How common is it to mis-sell.

[Sneaky Pete]

I recently had a boat surveyed in Port Solent a 2010 Beneteau 37. The broker described the boat as “in great condition” and “engine recently serviced”.
The boat was completed around August 2009 so not a 2010, it had suffered serious structural damage along it’s side deck earlier in it’s life resulting in a very poor questionable repair, also badly repaired damage to port and starboard transom, the engine wasn’t serviced it was a mess, and a wood screw sticking through the coach roof that was securing headlining below.
Do brokers not carry out a visual inspection and a search of boat history before marketing them, to me this is mis-selling stating something that doesn’t reflect the condition of the product and very mis-leading to any prospective buyers.

 

[PCUK]

Did you not view the boat prior to the survey?

 

[Paul1962]

Sounds very "Estate Agent ish" regarding descriptions

 

[Moonbeam]

Did you get your deposit back? I'm looking at your other thread on this situation. Problems with Ancasta

 

[Cathy*]

We went to see several boats when looking for ours last year which didn't measure up to the blurb. One was about 250 miles away from the broker who had relied on old photo's from the seller to create the ad having never seen it themselves. Some are advertised using stock photo's which bear no relation the the actual boat being sold.

 

[steveeasy]

My view is brokers use the information they are provided by their client the seller. im sure they have a disclaimer. Looking at it from a buyers prospective, it is the buyers responsibility to research history and be reasonably content before doing a survey. ie check details of service of engine.
That said, if the buyer feels the advert was missleading to sell the vessel then you would be entitled to your deposit back.

Further more. My recent purchase of a boat had grey sales details. The engine was not a 1994 beta 20 as advertised, it was infact a 2004. not good attention to detail, and the chartplotter on board, and shown in the inventory in pic was not included. So brokers should take a little more care in the sale particulars.

I dont think they need to list previous repairs or history, but if you ask they should not withhold information known to the buyer or the broker. that would be misleading.

Its the buyers job to do the research.

Steveeasy

 

[Stemar]

I don't care what disclaimers the broker puts in his small print, unless they specifically mentioned that, because of distance or whatever, they hadn't viewed the boat, they'd give me a false description like that to me once.

I know they're acting for the seller, but anyone with any integrity should call out obvious BS on the part of their client.

 

[Tranona]

I recently had a boat surveyed in Port Solent a 2010 Beneteau 37. The broker described the boat as “in great condition” and “engine recently serviced”.
The boat was completed around August 2009 so not a 2010, it had suffered serious structural damage along it’s side deck earlier in it’s life resulting in a very poor questionable repair, also badly repaired damage to port and starboard transom, the engine wasn’t serviced it was a mess, and a wood screw sticking through the coach roof that was securing headlining below.
Do brokers not carry out a visual inspection and a search of boat history before marketing them, to me this is mis-selling stating something that doesn’t reflect the condition of the product and very mis-leading to any prospective buyers.

It could be misleading, but not mis-selling because they are only acting as brokers, not selling the boat by way of trade. There is a limit to how much checking a broker can do. The particulars rely on what the seller declares and the broker will have a disclaimer. While one would have expected the engine service details to be available beforehand but the mess should have been obvious from a casual inspection. Not uncommon for the service to be included in the price but done before completion, but if that is the case the particulars should have said so. The damage is more difficult. The owner may not have been aware of it, or assumed that it had been repaired properly, but that is the sort of thing a survey is expected to pick up. As to the year thing. It is practice to describe boats by model year as that is what determines the build spec and quite normal for boats to be built in the previous calendar year for delivery the next season. Really does not make any difference to the "age* of the boat - it may not have been launched until well into 2010. No different from cars.

 

[Sneaky Pete]

Thanks Tranona, the owner was in possession of a structural survey report done many years prior, by Sea Ventures as a trade in, and knew exactly what was wrong, this was discovered later in the day of the survey, but as you state this lack of disclosure from the owner seems to exonerated brokers from any kind of responsibilities or blame. Personally I think brokers are worse than used car salesman/women and regulations need to be tightened to reduce the risk to buyers.
Fortunately the surveyor was very good and saved me a great deal.
I would add that with cars there is a registered history through DVLA and often you see CAT a b,,c or what ever against it highlighting some kind of accidental damage or repair status.

 

[Caer Urfa]

Sadly like estate agents there are good and bad so called yacht brokers.

On a number of occasions I have found some well known brokers would not know a Colvic Watson if it was moored in front of them.

Some do not even know the difference of sloop rig to a ketch rig and sometimes when I survey a boat due to what I find compared to the advertisement I wonder if I am on the right boat.

One tip for new buyers always ask for a copy of any old surveys as its amazing what you find and if any of the previous surveys recommendation were ever done.

Another tip if possible take someone with you who knows the model of boat you are viewing and be very aware of so called .project boats.

 

[Sneaky Pete]

Did you get your deposit back? I'm looking at your other thread on this situation. Problems with Ancasta

I paid 10% which is the norm. On rejecting the boat they initially withheld the deposit even though the faults were highlighted to them and I explained I was happy to go to court over this, but the boat would need to be withdrawn from sale as a deposit is still against it. Eventually after many days and emails they decided to return the deposit but it was a hassle.
I was informed by surveyor that if remedial work is greater than 5% of agreed price of boat the purchaser has the right to reject it. This would have taken 5 figures to repair.

 

[Sneaky Pete]

Sadly like estate agents there are good and bad so called yacht brokers.

On a number of occasions I have found some well known brokers would not know a Colvic Watson if it was moored in front of them.

Some do not even know the difference of sloop rig to a ketch rig and sometimes when I survey a boat due to what I find compared to the advertisement I wonder if I am on the right boat.

One tip for new buyers always ask for a copy of any old surveys as its amazing what you find and if any of the previous surveys recommendation were ever done.

Another tip if possible take someone with you who knows the model of boat you are viewing and be very aware of so called .project boats.

Totally agree. This would have been my fourth boat but I have never come up against such deception as this from a broker. It's important to constantly ask questions about everything.

 

[Cathy*]

I paid 10% which is the norm. On rejecting the boat they initially withheld the deposit even though the faults were highlighted to them and I explained I was happy to go to court over this, but the boat would need to be withdrawn from sale as a deposit is still against it. Eventually after many days and emails they decided to return the deposit but it was a hassle.
I was informed by surveyor that if remedial work is greater than 5% of agreed price of boat the purchaser has the right to reject it. This would have taken 5 figures to repair.

Some months ago I posted about our experience of these contracts and said that we insisted our deposit would be paid subject to survey and sea trial at our absolute discretion. We could reject it for any reason. That's what we did and that's what I would insist on the next time.

 

[Tranona]

I paid 10% which is the norm. On rejecting the boat they initially withheld the deposit even though the faults were highlighted to them and I explained I was happy to go to court over this, but the boat would need to be withdrawn from sale as a deposit is still against it. Eventually after many days and emails they decided to return the deposit but it was a hassle.
I was informed by surveyor that if remedial work is greater than 5% of agreed price of boat the purchaser has the right to reject it. This would have taken 5 figures to repair.

That 5% is just a guide and derives from the Dutch contracts that have that as a clause. I don't know contract Ancasta use, but the model RYA and ABYA contracts both have clauses that allow you to withdraw for any reason. On one boat I nearly bought we agreed a contract that allowed withdrawal if the survey identified any structural faults - which it did (the owner was unaware) and deposit returned minus costs within a week. Without knowing the details of the contract you signed it is difficult know what reasons they would have for behaving in the way you described.

As to regulation - it is difficult to know what this would be or achieve over and above rights under law. You do not have a contract with the broker other than he is acting as a holder of your deposit. Your contract is with a private seller and caveat emptor is the guiding principle. Ancasta claims to be the biggest broker in the UK and generally gets good reviews - one would expect that to be as successful as it is. It is a member of ABYA and BMF both of which have a code of conduct. As I suggested on your other thread it is the wording of the contract which determines the approach when things go wrong and the usual way when you find that level of undeclared defects is to identify the clause you are using and provide your evidence. If you think the broker has acted unprofessionally then take it up with the associations it belongs to.

 

[steveeasy]

.
Well I hope ive looked at the correct boat. looks very smart. advertised as sits in great condition.

Have they changed the advert. It says the following.
Engine hours run to 1695 as of January 2024
Last serviced 2023



Engine looks clean and tidy for a 14 year old engine. some surface rust which id suspect is normal. Quite a few hours on it though or not.

Steveeasy

 

[LittleSister]

I have only ever been at the bottom end of the market, but in my experience brokers are almost all useless and, how shall I put this, much keener to share things that are positive about the boat (whether true or not!) and disinclined to reveal things that they must have known or have been brought to their attention which are unfavourable.

One of numerous unpleasant experiences over the decades include once travelling from the West Country to view, by appointment, a 24' boat in an East Coast mud berth only yards from the broker's office in the adjacent marina. The boat was described as 'well maintained'. I could see from a hundred yards away this was at least questionable, as the the running rigging was all dirty and grey. We climbed aboard to find the cabin full of muddy water to a depth of about 6". The broker attempted to use the manual bilge pump but it didn't work. I noticed that the engine (probably the only) battery was just sat on the floor in front of the engine, completely unsecured except by the couple of scraggy electric cables attached to it. This clearly wasn't the up-together boat I had come to view, but it was a model I was keen on, and wondered if I could get it for severely reduced price as a doer-upper. Unfortunately any opportunity to look any further around the boat was ruled out as the broker announced we must now leave - we had been aboard for less than 5 minutes, including unlocking, trying to pump, etc. - because the tide was about to cover the path to the boat, and indeed it was almost awash as we made our way back along it. A complete waste of a 500 mile round trip. (A week later I received details in the post for the same boat from another broker, which also described it as 'well maintained'.)

Many years later I actually bought a boat through that East Coast brokerage. I pointed out that some of the boat's advertised kit was, variously, non-existent or not actually new as stated. They didn't change the advert, and I was later told by the seller that he had pointed out those errors to the broker the previous year to no avail.

I could go on at some length with my broker tales of doom, but it would be easier to list those I have found straightforward and competent. (Only one springs straight to mind, long retired.)

On the other hand, I have found some private sellers somewhat economical with the actualité, too!

 

[ylop]

Thanks Tranona, the owner was in possession of a structural survey report done many years prior, by Sea Ventures as a trade in,

im far from experienced in this but suspect you might be buying from a long way away? We looked at boats that were too remote to go and tire kick - and found it very useful to ask extra information, eg photos of the bit it mysteriously didn’t show, copies of the previous survey, details of who performed a repair etc.

Fortunately the surveyor was very good and saved me a great deal.

well that is what you paid him to do!

Sadly like estate agents there are good and bad so called yacht brokers.

It’s odd - because it should be economically stupid to be a crap one! If you are good you don’t waste your time talking to people who aren’t going to buy, organising lifts or sea trials for people who will pull out, and at the same time pissing off your clients by not actually selling the boat or not for the price you promised.

 

[PCUK]

If you haven't viewed the boat it is down to you.

 

[Sneaky Pete]

I have only ever been at the bottom end of the market, but in my experience brokers are almost all useless and, how shall I put this, much keener to share things that are positive about the boat (whether true or not!) and disinclined to reveal things that they must have known or have been brought to their attention which are unfavourable.

One of numerous unpleasant experiences over the decades include once travelling from the West Country to view, by appointment, a 24' boat in an East Coast mud berth only yards from the broker's office in the adjacent marina. The boat was described as 'well maintained'. I could see from a hundred yards away this was at least questionable, as the the running rigging was all dirty and grey. We climbed aboard to find the cabin full of muddy water to a depth of about 6". The broker attempted to use the manual bilge pump but it didn't work. I noticed that the engine (probably the only) battery was just sat on the floor in front of the engine, completely unsecured except by the couple of scraggy electric cables attached to it. This clearly wasn't the up-together boat I had come to view, but it was a model I was keen on, and wondered if I could get it for severely reduced price as a doer-upper. Unfortunately any opportunity to look any further around the boat was ruled out as the broker announced we must now leave - we had been aboard for less than 5 minutes, including unlocking, trying to pump, etc. - because the tide was about to cover the path to the boat, and indeed it was almost awash as we made our way back along it. A complete waste of a 500 mile round trip. (A week later I received details in the post for the same boat from another broker, which also described it as 'well maintained'.)

Many years later I actually bought a boat through that East Coast brokerage. I pointed out that some of the boat's advertised kit was, variously, non-existent or not actually new as stated. They didn't change the advert, and I was later told by the seller that he had pointed out those errors to the broker the previous year to no avail.

I could go on at some length with my broker tales of doom, but it would be easier to list those I have found straightforward and competent. (Only one springs straight to mind, long retired.)

On the other hand, I have found some private sellers somewhat economical with the actualité, too!

Yes totally agree and unfortunately brokers like this do get the industry a bad name it doesn't bother them that they waist a buyers time and money, and their reply for doing this "sorry it didn't work out" how about "sorry we didn't have the experience to notice these faults before we marketed this". I move on and put it down to a bad experience with a bad broker.

 

[steveeasy]

So do you expect a broker to carry out a survey on a boat they sell. should they request disclosure of all documents held by the seller.

You did not see any damage when you viewed the boat. there is also this matter of the engine the op has not responded to specifically.

the engine was said to be just serviced. but actually the add states last serviced in 2023.

has the add been changed or was the buyer confussed. If the add has not been changed then there was no attempt to mislead the buyer at all.

We do get cold feet. does not make the seller a criminal. clearly you found a reason to withdraw and it sounds a genuine reason. the engine not in my opinion. the broker said Sorry its not worked out. Sounds like a polite response even if their hand was forced a little. they were acting for the seller after all.

Steveeasy