Whiterose
Well-Known Member
Comments sound like the Government rolling out “Experts” and “Professors “ of this that and the other.... take it all with a pinch of salt...
Hamble Yacht Services - DONT USE THEM!
- Thread starter Solent sailer
- Start date
Tranona
Well-Known Member
By your own admission it is not as simple as antifouling GRP. You make the point that it needs to be carried out in a specific way and because of that you engaged a specialist contractor. There seems to be a failure of the antifouling adhesion and it is not unreasonable that you should seek recompense from the contractor if they are responsible for the failure. Similarly with the anodes if they failed to follow your instructions.
When you get problems like this either the contractor admits to failure or rejects. If it rejects you are entitled to know on what basis, so that you can challenge if you think they are wrong. The only way to do this is to assemble your evidence to show that they are wrong. No good posting on here in the way that you have. It is a pain to challenge properly, but that is the way the law works. If you believe they are in breach of contract (that is not doing what you asked them to do and not doing the job to the standard expected, then you need to engage a specialist first for an opinion and then to represent you in your claim against the contractor.
As I say there are always two sides to every dispute and the other party no doubt has their reasons for refusing to address the issue. Find out what they are and then challenge if you think they are wrong.
I would imagine the value of the work is within the limits of the small claims track. If you think you have a sound case, present it to them and give them the opportunity to respond and negotiate a settlement. If they fail to respond make the claim on the basis of your expert opinion. You are one step ahead then as you have given them the opportunity to settle. Clearly you have to be confident that your expert opinion trumps theirs!
In the meantime suggest you don't slag them off as at the moment your opinion is just that and lacks authority.
Caladh
Well-Known Member
Excellent advice from Tranona. The OP should take it on board.
Neeves
Well-Known Member
Paul,
You made mention that you did not want to enter into a lengthy discussion on YBW, you also mentioned that you thought the pictures you HAVE NOW PROVIDED are sufficient - for us to take your claims as being fair and fulsome and that we should all boycott the yard in question (easy for me I'm rather long way away). You were a bit unfortunate in that Covid did inconveniently intervene.
However I do think you were a bit arrogant (?) maybe the wrong word, but it will do, to assume we would wholeheartedly offer you moral support in the absence of the detail and even now you, still (which you admit), seem reluctant to be fulsome. If those are the examples of the paint falling off - it looks like yachts that I have seen that have enjoyed a collision of two .......? dinghy etc
But if your reluctance to document the issues also extended to the yard - they might simply think you are a customer whose trade they no longer need .
This idea that yards are centres of perfection where no monitoring of process by an owner is totally unnecessary is surely a joke. You are paying good money - why one earth would you not check, Covid allowing, and document, take pictures - and complain (verbally) at the slightest error and follow up any verbal complaint with the error documented and sent to the yard (with photographs).
Pagoda's are (were) money, like a bob was a shilling (in old money), people who have a surfeit of money had pagoda trees and because the trees were always full did not manage the use of the pagoda's.
Throwing pagoda's or money at a problem is not all of the answer. Nor is complaining and expecting a boycott without a lengthy description.
But we are getting there - though I'm not wholeheartedly behind you - sorry but you started off on the wrong foot - and if you did that with us, I wonder how you have approached the yard?
This is obviously important to you - what is to stop you putting in the effort and writing this all up with copious photographs and sending it to the yard and advising you will be visiting at a time of mutual convenience to discuss. You will obviously send electronically - I'd address it to the most senior individual you know (find out the name of the MD or owner) and then telephone to arrange the meeting. You might like to point out that you live 80 miles away - which might underline to them the inconvenience being caused to you. Prior to the meeting I might define what my fall back will be should the meeting prove unsuccessful. and you can advise the owner/MD etc that as you remain unhappy you will be proceeding further to enjoy satisfaction. Try not to make it a threat early on in the piece - it will simply raise hackles further.
But as you are slowly doing here - you are explaining your dissatisfaction - which as you might have noticed with us - we were not wholeheartedly supportive with a comment that appeared to be trolling. I'm all for working with people - not against them. We all learn from our experiences - hopefully the yard will take this on board as part of a learning experience for their team.
There are 2 sides to the story - and we have only heard your side, and the part you have documented might only be a small part. If the yard know you have been publicly (here on YBW) critical of their work (and that criticism is unfair) - you might need to mollify before progress is made.
Finally - as we only have one side of the story it is incumbent on you, as you have been so critical, to advise us - on this thread - what the outcome is - should we boycott, use them with caution or accept them as a fair and honest business. If you don't update us my attitude, being a good few thousand miles away, is to totally ignore your complaint as being unjustified and inadequately documented. If you want support and advise - YOU have to put in the effort (not us)
Take care, stay safe
Jonathan
You made mention that you did not want to enter into a lengthy discussion on YBW, you also mentioned that you thought the pictures you HAVE NOW PROVIDED are sufficient - for us to take your claims as being fair and fulsome and that we should all boycott the yard in question (easy for me I'm rather long way away). You were a bit unfortunate in that Covid did inconveniently intervene.
However I do think you were a bit arrogant (?) maybe the wrong word, but it will do, to assume we would wholeheartedly offer you moral support in the absence of the detail and even now you, still (which you admit), seem reluctant to be fulsome. If those are the examples of the paint falling off - it looks like yachts that I have seen that have enjoyed a collision of two .......? dinghy etc
But if your reluctance to document the issues also extended to the yard - they might simply think you are a customer whose trade they no longer need .
This idea that yards are centres of perfection where no monitoring of process by an owner is totally unnecessary is surely a joke. You are paying good money - why one earth would you not check, Covid allowing, and document, take pictures - and complain (verbally) at the slightest error and follow up any verbal complaint with the error documented and sent to the yard (with photographs).
Pagoda's are (were) money, like a bob was a shilling (in old money), people who have a surfeit of money had pagoda trees and because the trees were always full did not manage the use of the pagoda's.
Throwing pagoda's or money at a problem is not all of the answer. Nor is complaining and expecting a boycott without a lengthy description.
But we are getting there - though I'm not wholeheartedly behind you - sorry but you started off on the wrong foot - and if you did that with us, I wonder how you have approached the yard?
This is obviously important to you - what is to stop you putting in the effort and writing this all up with copious photographs and sending it to the yard and advising you will be visiting at a time of mutual convenience to discuss. You will obviously send electronically - I'd address it to the most senior individual you know (find out the name of the MD or owner) and then telephone to arrange the meeting. You might like to point out that you live 80 miles away - which might underline to them the inconvenience being caused to you. Prior to the meeting I might define what my fall back will be should the meeting prove unsuccessful. and you can advise the owner/MD etc that as you remain unhappy you will be proceeding further to enjoy satisfaction. Try not to make it a threat early on in the piece - it will simply raise hackles further.
But as you are slowly doing here - you are explaining your dissatisfaction - which as you might have noticed with us - we were not wholeheartedly supportive with a comment that appeared to be trolling. I'm all for working with people - not against them. We all learn from our experiences - hopefully the yard will take this on board as part of a learning experience for their team.
There are 2 sides to the story - and we have only heard your side, and the part you have documented might only be a small part. If the yard know you have been publicly (here on YBW) critical of their work (and that criticism is unfair) - you might need to mollify before progress is made.
Finally - as we only have one side of the story it is incumbent on you, as you have been so critical, to advise us - on this thread - what the outcome is - should we boycott, use them with caution or accept them as a fair and honest business. If you don't update us my attitude, being a good few thousand miles away, is to totally ignore your complaint as being unjustified and inadequately documented. If you want support and advise - YOU have to put in the effort (not us)
Take care, stay safe
Jonathan
Bilgediver
Well-Known Member
I think you might have got a better result to your complaint in other ways. Were there any discussions prior to the work regarding paint application on aluminium. Have there been any discussions since on what products used and has the paint supplier been involved in the problem.
Did the antifouled fall off the primer? Or did the primer fall off the hull carrying the antifoul with it? Not sure myself how antifoul can fall off when according to you very little was applied in the first instance however it might not be unusual for primer to fall off bringing the antifoulf with it and reminds me of an incident hen I called the International rep to my ship in Vancouver BC. Three attempts to paint on aluminium and the finish ruined some weeks after completion by blistering . Apparently it was my fault because I should have used and etching primer and some months later having used the correct primer the job was done again and 40 years later those three articulated GWR model railway coaches are perfect. What primer did Hamble use? and has anyone discussed this with a paint specialist.
Yes Mr International did smile when he saw my problem and for any modellers here making models using aluminium then you will find that the aerosols of grey primer in Halfords are perfect for this job a!though not always marked as etching primer. Perhaps they will also work on OVI hulls.
Did the antifouled fall off the primer? Or did the primer fall off the hull carrying the antifoul with it? Not sure myself how antifoul can fall off when according to you very little was applied in the first instance however it might not be unusual for primer to fall off bringing the antifoulf with it and reminds me of an incident hen I called the International rep to my ship in Vancouver BC. Three attempts to paint on aluminium and the finish ruined some weeks after completion by blistering . Apparently it was my fault because I should have used and etching primer and some months later having used the correct primer the job was done again and 40 years later those three articulated GWR model railway coaches are perfect. What primer did Hamble use? and has anyone discussed this with a paint specialist.
Yes Mr International did smile when he saw my problem and for any modellers here making models using aluminium then you will find that the aerosols of grey primer in Halfords are perfect for this job a!though not always marked as etching primer. Perhaps they will also work on OVI hulls.
TernVI
Well-Known Member
The OP's photos show small areas with problems.
The one next to the sling is probably where the boat was supported while it was painted, so quite likely got a 'dab and hope' treatment just before launch?
The other small areas could be caused by contamination, it happens in boatyards.
I wouldn't expect a painter to fiddle with anodes, if you want anything done to the anodes other than masking, I'd expect it to be explicitly requested.
The one next to the sling is probably where the boat was supported while it was painted, so quite likely got a 'dab and hope' treatment just before launch?
The other small areas could be caused by contamination, it happens in boatyards.
I wouldn't expect a painter to fiddle with anodes, if you want anything done to the anodes other than masking, I'd expect it to be explicitly requested.
CAPTAIN FANTASTIC
Well-Known Member
A lot of issues are as result of lack of communication. Very often Boatyards cut corners, either purposely or accidentally, especially when they get busy, however, communication with a client who paid a lot of money for a service is key to defuse the situation and to rectify issues. Sometimes technicalities are less of a priority, to begin with, customer care and communication should prevail.
dom
Well-Known Member
When you say HYS, presumably you mean one of the firms operating there?
Also have you any photos, and a little more detail about what you asked HYS to do?
Not taking sides on this, but I use HYS a lot and really like them. Some of their onsite outfits are indeed a tad pricey, but I the quality is always there. At least that's what I find and a lot of top, top quality boats go through there.
Refueler
Well-Known Member
Maybe just me - but this update to your original post has a slightly different part to it.
Original post appeared to concentrate on primer / antifouling and anodes not removed. No mention of 'paint'.
This post now makes far more sense and I can agree with you that - it should have been prudent for HYS to remove anodes etc.
BUT forgive me asking - What were your instructions and orders to HYS ? Not being rude - but I have known various arguments between yards and owners for work done - to find that owners have not instructed fully, but assumed yard would do aspects of work.
Again I do not mean to be rude ... just curious.
Refueler
Well-Known Member
Oh Dear .... like many stories ... as the story unfolds over more and more posts and info - the overall complaint starts to get greyer and greyer ...
Seems to me as a general lack of real communication and co-operation between contractor and contractee ... sorry to be blunt.
Seems to me as a general lack of real communication and co-operation between contractor and contractee ... sorry to be blunt.
penberth3
Well-Known Member
Indeed. No idea about this one, but I've seen a few stories on here involving a "customer from hell". As more facts appear the OP usually stops responding and disappears. As said above starting with a public slagging-off isn't a great start.
Aardee
Well-Known Member
Indeed - If the thread title was "Antifouling issues with aluminium hull" the whole tone and direction could have been so different.
PaulRainbow
Well-Known Member
If one was contracting a specialist to do a specialist job, is it not reasonable that the specialist would know how to do the job, without the owner giving detailed instructions ?
I would have thought that a professional body taking on the blasting, repainting and antifouling of a aluminium yacht would know that the anodes needed to be remove prior to painting. The rest of the complaint by the OP appears to centre on the flaking antifoul. I don't see where there is any relevance to the material used in the hull build when it comes to this. Once the hull has been blasted and epoxied/primed (in accordance with the procedures for the hull material) the application of antifoul is surely the same ? If the antifoul is flaking off, then something was done incorrectly. The most likely thing would be that the primer was left too long before the antifoul was applied.
I do agree with some of the comments that the OP should have revealed the full story in post #1, we should have been aware that it was an ally hull and that it had been blasted and primed, but that doesn't change the fact that the antifoul shouldn't be flaking off. I also think the OP should post more of the pictures that he has, to show the full extent of the problem.
With the evidence at hand i couldn't comment on the competence of the contractor, but i'd certainly question not removing the anodes.
I think that some of the comments to the OP are unappropriated. For instance, i don't think it at all reasonable to expect the boat owner to keep visiting the yard and supervise the contractors, one would expect that they knew more about the process than the owner.
I would have thought that a professional body taking on the blasting, repainting and antifouling of a aluminium yacht would know that the anodes needed to be remove prior to painting. The rest of the complaint by the OP appears to centre on the flaking antifoul. I don't see where there is any relevance to the material used in the hull build when it comes to this. Once the hull has been blasted and epoxied/primed (in accordance with the procedures for the hull material) the application of antifoul is surely the same ? If the antifoul is flaking off, then something was done incorrectly. The most likely thing would be that the primer was left too long before the antifoul was applied.
I do agree with some of the comments that the OP should have revealed the full story in post #1, we should have been aware that it was an ally hull and that it had been blasted and primed, but that doesn't change the fact that the antifoul shouldn't be flaking off. I also think the OP should post more of the pictures that he has, to show the full extent of the problem.
With the evidence at hand i couldn't comment on the competence of the contractor, but i'd certainly question not removing the anodes.
I think that some of the comments to the OP are unappropriated. For instance, i don't think it at all reasonable to expect the boat owner to keep visiting the yard and supervise the contractors, one would expect that they knew more about the process than the owner.
PaulRainbow
Well-Known Member
What is the difference between antifouling a freshly blasted and primed ally boat and a freshly blasted and primed GRP boat ? In both cases, is it not the case that the antifoul is going onto the primer ? What is the relevance of the material underneath the primer ?
Tranona
Well-Known Member
There is a lot of guesswork going on here (generally), but it is fair to say that blasting and painting an aluminium hull is more complex than GRP and less tolerant of errors. We don't know whether the failure of adhesion is due to incompatibility of coatings or inappropriate application (temperature, time between coats, preparation etc,); nor whether the way the anodes were treated is wrong and what the consequences might be. I suspect that the OP does not know either, other than small patches of Trilux are coming off after a relatively short period and the contractor has not given a satisfactory explanation.
Such issues can only be moved on by getting professional opinion to identify first if there is indeed failure and then what might have caused this. Whether the OP wants to go down this route depends on how much money is involved and his tolerance of the hassle. As I suggested earlier the first step is to ask the contractor for a detailed account of the work done, products used, processes followed and an explanation as to why the final coat seems to have failed. If they still fail to take responsibility then it is up to the OP to show that they are in the wrong and should. Otherwise it is his non expert voice against an "expert" contractor.
The OP may well decide to cut his losses and take the boat elsewhere for the remedial work, but it would be unwise to do this without getting a professional opinion, otherwise he could end up having the same problem again.
Having just been through a similar problem with the failure of Coppercoat on my iron keel. The contractor said he followed the manufacturer's instructions and used approved products. I sought alternate professional advice that was inconclusive so did not pursue because the cost and hassle would be greater than starting again and using a process and materials recommended by a different contractor, but still following the manufacturers guidelines. So far so good.
RJJ
Well-Known Member
I agree. it's not as though HYS are some provincial mob used to dealing with dories. You should be able to trust they know what they're doing.
Just a glance at their website:
Hamble Yacht Services is a professional full service yacht and motor boat yard. Taking advantage of our unique and enviable location on the Hamble River, minutes from Southampton Water and the Solent, we’re proud to enjoy a world wide reputation for excellence, based not only on our comprehensive boat lifting, storage and berthing facilities, but the expertise and skill with which each service is delivered.
I don't know much about aluminium boats. Because I don't know, I'd ask.
Aardee
Well-Known Member
My post was about the tone of the thread rather than the technicalities of antifouling - If the OP hadn't been so aggressive and confrontational from the get-go he may have elicited a more sympathetic response.
dom
Well-Known Member
There is clearly more to this story than a standard a/f gone wrong.
Go in so heavy with a name and shame and one really needs to back it up.
And I think the OP should now. Or withdraw.
Fair is fair.
Go in so heavy with a name and shame and one really needs to back it up.
And I think the OP should now. Or withdraw.
Fair is fair.
PaulRainbow
Well-Known Member
My question, which you quoted, was:
Once the hull has been blasted and primed, there is no difference to the antifoul application, irrespective of the hull construction. The difference in preparation, products and procedures would be in the stages prior to applying the primer.
The anodes should have been removed. They are not there to protect the ally hull, they are there to protect other underwater metalwork and as such, should be isolated from the hull, otherwise the whole hull becomes an anode. Ally hulls, with improper anodic protection don't last well.
RobbieW
Well-Known Member
Given the number of contractors operating at HYS (primarily a storage and haul-out company) it would be useful to understand which of the service contractors is involved. If it were HYS R&R (a part of Ancasta) I wouldnt be surprised at the OP complaint given management changes over the last 2-3 years and subsequent loss of many experienced staff
