in the uk this year taking people for a lot of money, theres no wonder there is little faith in the industry at the moment, why dont the RYA do something for us? its time something was set up properly, we say it every time something happens and yet nothing is done.
 
Put Simply,

No...and it is a shambles. The UK boat indistry is run as a cottage industry which is fine when buying and selling boats up to about £25,000. But when the figure gets larger there should be more licensing and more protection for buyers and sellers.

The industry has to react to survive as there are challenging times ahead and continuing to stick their heads in the sand will not help.

I believe that now is the time to act and reassure people that the british boat indiustry knows what it is doing and starts to behave in a professional, not amateur way!

Cheers

Paul /forums/images/graemlins/smile.gif
 
just using deposits as an example. The broker dealer does of course have access to the client account at a bank-how else can he move money to the seller or factory? All is well as long as there isnt any temptation to dip into it, and its not up to the bank to track his buisness.
You can have the client account at a solicitors.. it then gets protection if the solicitor goes under, bcz the funds were indeed not his, but still, the dealer/broker can dip in and out if he feels the need.
You can have a segregated and blocked account with the solicitor whereby the broker/dealer cant access without your permission. Now we are getting safer.
In short, the money needs to be NOT part of the dealers ongoing business, and the dealer should not have free access.
For some reason, some businesses dont find that very attractive....and seem very blasey about someone elses money.
 
BRBA can implement all the improvements they like. Weasely words will not protect the innocent buyer dealing with a limited company. When that company goes under the directors can simply slither away.

When buying new at the lower end of the market - which is where most of us are floating - demanding money up front for a new but fairly standard off the shelf boat is ridiculous. The current accepted protocol allows devious marine dealers to flourish; publicity will attract more scum to the industry. Buyers need to trade as they would in any other sector: pay a small deposit and no more until the boat is in their possession. All this nonsense about monies needing to be transferred as soon as the boat reaches a UK port must be stopped before more decent folk undergo these gut wrenchingly dreadful, life changing experiences.

<span style="color:red">Edited by Dan - innocent until proven guilty... </span>
 
Perphaps we should await the outcome before we say anyone has "lost" any money!

No one stole anything, you will notice that no a single one of the Peters directors are under criminal investiagtions so before you tell what I consider to me liablous untruths perphaps you should get your facts right.

The firm folded end of...there appears to be a shortfall of £350,000 this is still be trawled through by KMPG as admistrators, they have already dismissed over £100,000 of claims as spurious i.e. people who are trying it on and had forfeited deposits becasue of pulling out of contracts etc.

That leaves £250,000 of which it is beleived some was passed to manaufactuers against the product ordered. The rest will come out as things proceed.

NO ONE HAS STOLEN ANYTHING - I attended the creditors meeting so I am talking fact, not printed speculation or tittle tatle!!!!

Rant Over
 
StewartC, I think the result of the vote should tell you everything you need to know. The fact is that buying a boat is not like a car or other consumer goods; it often involves sums of money which would buy substantial houses in most parts of the country. To be honest, it amazes me that ordinarily prudent people are happy to pay over hundreds of thousands of pounds of hard earned cash to some of the one horse outfits that populate the boating industry. The industry has had a good time of it recently on the back of a stable growing economy but, if the doomsayers are to be believed and the economy is about to slow, then there will be more high profile failures like Peters and Deva and that could irreparably damage the industry. To my mind, it is simply unnacceptable that the industry can allow such large sums of customers' money to be put it risk in this way and it has to take action to ensure that this does not occur in the future, whether it be through some kind of insurance scheme or proper ringfencing of client accounts
 
For the record,

I heard that Mr Peters has his house on the market and has been forced to sell the marina he also co-owned and also because of Spanish laws has had to pay a significant amount into the spanish operation.
 
Mmm, why? Peters was a limited company so why is he having to sell personal property to finance company debts and, as a British citizen (I presume) why is he subject to Spanish law? My guess is that this is a bit of a sob story to make creditors feel that the ex director is feeling some financial pain too although the marina assets may well have been used as security for loans on other company assets
 
No...and it is a shambles. The UK boat indistry is run as a cottage industry which is fine when buying and selling boats up to about £25,000. But when the figure gets larger there should be more licensing and more protection for buyers and sellers.

Excuse me, but i love my boat, it's what i want, and i have saved hard for it, and why should people who pay above £25000 get more protection than me , when i have saved to be able to get the boat that i want.
The guy who has saved hard or borrowed prudently to buy his boat deserves just as much protection as the wealthy guy who could loose the deposit on his super cruiser and not notice the lose in their bank balence /forums/images/graemlins/mad.gif
 
Hi,

I was trying to define the difference between a cottage industry and a professional developed industry. The figure can be as high or low as you want. I agree that every boat purchase through a dealer or broker should be handled professionally with back up.

Hope that explains all,

cheers

Paul /forums/images/graemlins/smile.gif
 
hello Nautorious
Thanks for the reply, some times i get over touchy about things, i think it stems from times like when i saw on a cross channel ferry a gent in a roller complaining about the small space the loader wanted him to put his roller in, the gent said, put that bloody cortina in there instead, it does'nt matter if that get's dented, that really GRIPPED MY SH*T.
I sound like a real commie, but i am not, just believe in fairness /forums/images/graemlins/smile.gif
 
Having recently been through the purchase process I have to say I was extremely nervous during the period between deposit payment and transfer of ownership, and that cannot be right.

It remains to be seen if the BRBA's scheme (whatever that is) is workable, but I see any effort to improve the status quo, as a positive move on behalf of the industry.

It will then be partly in the hands of us the consumer to ensure that we only trade with bona fide scheme members, and resist the temptation to go for what will undoubtably be the cheaper option of a non scheme member.

Neil
 
Funny how many virulent free marketeers suddenly go all pro rules and regs when the purchase of a white floating shed, basically a rather expensive frivolous toy,gets exposed to the rough and tumble of the real world.
In any other case of paper pushers getting involved the anti bureaucracy brigade would be organising a protest up the Solent at this very moment and if it was proposed that this was a european matter the lounge would already be in full flow.
Private jet owners next to demand proctection from horrid entrepreneurial types prepared to sell stuff that people want to buy.?
 
Think you're mistaking free enterprise with anarchy. Free enterprise fundamentally requires a legal framework to operate, and at the very centre of that is the concept of legal ownership.

ps. i know you were only winding us up, you old git /forums/images/graemlins/grin.gif
 
[ QUOTE ]
......whether it be through some kind of insurance scheme

[/ QUOTE ]
Isn't this the simple answer. Just get insured for the risk. I don't know where one would go for it but I'm sure this sort of situation is not uncommon in other industries.
 
Presuambly all those pro an insurance type scheme would be happy to pay extra for it, in an already tough market the dealers won't be!!!!

So you'll either see sellers on brokerage pay a higher percentage or a fee be added to the new boat prices. It's all a good idea but remember you never get something for nothing!
 
[ QUOTE ]
So you'll either see sellers on brokerage pay a higher percentage or a fee be added to the new boat prices. It's all a good idea but remember you never get something for nothing!

[/ QUOTE ]

I'd be happy to pay, say, 0.5 - 1.0% of the purchase price for this level of insurance. If you think about it, the annual insurance premium for a boat costs around about this figure (mine is about 0.7% of it's value) and I think that is a reasonable deal so the idea of paying a similar amount to insure a purchase would not put me off. In fact, it would actually encourage me to buy a new boat which is what it's all about
 
Its becoming a British Disease.... manufacturers of all sorts of things seem to want our money up front before the goods are made - leaving us, the poor consumers to take all of the risk.

Same thing happened with a national furniture store a few years ago - "So - you'd like that £5,000 dining suite would you sir, well you pay for it now and we might deliver in 12 weeks time".... "Oops - sorry we've gone bust - see you in Courts if you want your money back".....

Now - I don't mind paying a small deposit to prove I'm serious, but like a house purchase - we should hand over the money on the same day we get the keys to our boat

I'm not here to finance the businesses of Boat Builders or dealers
 
Providing protection for boat buyers should be seen as an opportunity by the industry.

Surely, brokers who provide an insurance package for a nominal fee would be far more likely to get the business than those who maintain the status quo - and, administered correctly, it could provide a small profitability bonus for the better managed brokers.

Either way, something needs to change. Although I have never lost money in this way, it's truly heartbreaking to hear of the poor souls who have lost both their deposit and their dreams as their chosen supplier has gone belly-up.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

Share this page

Top