How common is it to mis-sell.

[Sneaky Pete]

Thanks for the additional information. Based on what you say, I am even more surprised that you choose to accuse the broker of dishonesty in the way the boat was described and raise the issue of "mis selling". It seems now (correct me if I am wrong) they were not aware of the survey report following the damage with its comment on "poor repair" when placing the boat on the market. Presumably you carried out your due diligence, inspected the boat and accompanying paperwork thoroughly, asked questions and satisfied yourself you knew enough about the boat to sign a contract to buy it at a price that was acceptable. You are after all by your own admission an experienced boat owner.

You now say that the repair (although visible) only really came to light in the survey and your sight of an earlier survey carried out (some years ago?) post the repair. You also say now that there are more things wrong with the boat, but only give a cross threaded filler plug as an example. What else did your surveyor find that justified rejecting the boat? What is meant by "poor repair"? cosmetic? structural? safety related? Presumably the boat has been used successfully for some time without any ill effects.

I really cannot see what the broker has done wrong. He is not responsible for the condition of the boat, he did not know about the damage. How do you think he can do anything more about assessing its condition than you could when you carried out you due diligence? They have no "jail" to get out of. They are doing their job - describing the boat as best they can given the information available to them and making it available for you to view and determine if it is worth you making an offer. As far as I can see there is nothing in their description that is not a fair representation of the boat.

I can understand you disappointment on finding all is not what it seemed - but would guess the broker was equally surprised. The nature of buying somebody else's private property means the onus is on you to determine if you want to proceed and it is clear that you should not place reliance on the broker's description (or your interpretation of it - what does "great condition mean exactly?) and you are strongly recommended to engage a surveyor as you did because you have no recourse to the broker, I would imagine threatening to take the broker to court did not help resolve the dispute between you and the seller.

Not sure you have moved on. It is presumably some weeks since these events occurred and yet you start 2 threads, one explicitly accusing the broker of behaving improperly and the other implying that "mis selling" is common. From what you have revealed about the events it sounds more like a lesson of what can go wrong even when everything about the buying process goes according to the book, things can still go wrong at the survey stage when hidden defects are discovered. Indeed it is an endorsement of the need to have a surveyor to look after your interests.

It is not dissimilar from my recent experience I mentioned earlier. I found boat that was close to my ideal, a boat type I know well. met with the owner (of 20 years) went through the history in his ownership, inspected all that was possible while it was afloat and saw enough to put in an offer. After discussions agreed that the contract had a clause allowing me to withdraw if there were any structural issues. The seller was confident there were none. The survey identified 3 significant issues and 2 relatively minor. The seller offered to pay for the repairs, but I elected to exercise my option under that clause and withdraw. Disappointed but no hard feelings and my deposit returned minus expenses within a week.

“I’m not sure you have moved on” I don’t believe you have moved on either you keep responding to my posts, which in turn gives my the opportunity to reply back and keep this post active.

Due diligence was carried out but equally due diligence is what I do when I engage a surveyor to inspect the boat, a person far more experienced than myself.
You mention that the broker did not know about the damage and that he was completely surprised, where is your evidence, also, as far as I can see there is nothing in their description that is not a fair representation of the boat, again where is your evidence have you now done your own inspection of the boat? It seems now (correct me if I am wrong) they were not aware of the survey report following the damage, again how do you know that. You appear to make a great deal of statements of fact, speculative statements without showing the evidence. That’s worrying.

With the general condition of the boat now in the public domain and that I have discussed this with the broker the boat is still advertised as “great condition”. This may suggest the broker is completely ignorant of the fact or not being honest with it’s true condition.

You mentioned the cross threaded plug a serviceable part not serviced, this was one of many faults, and I’m not posting the report on here but lets say after many hours on the boat the surveyor came up with a comprehensive list.
I’ve moved on with this you should do the same, my deposit is back and other viewings are getting organised. I will however stand by my statement that there are many brokers out there who are worse than used car salespersons.