How secure is your ownership?

[petem]

I feel that you have, similarly, misrepresented the facts to us?. Originally you had my immediate sympathy and concern, by omitting (initially) that the culprit is your ex, we were led to believe that the person was a criminal.
In fact, I would guess that your ex sees this as some kind of payback....and not only are we supposed to unravel the legalities of the boat sale but also, now, your relationship and divorce.

Blimey Bouba, you're jumping to a lot of conclusions there. Just because someone is your wife or partner, it doesn't mean that they can's teal from you / be a criminal.

 

[petem]

Outline the conversations you had with your ex ( wife ?) up to the sale ?
I mean did you drag your feet kinda forcing her to make ways to get out .

Outline why she put in a far greater % leaving you with 12/64 th .Normally spouses are written up as equal shares .
Why the difference ?
Just seems odd an “ ex “ and all that that entails would bank roll a doer upper old boat …..what was her motivation last year ?

What right do you have to cast aspersions like that on the OP?

 

[yachtpilot]

Please, bear in mind that the purpose of posting the thread was no more than to raise awareness of the limitations regarding proof of ownership afforded by the SSR Pt 3. Nothing more. I've been quite overwhelmed by the suggestions and sympathy by those who've responded, many have opened my mind to possibilities that may well result in clawing back some of the losses and I can't overstate my gratitude.
To list the circumstances of the relationship would be unfair to my ex, as she's not here to defend herself and in an event bear no relationship to the point of the thread.. Be Aware.
As for 'doing up old boats'.. I'm a retired pilot. During my contracts I had lengthy periods at home, 6 weeks, sometimes three months and have been around boats all my life. I enjoy taking something that's been badly neglected and restoring it to something the new owner can be proud of owning. That wasn't the case with the Rampart 48. I'd been telling anyone who would listen, if they see me buying another wooden vessel. just come up behind me and put a pistol to my head. However, my ex was passionate about owning a wooden boat for a trip through the French canals. As men all too often do, I gave way on the understanding that it would have to be in pristine condition, leaving me only small maintenance jobs to keep it in trim, I'm not boat-builder. The survey showed it to be in excellent shape, (if my prayers have been answered he's now being prodded into hells' furnaces at the point of a pitchfork. Anyway, the resulting expenditure led to a major falling out in the relationship. Things began going downhill. The costs of the work reached in the region of 25k Eur. The lady in question is by any standards, very comfortable financially, the loss to her is an irritation. It was her that suggested the share division based on the differences in our resources.
Being retired, I'm now in no position to recoup my losses, other than by legal action.
I hope I can say this for the last time; the purpose of the thread was simply to raise awareness of the limitations of SSR Part 3. Somewhere out there, the new owner of the vessel is completely unaware that his purchase was not legal. Let's hope this message reaches anyone else that might not be aware of the situation with regards to SSR Pt 3.

 

[Bouba]

Blimey Bouba, you're jumping to a lot of conclusions there. Just because someone is your wife or partner, it doesn't mean that they can's teal from you / be a criminal.

True...but it’s not the same. One of your shareholders diddling you is not the same as your wife doing it.
For example, if I said someone vandalized my car, I would expect (hope) to get sympathy...if I said my girlfriend did it, I would expect to get derision. It’s just the way the world works

 

[yachtpilot]

Perhaps, but the police will see this as a £10k domestic dispute and deal with it accordingly (i.e. do nothing).

That's always possible, but the dispute over funds is, as you quite rightly point out, a domestic issue. The act of acquiring a Reg. Cert, in her own name and then using it to sell the vessel as sole owner is not civil, it comes under the Fraud Act 2006, False representation, either to gain or cause a loss. Anyway, that's what the police are now investigating.

 

[Mr Googler]

True...but it’s not the same. One of your shareholders diddling you is not the same as your wife doing it.
For example, if I said someone vandalized my car, I would expect (hope) to get sympathy...if I said my girlfriend did it, I would expect to get derision. It’s just the way the world works

No one would dare vandalise your car……too much cctv around charging stations and it’s rarely anywhere else ?

 

[Bouba]

No one would dare vandalise your car……too much cctv around charging stations and it’s rarely anywhere else ?

And the car films everything...

 

[Portofino]

And the car films everything...

Even when it spontaneously combusts ? .….saves it on I cloud or something.

 

[Bouba]

Even when it spontaneously combusts ? .….saves it on I cloud or something.

There is no such thing as spontaneous combustion ?

 

[Portofino]

What right do you have to cast aspersions like that on the OP?

None ,
But refrain from further comment until full facts available.

Think we ( most on here ) already know Part 1 of the reg is the part to list interested parties liens etc , with the legal clout .Enough clout to satisfy a loan Co.

The other parts inc SSR as said earlier by other respondents are just for ease of convenience when leaving U.K. waters and should remain so easy and convenient imho .

How ever having said that Jonny foreigner officialdom in the EU does ask to sight the SSR part 3 cert and assumes the name is the owner often linking the name to a passport holder on board and to the insurance docs .

-French Douanes
-Italian Guards Finanza .
- EU marina berthing clerks
-Italian surveyor s

None of the above ever requested to sight a BoS in my experience(s)
UK purchased boat from U.K. factory Sunseeker .
Used Italian boat re re registered .

Both SSR .

So I can see especially in the EU how easy it’s is / was to fall for the part 3 cert being some sort of ownership doc .If the marine officialdom thinks it’s proof of ownership what chance of ex marine Eg classic car auction sites got ?

Thus a bit of gratitude is passed on from me to the Op for spotlighting this issue .

 

[Sandydog2]

Pm sent

 

[Bigplumbs]

Why am I not surprised this thread has got out of hand and started all sorts of Arguments. Many of which could perhaps be upsetting the OP further.

Putting things into perspective he may be out £10,000 - £15,000 which is quite a lot of money to many. But it is not enough to start legal proceedings that will very soon blow that amount of money down the drain into the pockets of the Vultures that love this sort of thing. It will also probably cause the OP loads of stress which is perhaps not worth it.

I think we should all remember that he never came on here asking for advice or what he should do. He merely came on it would seem to help others.

Jumping in and spouting the law is very easy when it is not you who could be facing a bill charged at £250 per hour plus VAT no doubt. This is why the law is available to the rich but not those somewhat poorer.

?

 

[Tranona]

I'm sorry to reiterate that fact, it's simply that I wish to make it clear. Hopefully, now it will have come to the attention of some that were unaware of the fact, obviously the purchaser of the vessel was not aware that he/she needed to have sight of the Bill of Sale. I am attempting to get legal advice, at a cost that I can afford, maybe through the RYA.

But it seems it is only you that has this misunderstanding. It is quite clearto everybody else so I don't know why you keep repeating a "warning" about something that is firmly established. There is no "mistake" on the part of the registrar in issuing the certificate in your partner's sole name - the information is self declared and not checked or witnessed as it has no legal meaning except to state that it is considered a British ship.

You should concentrate on finding out how the "ownership" was transferred as your ex does not have clear title to sell so if she issued a Bill of Sale to the new owners she is committing a further offence. Equally if the auction House has arranged the Bill of Sale then they are negligent in not safeguarding your interest by getting your agreement to sell and giving you a share of the proceeds.

There are so many gaps in your story along these lines which you should seek to fill before wasting time with a lawyer. The ad hoc advice that I and others have given are only on the principles of what laws might have been broken and the possible remedies. However the law deals with facts and your account is currently woefully short on key facts that need to be established before deciding on a course of action.

 

[petem]

Why am I not surprised this thread has got out of hand and started all sorts of Arguments. Many of which could perhaps be upsetting the OP further.

Putting things into perspective he may be out £10,000 - £15,000 which is quite a lot of money to many. But it is not enough to start legal proceedings that will very soon blow that amount of money down the drain into the pockets of the Vultures that love this sort of thing. It will also probably cause the OP loads of stress which is perhaps not worth it.

I think we should all remember that he never came on here asking for advice or what he should do. He merely came on it would seem to help others.

Jumping in and spouting the law is very easy when it is not you who could be facing a bill charged at £250 per hour plus VAT no doubt. This is why the law is available to the rich but not those somewhat poorer.

?

That's just being defeatist.

A few months ago there was a gentleman on here who had sold his boat abroad and was receiving letters from the German purchaser threatening legal action for faults that had been discovered post purchase. He was quite distressed by it. Fortunately, he took my advice and contacted the solicitor who I recommended earlier in this thread. The solicitor sent the German buyer a cease and desist letter and that was the end of the matter (he didn't hear from the German again). The advice and letter cost him less than £200.

In this case, it could be that a letter to the auction house or purchaser yields a result or perhaps the OP could pursue his debt via the small claims court (which is inexpensive).

 

[Bigplumbs]

That's just being defeatist.

A few months ago there was a gentleman on here who had sold his boat abroad and was receiving letters from the German purchaser threatening legal action for faults that had been discovered post purchase. He was quite distressed by it. Fortunately, he took my advice and contacted the solicitor who I recommended earlier in this thread. The solicitor sent the German buyer a cease and desist letter and that was the end of the matter (he didn't hear from the German again). The advice and letter cost him less than £200.

In this case, it could be that a letter to the auction house or purchaser yields a result or perhaps the OP could pursue his debt via the small claims court (which is inexpensive).

I suspect you don't understand the value of keeping stress to a minimum

 

[Portofino]

That's just being defeatist.

A few months ago there was a gentleman on here who had sold his boat abroad and was receiving letters from the German purchaser threatening legal action for faults that had been discovered post purchase. He was quite distressed by it. Fortunately, he took my advice and contacted the solicitor who I recommended earlier in this thread. The solicitor sent the German buyer a cease and desist letter and that was the end of the matter (he didn't hear from the German again). The advice and letter cost him less than £200.

In this case, it could be that a letter to the auction house or purchaser yields a result or perhaps the OP could pursue his debt via the small claims court (which is inexpensive).

Auction house might ( well I would ) have a wordy disclaimer .Jist is buyer is responsible for due diligence re history and paperwork , errors in description, warranties ie zero etc . kinda bid at your risk no comeback with the house .