Help with boat yard dispute

[vic008]

Well the big question is, is he back in the water? (No cash, no splash)
If in the water I would be lawyering up and contesting.

 

[vic008]

Upon rereading it looks like you are afloat. Do you have a small claims tribunal in UK?

 

[Quandary]

They caused the problem and the extra expense by failing to undertake their responsibilities, first when they did not lift the boat on the rescheduled date they had given you and second when they did not bother to communicate with you. Your extra costs are a direct consequence of that.
Boatyards know that their customers are a soft touch and there is plenty of evidence for that in the posts above, they will be shocked if you decide to stand up to them.
How you proceed depends on how securely they have you trapped, if you are happy to shift you have more leeway. I would write to them deliniating your case as you did above and ask them for a meeting or failing that a written response, be pleasant and record your severe disappointment and your desire to sort it out amicably but be firm, record everything they say and send a copy of the minute of any meeting back to them, they are just as unlikely as you are to want to go to court but your meticulous recording of negotiations will worry them. At worst you might finish up with no compromise but if it can be kept to the small claims court and you show reasonable willingness when giving evidence you are very likely to get sympathy, don't take a solicitor to the small claims court, take all your notes and correspondence, go yourself and keep a pleasant disposition though do not miss any opportunity to wind up the other side, allowance will be made for your inexperience and you will be given time to think, I inhabited courts a lot before I retired, it can be entertaining and you get to learn how stubborn and stupid so many people including solicitors can be.

 

[chrishscorp]

The only thing they have done wrong was to not inform you that the lift did not take place but equally you could/should have called them to confirm the situation especially with trades booked, the warning shot being. not being lifted when you turned up.

The yard i have used is tidal so sometimes they cannot relaunch if there isnt enough water pending draught on the yachts being moved that week, throw into that gusty winds and thats their schedule out the window. I think i would show them the bill you have received for the lost trades and hope to be paying the original sum agreed £550 and the rest will have to be chalked upto experience.

 

[James_Calvert]

My earlier post was to point out you laid yourself open, through inattention, to this situation.

That said, obviously the way the boatyard handled it was disappointing, they could have done better.

Equally I think the other parties could have done better. Why didn't they check with the yard or you that the boat was out for their work? Was their work schedule so slack that they didn't need to constantly juggle it to get the best for them and their customers? Hadn't they ever had to reschedule work at the last minute ?

Above all, why did they care so little for their customer to risk billing him for their wasted time and journey, for the lack of that check?

 

[Pete735]

I'm with Quandary on this (except I suspect I would have been far more unpleasant with them face to face). You are dealing with a professional organisation (who probably have certifcates to prove it) and it's a business just like any other, the fact they look after boats is irrelevant and all this "write it off to experience" nonsense I cannot believe, its way over £700 we are talking about not 25 quid.
As for contractors coming and having no other work to go to, as a service engineer (self employed) it can be difficult if not impossible to pull a job forward a day as others have made commitments too.
There is also the point that if they consider they can get away with this level of incompetence then they will continue to operate in a cavalier manner with others and will never learn the fundamentals of business.

 

[Kurrawong_Kid]

They caused the problem and the extra expense by failing to undertake their responsibilities, first when they did not lift the boat on the rescheduled date they had given you and second when they did not bother to communicate with you. Your extra costs are a direct consequence of that.
Boatyards know that their customers are a soft touch and there is plenty of evidence for that in the posts above, they will be shocked if you decide to stand up to them.
How you proceed depends on how securely they have you trapped, if you are happy to shift you have more leeway. I would write to them deliniating your case as you did above and ask them for a meeting or failing that a written response, be pleasant and record your severe disappointment and your desire to sort it out amicably but be firm, record everything they say and send a copy of the minute of any meeting back to them, they are just as unlikely as you are to want to go to court but your meticulous recording of negotiations will worry them. At worst you might finish up with no compromise but if it can be kept to the small claims court and you show reasonable willingness when giving evidence you are very likely to get sympathy, don't take a solicitor to the small claims court, take all your notes and correspondence, go yourself and keep a pleasant disposition though do not miss any opportunity to wind up the other side, allowance will be made for your inexperience and you will be given time to think, I inhabited courts a lot before I retired, it can be entertaining and you get to learn how stubborn and stupid so many people including solicitors can be.

Probably better to send your correspondence by letter and recorded delivery than by e-mail.

 

[EugeneR]

First, the reason for the boat not being launched on time was not the weather. Instead, it was the yard's decision to prioritise customers whose lifts were impacted by the weather, as opposed to lifting OP's boat at the time agreed. Secondly, if the marina then agreed to launch the next day or communicate, but failed to do so, OP can hold the marina responsible for direct costs as a result of their failure. This depends on the marina accepting that they have agreed to lift or communicate but, in fact, failed to do so. OP might want to learn from experience and managing his suppliers better, but that does not put OP in the wrong here.

OP might want to talk to a responsible manager at the yard, explain why he feels they are the cause of the losses, and ask them to refund all the days on the hard. I doubt they will pay out for the workers, simply because of the hassle that would cause for them and their liability to OP likely being limited to direct losses; instead, they might be more open to refund the extra days on the hard because that was, directly, caused by them. It would also be good of them to refund the other days - in order to offset at least some of what OP had to pay the workers because of the yard's failures. It is much easier for the yard to cancel charges than to pay out money. The yard probably still made money on the lift in/out and, unless there was no further space and they had to point other boats away, they did not have any cost to OP's boat being on the yard.

I think people should be made aware of which yard this is. It would be good to hear that the yard resolved it, assuming they do.

 

[FlyingGoose]

As a person who over twenty years was a GM in frontline hospitality services , I always found that the calm customer with a genuine grievance , would have more of my ear , to the aggressive blow your top bully boy who might have the same issues , but as soon as you step over a line then expect the problem to be fixed but with no real urgency.
Just my little way of annoying them more.
The services industries are not perfect , things go wrong, approaching it with a positive outlook and good manners will see the problem getting resolved , even to a point of more than you expected.
Going in like a crazed mad person or shouting about court and suing gets everyone’s back up, trust me I have seen to many in my career , it has become the norm in this country , one of the reasons I left the industry to go back to university as a mature student..
It will cost more in time money and stress doing it the wrong way

 

[Hallberg-Rassy]

First, the reason for the boat not being launched on time was not the weather. Instead, it was the yard's decision to prioritise customers whose lifts were impacted by the weather, as opposed to lifting OP's boat at the time agreed. Secondly, if the marina then agreed to launch the next day or communicate, but failed to do so, OP can hold the marina responsible for direct costs as a result of their failure.

I'm with EugeneR here. The liability is theirs. They had a duty of care, and dropped the ball.

90% of the problems in the sailing world is created by people with too much money rolling over too easily.

In my experience, you get two things happening, a) office not communicating to yard, b) yardsmen being none-too-bright jobsworthies (in all fairness, probably not get paid much and having grumpy relationships with said managers).

It's sounds like you fell between their cracks, they have a system that is too rigid to deal with such scenarios, and there was a lack of communication between their departments; and they plain forgot about you. You stipulated a term in the contract.

I'd play it cool and try and find out what happened by asking questions.

As far as the tort/breach of contract goes,

a) what is the current situation precisely, ie where is the boat, what have you paid or not, what are the costs/charges both ways? (I'm guessing Covid lockdown is an issue).​

b) can you copy us in on their terms and conditions or relative parts? (They'll probably be copy and paste).​

​

I've also seen other issues, eg people will bigger boats (ie paying more) get priorty; smaller/older/cheaper boats (ie paying less) will get treated with contempt. Normally, using outside contractors isn't an issue, especially if they don't do the required services. Yards just charge them a small fee to work.

The legalities can just come down to whether they think they can hold your boat to ransom or not. Where there's a dispute over charges/services, they are unlikely to get away with charging you more while they are resolved.

If you need to prepare for a court case, take screenshots of detailed weather pages now to show wind/weather wasn't the issue.

In both contract and tort, successful claimants must show that they have suffered foreseeable loss or harm as a direct result of the breach of duty

In English law, a claimant must establishe that they were owed a duty of care by the defendant, and that there has been a breach of that duty. The defendant is in breach of duty towards the claimant if their conduct fell short of the standard expected under the circumstances.

Therefore, did they alert you your boat would not be ready beforehand, as they knew you had contractors coming and would face losses if they could not work?

 

[superheat6k]

You imply a contractual responsibility burden upon the yard with others you have contracted with but not them. It is likely they would simply claim Force majeure, and regard the contract/s you hold as the affairs of others.

If a delay arises on their part, and without seeing the specific contract we can't be sure what the remedy is, but what if for instance they called you and no one answered - have they complied with their obligaton, indeed is there any obligation to inform you of a (to them) minor delay in proceedings. Regardless I see nil obligation on behalf of a yard to meet contractual obligations you have taken on completely separately. Indeed I daresay they would argue the services procured are all available from themselves, so in ignorance of these requirements why should they have any obligation at all.

I am concerned your appointed trades felt it OK to ensure you were charged in full for them sitting in their van for a few hours.

I also expect the yard are charging on a simple time used basis - so that it took 28 days instead of say 14, so what - that's how long you were using their facility. In this regard did you do anything at all in the extra days - legitimate delays as far as the yard is concerned - and they are not responsible for your work plans and contingencies.

Lesson - you plan and you control, and you do not rely upon others knowing your plans nor how to exercise your control function.

I know this seems hard, but this is contractual life and not just applicable to boat yards, where I would add folk would take the rise at any opportunity so to do.

 

[LadyInBed]

I think that the OP was being a little naive putting the onus on the yard to phone. Better to be proactive and phone the yard the day before the contractors were due to arrive to confirm that the boat is out.

 

[Hallberg-Rassy]

At this point, I'd also check any insurance policy you have, from boat to home insurance, to see how much legal cover it offers you in consumer law issues.

Generally, it will cover at the very least up until seeking a barrister's opinion of whether you have a case. Generally, if it's 50:50 they'll cover it.

Force majeure would not apply (the wind did not stop them from calling) and even if it did, it only suspend it for the duration of the force majeure, eg the storm did not last.

The yard breached its duty (the yardsman likely did not pass the message on), the office not inform the yard of your contractual precondition). Then they all went back to sleep on autopilot.

You have a good case.

I've never understood the mentailty of individuals who turn around to a victim and say, "it's your fault, you were naive". If someone did that to me, I'd teach them a lesson in their naivety for doing so.

 

[pandos]

I'm with EugeneR here. The liability is theirs. They had a duty of care, and dropped the ball.

90% of the problems in the sailing world is created by people with too much money rolling over too easily.

In my experience, you get two things happening, a) office not communicating to yard, b) yardsmen being none-too-bright jobsworthies (in all fairness, probably not get paid much and having grumpy relationships with said managers).

It's sounds like you fell between their cracks, they have a system that is too rigid to deal with such scenarios, and there was a lack of communication between their departments; and they plain forgot about you. You stipulated a term in the contract.

I'd play it cool and try and find out what happened by asking questions.

As far as the tort/breach of contract goes,

a) what is the current situation precisely, ie where is the boat, what have you paid or not, what are the costs/charges both ways? (I'm guessing Covid lockdown is an issue).​

b) can you copy us in on their terms and conditions or relative parts? (They'll probably be copy and paste).​

​

I've also seen other issues, eg people will bigger boats (ie paying more) get priorty; smaller/older/cheaper boats (ie paying less) will get treated with contempt. Normally, using outside contractors isn't an issue, especially if they don't do the required services. Yards just charge them a small fee to work.

The legalities can just come down to whether they think they can hold your boat to ransom or not. Where there's a dispute over charges/services, they are unlikely to get away with charging you more while they are resolved.

If you need to prepare for a court case, take screenshots of detailed weather pages now to show wind/weather wasn't the issue.

Therefore, did they alert you your boat would not be ready beforehand, as they knew you had contractors coming and would face losses if they could not work?

Be wary of taking advice that that rachets things up .... There has been no allegation of a tort... The scenario outlined so far is squarely contractual...

And without sight of the contract (probably stuck on the wall or a website or some docket) it is not proper to advise to go to court, as it is likely that the yard has dealt with all of the events which occurred...and unwittingly perhaps the OP agreed...

Unfair terms in comsumer contracts might help him but this is about sub 1000 pounds and with all due respect if he is not happy to waste this sum he definitely ought not go to court.

The small claims court may have limited costs but that decision can probably be appealed to one where costs will be awarded...

Furthermore court will eat away at him and ruin his sailing season....

litigation usually ends in exhaustion...

 

[Hallberg-Rassy]

litigation usually ends in exhaustion...

Which also plays in both directions, meaning that the yard is even less likely to pursue their costs legally, and less likely to get anything out of it. Hence, if they were wise, they would be more likely to settle for some compromise.

They are at present just trying it on, depending on rich suckers just paying up.

What's the fee to the external contractor if not some kind of loss?

Besides, it's Winter. He's not going sailing now. He's got until Spring to sort it out.

Yes, we need to know more details. Sometimes even solicitors aren't the best people to advise on such situations as they only think within their billable/compliancy limits, but it's still worth exploring to be sure of his legal position, if it is covered by his insurance.

They'll have their recommended firms to go and speak to.

 

[xyachtdave]

Lots of stress to recover a few hundred quid being advised.

How about chalking this up as an experience in the new to the OP world of boats. Banging a load of dates on a spreadsheet, booking trades etc in and expecting it to run like clockwork was unfortunately doomed to failure.

My first lifting experience (local marina) was booked for 8.00am. Forecast was windy later, blowing about 5 knots first thing so ideal.

Foolishly I arrive at 7.00, pop the boat on the lifting pontoon, remove the backstay as required, so am 100% ready and expect someone to show up shortly before 8.00 to man the crane.

At about 8.30 some 'fellas' arrive, endlessly muck around making silly noises and taking the piss out of each other, the crane starts to move about 9.30, just as it starts to gust up a bit, 'Sorry it's too windy to lift,'

The chaps retreat to the warmth of their tea hut.

I had grabbed the day off work and was expecting to be sanding by 10am at the latest...

We lifted last Saturday, it was blowing old boots, no danger of a cancellation at our yacht club, if you think you can get your boat in the travel hoist, it's coming out!

 

[Babylon]

we had a time and date set on a quote for £550 all in, now they want £850 due to the extra days.

the tradesman wants his 6hrs x 2 people labour paying for that day and rightly so I’d booked them but they were unable to do anything and at short notice they couldn’t do other jobs and had travelled specifically to work my boat... so I’m £720 out of pocket already.

Reality check time!

On the assumption that the work was done and the trades fully paid (including the extra £720 for sitting in their van), that your boat is back in the water but you haven't yet paid the yard more than £110 (i.e. 20% of the £550 originally quoted), and the yard is now hounding you for the full £740 (£850-£110).

If it can be clearly and convincingly demonstrated (by paper-trail, including emails etc) that the yard was aware of your "critical-path" situation but failed to inform you that your boat wasn't available for the trades to work on it, then I'm sure a court would recognise this as a loss to you of £720 due to the yard's failure. If however the court takes the view that some of the responsibility for this lack of communication is yours, say 50%, then the loss to you reduces to £360. I would personally bank on the latter, lower figure!

Then there's the question of extra time spent ashore, which amounts to £300. If the court accepts that this is entirely the fault of the yard (assuming their terms and conditions of the contract doesn't provide for otherwise), then you'd only be expected to pay the yard the £440 balance owing (i.e. £550-£110) under the original agreement.

Therefore, in the best-case scenario for you following a pursuit by the yard through the small claims court, it can be seen that the yard should be paid a total of £80 (i.e. £440 balance owing under original contract minus £360 for their share of the lack of proper communication).

I would therefore compose a letter (attached to an email as well as posted recorded delivery) to them (headed "Without Prejudice") setting out your reasonable arguments simply and concisely, and requesting a revised invoice for the final balance of £80. Then sit back and wait!

From the yard's point of view, they'll need to take a decision whether to accept this £80, pursue you for the £740 they see as owing, or come to some compromise in the middle. At best they might be prepared to accept something in the region of £400 (approximately the original £550-£110 deposit) on the argument that your foul-up with booking the trades was your problem!

How much you then hold out for any further reduction before agreeing is a question not of principle but of your stomach!

Hope this is of some use.

 

[Mudisox]

Why did you buy a boat? Hopefully to get away from stress and bother. So do you want to pursue a legal route or get on with life having gained some experience of dealing with Yards. By all means talk to the yard, and try to get some resolution, but maybe the person sending you the bills is just passing on results ofthe job sheets from the "workers". Good luck and enjoy your new boat.

 

[SailingEd]

Reality check time!

On the assumption that the work was done and the trades fully paid (including the extra £720 for sitting in their van), that your boat is back in the water but you haven't yet paid the yard more than £110 (i.e. 20% of the £550 originally quoted), and the yard is now hounding you for the full £740 (£850-£110).

If it can be clearly and convincingly demonstrated (by paper-trail, including emails etc) that the yard was aware of your "critical-path" situation but failed to inform you that your boat wasn't available for the trades to work on it, then I'm sure a court would recognise this as a loss to you of £720 due to the yard's failure. If however the court takes the view that some of the responsibility for this lack of communication is yours, say 50%, then the loss to you reduces to £360. I would personally bank on the latter, lower figure!

Then there's the question of extra time spent ashore, which amounts to £300. If the court accepts that this is entirely the fault of the yard (assuming their terms and conditions of the contract doesn't provide for otherwise), then you'd only be expected to pay the yard the £440 balance owing (i.e. £550-£110) under the original agreement.

Therefore, in the best-case scenario for you following a pursuit by the yard through the small claims court, it can be seen that the yard should be paid a total of £80 (i.e. £440 balance owing under original contract minus £360 for their share of the lack of proper communication).

I would therefore compose a letter (attached to an email as well as posted recorded delivery) to them (headed "Without Prejudice") setting out your reasonable arguments simply and concisely, and requesting a revised invoice for the final balance of £80. Then sit back and wait!

From the yard's point of view, they'll need to take a decision whether to accept this £80, pursue you for the £740 they see as owing, or come to some compromise in the middle. At best they might be prepared to accept something in the region of £400 (approximately the original £550-£110 deposit) on the argument that your foul-up with booking the trades was your problem!

How much you then hold out for any further reduction before agreeing is a question not of principle but of your stomach!

Hope this is of some use.

This is basically where I’m at, I realise I’m not going to be able to pass liability for the tradesman costs onto the yard without significant court costs but I feel I shouldn’t pay the outstanding yard fees due to their incompetence and I’ll chalk the £720 to experience that yards are bloody useless and I have to babysit them and double check their work (not like you go around checking electricians have wired up sockets correctly it’s implied competence) but if that’s the norm so be it lesson learnt

but I feel I’m justified in not paying the remaining yard fees, they can keep the 20% deposit but that’s it. and I will obviously find a different yard in future.

This is on the basis that they didn’t provide the service (or a duty of care and level of competence) they were contracted for

It’s more out of principle, the hassle of filling in a few forms for small claims court isn’t Really a hassle these days, I’m sure there is an ombudsman who could step in too.

I’m surprised how many folk would just accept this behaviour from a business. outside of the marine industry it wouldn’t “float” at all.

Thankfully the boat is back in the water, I think I’ll send a final letter to them and give them 28 days to resolve my complaint, if not I’ll go to the small claims court or research for an ombudsman of some description out of principle.

 

[SailingEd]

Why did you buy a boat? Hopefully to get away from stress and bother. So do you want to pursue a legal route or get on with life having gained some experience of dealing with Yards. By all means talk to the yard, and try to get some resolution, but maybe the person sending you the bills is just passing on results ofthe job sheets from the "workers". Good luck and enjoy your new boat.

true but I’m not going to throw money at an incompetent yard for their mistakes.

yeah I’m pretty amicable with thefront facing staff they’re just passing the managers comments onto me, he won’t talk to me face to face he was never “available”