Hamble Yacht Services - DONT USE THEM!

[john_q]

I have a steel boat (28 years) not aluminium one but the paint systems are similar if you are going back to bare metal.

The antifouling paint flaking off in the photos looks to me like the last coat of primer was left too long before over coating so no chemical key was possible. In this case the primer should have been lightly sanded to provide a mechanical key before the antifouling was applied. I have had this issue on decks and topsides

I always remove the anodes. I am going through sand blasting at the moment and the only anode I left on (the shaft one) was very well painted by the yard as well as the anode studs. Not Impressed but retrievable

 

[Tranona]

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.

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.

Sorry I was using your post wrongly although it illustrates the point I was trying to make that there are too many unknowns and probably too many people involved in the job. The blasting would likely have been done by one contractor and the painting by another. The primer and antifoul is different from a GRP boat and Trilux (as used here) is not the easiest paint to deal with. Hence my observation that there needs to be clarity about who did what, what materials were used and were they applied correctly. The OP is vague about what he asked them to do with the anodes and what was actually done and are there any problems with them now.

Seems to have gone very quiet as well!

 

[PaulRainbow]

Sorry I was using your post wrongly although it illustrates the point I was trying to make that there are too many unknowns and probably too many people involved in the job. The blasting would likely have been done by one contractor and the painting by another. The primer and antifoul is different from a GRP boat and Trilux (as used here) is not the easiest paint to deal with. Hence my observation that there needs to be clarity about who did what, what materials were used and were they applied correctly. The OP is vague about what he asked them to do with the anodes and what was actually done and are there any problems with them now.

Seems to have gone very quiet as well!

You keep saying things like the quote above about the anodes, but i disagree with you (and others who have mentioned this and similar things).

The OP took his boat to a specialist contractor to have the hull blasted, primed and antifouled, it should not be up to the boat owner to instruct them how to do it.

If i came and re-wired your boat, then shortly afterwards some of the new wiring caught fire, because i hadn't fitted any fuses, would you accept it when i said "sorry sir, you didn't say you wanted fuses" ?

I suspect not. I suspect that you would assume that i would do a proper job and when i didn't and your boat caught fire you would be suing me for the damage.

I do agree though that we should have more information about who did what etc.

 

[CAPTAIN FANTASTIC]

You keep saying things like the quote above about the anodes, but i disagree with you (and others who have mentioned this and similar things).

The OP took his boat to a specialist contractor to have the hull blasted, primed and antifouled, it should not be up to the boat owner to instruct them how to do it.

If i came and re-wired your boat, then shortly afterwards some of the new wiring caught fire, because i hadn't fitted any fuses, would you accept it when i said "sorry sir, you didn't say you wanted fuses" ?

I suspect not. I suspect that you would assume that i would do a proper job and when i didn't and your boat caught fire you would be suing me for the damage.

I do agree though that we should have more information about who did what etc.

Very well said

 

[savageseadog]

Sorry I was using your post wrongly although it illustrates the point I was trying to make that there are too many unknowns and probably too many people involved in the job. The blasting would likely have been done by one contractor and the painting by another. The primer and antifoul is different from a GRP boat and Trilux (as used here) is not the easiest paint to deal with. Hence my observation that there needs to be clarity about who did what, what materials were used and were they applied correctly. The OP is vague about what he asked them to do with the anodes and what was actually done and are there any problems with them now.

Seems to have gone very quiet as well!

I've applied and used Trilux myself and found it to be an easy paint to deal with.

 

[EugeneR]

I used HYS to sandblast, coppercoat and Propspeed our boat. HYS recommended Propspeed and my contract was with them.

After a few months the props and shafts were covered in hard growth as if nothing was applied i.e a complete failure. Not fit for purpose. HYS accepted that it failed but blamed Propspeed. They refused to give a refund because they "applied it as per instructions".

Life is too short to worry about a few £100 and I am sharing in case there is actually a pattern of behaviour here.

 

[Neeves]

I used HYS to sandblast, coppercoat and Propspeed our boat. HYS recommended Propspeed and my contract was with them.

After a few months the props and shafts were covered in hard growth as if nothing was applied i.e a complete failure. Not fit for purpose. HYS accepted that it failed but blamed Propspeed. They refused to give a refund because they "applied it as per instructions".

Life is too short to worry about a few £100 and I am sharing in case there is actually a pattern of behaviour here.

If the Prop Speed did not fall off then it was applied properly and the fault could be as a result of lack of use. No AF works (there may be, there are, exception) if the vessel is left idle, particularly in the warmer months and if left in a high fouling environment. Prop Speed is also easily damaged, it is soft, and if damaged, as a result of the prop hitting something when it is in use (accidental - not suggestion of incompetence) than fouling will find a way to adhere to the damaged part - once you have fouling you are on the slippery slope - and attempt to remove, even raving the prop hard, it further damages the coating and it gets worse - not better. It is basically impossible to repair.

For this or these reasons many commercial operators large ships are moving back from silicone coating and reverting to conventional AF. Princess have moved some or all ships back to conventional AF, Maersk use conventional AF. I say conventional, expensive and top of the range.

Props and sail drives have always been a problem and remain so - there is no answer (you can get conventional AF that will well outlast silicones).

But if you use your yacht and are lucky enough to use it in clear and clean water Prop Speed is good and HYS recommendation cannot be criticised. It is an expensive treatment and needs applied correctly (its not difficult, you just need to follow the instructions, then it competes well with Veleox. I'd vote for Velox, its cheaper and is more robust - but as has been mentioned may not be availableable in the UK, now - confirmation would be useful. However Velox does not last as long as the conventional AF we use on a time basis of about 2:1.


We read on this forum of people whose AF lasted 2 years and the next time they applied the same AF it lasted one year, we read that a yacht at one end of a trot stays clean and another at the other end gets fouled - using the same AF. AF is too variable a topic to be definitive over one or 2 seasons - unless it falls off - and then there is a fault.....


But my understanding, reading this thread - I have an interest in AF, from thousands of miles away is that HYS is a location employing a number of independent contractors. The thread title and Post No 46 damn the whole lot. To me this is wrong, I put it down to Trolling - we have another post where a member was very happy with the work completed. The complaints are not defined completely - people are simply mouthing off, because they do not understand AF, or they did not define what work they wanted done, did not document what was wrong etc etc.

I have no sympathy for someone who spends 1,000s of Stg to have work completed, finds an apparent fault, does not appear to complain at the time is too lazy to define the issues when looking for public support (and help?) and appears to drag a whole raft of independent contractors into his complaint s- when the issue might be one contractor. And in answer to a point made earlier - if I'd spent thousands - I would check and check again - no-one is perfect and the time to complain is before you pay not 6 months later.

Jonathan

 

[Solent sailer]

Hello all

Thought it was time I gave an update on the stunning service we have received from Hamble Yacht Services – although they have now changed their name to “Ancasta Yacht Services” (I remember a certain cable TV company changing its name after it got a reputation for causing traffic congestion and killing trees when laying their cables – similarities?).

After getting know ware with Ancasta Yacht Services as a remedy that in my view was a compromise and that was minimal cost to them but should save me some expenses, I suggested they lift our boat and put it in their yard for the weekend, give me one can of A/F and I would do the repairs to the A/F, this would give them a chance to look at it and would save me the cost of a lift. Ancasta Yacht Services accepted this suggestion and we arranged to lift out for a weekend, unfortunately I was then told they don’t do boat lifts on a Friday or a Monday so I would need to take 4 days off work to get the boat there and back home – This was now costing me more than it would cost Ancasta Yacht Services!

When we were lifted, I requested a hard blast off to remove any loose A/F so I could do a good repair, this was overruled and they only washed hull gently so as not to do any “damage to the paint”, I wasn’t paying so had no say in this.

Unfortunately, at this stage we noticed the epoxy primer had failed in many areas, most of the chines had corrosion and odd patches else ware, we agreed that their painter and the paint supplies “expert” (Rep!) could view it the next day. The painter seemed knowledgeable and proposed sanding the A/F off and patching the corroded areas followed by a coat of epoxy over the whole boat again followed by A/F. This seemed like a sensible solution and I was happy with this approach, the paint suppliers rep. had a different view. He said that:

• He expected 5% of the paint to fail.
• The failed A/F was caused by slamming and was to be expected (we have been in lock down and the boat hasn’t left the marina!)
• There was one worn anode and this was caused by stray currents and would cause the paint to fail (we can dry out on the beach so I change anodes at 50% ware not every time the boat is lifted – the anode could have been 2 years old, all the other were “as new”). The Rep. didn’t seem able to understand or listen and just kept saying the anode was only 6months old and was a problem, the boat had clearly been slamming badly and causing the A/F to fall off. He might be better at selling time share than providing technical support?

The Ancasta Yacht Services manager on site agreed with the painter and they both felt it would be best to program the works in for later in the year as they were busy, he also said he would have to run it past his boss (who was taking a long weekend and was not contactable). We did some temporary repairs to the epoxy and A/F the hull, ready to go back in the water on Tuesday. On the Monday when Ancasta Yacht Services MD returned she told us we should not have done the repairs to the epoxy or the A/F as she wanted to look at it herself. We had an agreement for one weekend in the yard, Ancasta Yacht Services had a manager in attendance and he advised me to do the works, if she didn’t trust him and their painters, she should have made herself contactable! (At this time I agreed to pay for the second lift to do the repairs as theoretically the repairs could have been done whilst we were out of the water if they had the labor – the painter didn’t think they did but..)



This was back in June had Ancasta Yacht Services MD promised to come back with a proposal asap, I also asked them to quite for some additional works to make it more worth there while and reduce any potential losses to them. I emails her again on the 19 August as I hadn’t received anything. In her reply she accepted the A/F was faulty and their fault but felt that allowing me to do the repairs myself was all they were responsible for (Ancasta Yacht Services repairing their own shoddy work was not on the cards). She also does not accept any responsibility for the epoxy failing.



Having inspected the paint when doing the repairs, I am confident it was not applied in accordance with International Paints guidance as it only appears to have 2 coats and not the 5 required so no criticism of the paint just the shortcuts that appear to have been taken applying it. Having discussed the works with other painting companies who cannot believe the response or inability to take responsibility for their work I stand by original post and strongly recommend you find a ethical company the want to do a good job and not just take you money, change there name and hope you go away.

 

[Solent sailer]

Hello All



Its been a while but I thought you might all be interested in the outcome of this fiasco.



I eventually had the primer thickness analysed and it came back slightly thinner than one coat should have been (I was assured it had had 5 coats) so no great surprise that it was failing!

We resorted to the small claims court and agreed to mediation – unfortunately we were told on the night before the mediation that Ancaster “were unable to attend” the TELEPHONE mediation, despite their agreeing to mediation beforehand.

Therefore, it had to go to the court with both Ancaster and myself attending, on the Thursday afternoon Ancaster settled in full. As the court was booked for 1000 on Friday and I don’t finish work until 1700 this did not give me a chance to contact the court to confirm this and did not give the court chance to use the court room/Judge for anything else.

With the over worked courts and long delays this seems very selfish, had Ancaster decided they didn’t have a leg to stand on and settled months ago the Judge and court room could have been put to use.

We have had to have the hull sandblasted back and repainted as despite my patching it on two occasions the whole job was failing – first paint job by the yacht builders lasted 16 years – Ancaster’s paint job lasted 6months and had to be completely stripped and repainted within 2 years…..says it all!

 

[WindyWindyWindy]

Well done for sticking to your guns despite the naysayers.

 

[Beneteau381]

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

?

 

[RJJ]

This is good news for those of us who expect to be able to trust our expert and expensive suppliers.

If they are unsure exactly how to do a job they should say so.

Sounds like they are bang to rights and well done you. As you say they have incurred a shed load of extra cost, wasted your time, their time and the courts, and generated reasonable adverse publicity.

 

[Wansworth]

Having worked in various boatyards it was a matter of personal pride by the tradesmento do a good job.Someone must have deliberately instructed the painter to ease off on the paint

 

[sailaboutvic]

After reading all the posting , I'm amazed how people automatically want to blame the owner , surly Ancasta such a big company can't be wrong .
I think you got more chance to get bodge up job dealing with a big company then one or two man firm or at less a much smaller company who are more Interested in looking after the customer.
When you or I ask a company to do a job you would expect it to be done in a professional way after all that's what we paying for,
My favour saying is.
Why pay some one to bogie up a job when you can do it yourself for free.
What I think is the worst thing about This whole episode is ,
Rather then owning up and just put the job right they rather hang it out till it gets to court hoping the client will give up then doing what's right.

 

[Tinto]

Play devils advocate to the devils advocates ?

What level of communication would have ensured that the anti foul didn’t fall off ?

how many times does a a customer have to tell a contractor to remove anodes before painting for poor communication to become good

is it reasonable for customers to know as much about the process as the contractor? For example, everyone know as much about the technology they are using to list on this thread as the people who built the networks and software?

 

[peter gibbs]

So scenario is somewhat different than imagined. Sounded like failure of a simple job on a grp hull. Now we are told it is an aluminium boat so needed specialist handling. No idea what the contract was or who supplied /used what to do the job. Guess we can't comment as no idea what the facts are.

Over 35 years afloat if I've learned anything it is that boat yards remain largely in the cottage industry era. As a result I am present in person when work is undertaken. Otherwise a clear spec in writing is essential to avoid slippage of understanding between the bloke receiving the commission and the "trainee" sent to perform. All with photos. For use with Trading Standards if required.

Naturally some yards don't like this level of supervision - proceed with them at your own risk. One further piece of advice on costings; too often a job is scheduled over generously - mostly in half day chunks of time. Low and behold that's the manhour count appearing on the invoice, whatever the actual time engaged. It's not criminal just sloppy, and rarely in your favour.

Caveat emptor could have been devised especially for the pleasure boating industry.

 

[Tinto]

Over 35 years afloat if I've learned anything it is that boat yards remain largely in the cottage industry era. As a result I am present in person when work is undertaken. Otherwise a clear spec in writing is essential to avoid slippage of understanding between the bloke receiving the commission and the "trainee" sent to perform. All with photos. For use with Trading Standards if required.

Naturally some yards don't like this level of supervision - proceed with them at your own risk. One further piece of advice on costings; too often a job is scheduled over generously - mostly in half day chunks of time. Low and behold that's the manhour count appearing on the invoice, whatever the actual time engaged. It's not criminal just sloppy, and rarely in your favour.

Caveat emptor could have been devised especially for the pleasure boating industry.

full spec from the customer written up for the professional who is really an amateur then?

 

[sailaboutvic]

The reality is most who take their boat to get work done is because they can't do it them self ,
How do these guys give a full spec of work to a professional boat yard better still why should they , they are paying the yard because they supposedly to be able to carry out the work .

 

[dslittle]

I have only just read this, despite it starting nearly eighteen months ago.

Having read the outcome, it seems a bit churlish to comment on some of the earlier responses but I do feel that the ‘victim’ was quite unfairly criticised for his original post.

I do hope that some of those who made comments earlier in the thread reflect and perhaps make further comment…

 

[steveeasy]

The same principles in this thread apply to everything in everyday life. nothing is really black or white. People try to short cut anything to increase profits once they can see the money. Oh of course you say not everyone does so, well perhaps not but the reality is a lot do. In any service.
Ive just been in and had a new hip. Same thing. bish bash bosh. ive a new leg is 2 inches longer than it was and no one said a thing. never checked the lengh before they woke me up. In a rush. You have to tread carefully.

Steveeasy