legal advice

V

viramati

New Member
Joined
26 May 2007
Messages
20
Visit site
I have problems with my Freeman 26 bought back in May. was supposed to have been fully restored and was bought through reputable broker. paint is now coming off (done by previous owner who claims to be a marine engineer) and am looking at several thousand pounds to get problem rectified professionally. I am sure he is lying about what he says he has done. Does anyone know where I can legal advice on this and if I have any chance of a claim.
many thanks
David

PS boat is on the Thames at Shepperton
 
Depends...

It depends on documentation. If you have written details of what was supposed to heve been done, and to what standard (ie did it say "professionally restored"?), then you could try taking the seller and the broker to the Small Claims Court. You'd need a proper survey, detailing the problems, as evidence before lodging the claim.

Otherwise, if there was nothing written down, it's just one of those things. Learn from it.
 
Re: Depends...

I have nothing written directly from him. I have the paint he said he used and an e-mail from the brokers listing what he said he had done
as follows
I have spoken to Mr. Weston in regards to the bubbling that has appeared on the superstructure of you Freeman, and the following was done on ‘Gypsy Lady’ –

1) boat was placed inside shed

2) the fibre glass was rubbed right back

3) the fibre glass was cleaned with acetone

4) Marine industrial 2 pack was used

5) Primer 2 pack

6) Top coat x 2 possible three

7) In between coats the paint was braided and painted over as well

Mr. Weston is very unsure as to why this has happened as he followed the guide lines as to how it should be done, and he sends his apologies


and the original survey which basically says the the painting seems to be of a good standard and the boat has been renovated
 
[ QUOTE ]
latin?? seems to translate as 'hollow place a buying' please enlighten

[/ QUOTE ]

It means buyer beware - i.e. it is up to the buyer to make sure that he is buying what he thinks he is buying.

You might have a case against the surveyor, or possibly the paint manufacturer.

i would guess that you only have a case against the seller if he misrepresented the situation in a contractual way. I would further guess that, if he did what he says hed did, and followed the paint suppliers instructions, that he hasnt misrepresented things.
 
Re: Depends...

Don't think you have much of a leg to stand on. Seller will argue he followed manufacturers instructions and that it might be related to something that has happened whilst the vessel is in your posession. ( Mistreatment by you, spillage on deck of chemicals, fallout from nearby chemical works etc etc.)You, on the other hand, would need to prove that he failed to apply correctly. How much to strip and paint yourself? How much would a paint firm charge to give a written opinion? How likely is the opinion to be definitive and unequivocal? What if he gets a firm to give contradictory evidence?

Take it on the chin and go sailing.
 
As in all such cases, it pays to try the negotiated approach first. A letter to the vendor, saying what's happened and in view of the asssurances given as part of the verbal conditions pertaining to the sale, to ask for his comments and what action he proposes to take to put matters straight. cc the broker.

If no response, the second letter is a "sorry you have not replied" but under advice have to inform him that if he's not prepared to respond you'll have to take matters further, which everyone wants to avoid etc etc.

If still no response, you either eat the situation and move on or take the high road, which can be costly: your deal was inadequately contractualised, and in effect you have bought the vessel "as seen" or as surveyed by your own expert witness (who clearly made no mention of the risk inherent in the amateur paint job)

I would guess that a lot of folks buying used boats find something that disappoints, either some electronics go bust, or sails start to unstitch etc. It's in the nature of the deal that nothing is guaranteed, and it is up to the buyer to take care.

Where a specific warranty or assurance has been given on an aspect of the deal, then you have grounds. But enforcing warranties in these situations where the vendor is resistant to making good, can cost more than its worth.

See what you can achieve on the basis of inducing the vendor to make a reaswonable, if not full, offer to make this issue go away.

PWG
 
I had a similar case a few years back. I had a BMW motor cycle with full fairing. (R 100RS) I removed all the panels and delivered them to a garage where they did fancy spray jobs. They undertook the work. When I took delivery of the painted panels and started to refit them it was obvious that there was something wrong with the laquer that had been sprayed with. I took them back the garage said it was not their problem. I took them through the small claims court and won. I took lots of pictures and employed the RAC to inspect and give an opinion/written report it cost me but I got all my expenses back. Its a simple process and there are many consultants who will give opinions at a price.
 
PeterGibbs suggestion seems sensible to me, but I'd be prepared to have to take it on the chin. It seems you are relying completely upon his goodwill.
 
Duncan's right on this one. The only way you are going to stand a chance is if the vendor is in fact restoring boats and selling them as a business and is in fact a trader. In that case you can rely on the sale of good /supply of services legislation which means that the boat has to be fit for purpose.

If you buy off a private seller then unless you can prove he has misrepresented to you about the boat then you haven't a hope.

It sounds like you got a boat with a new paint job, just not a very good one. I would suggest you are better off spending the money fixing the boat than spending it on legal fees.

Caveat Emptor - Buyer Beware
 
Re: Depends...

It would seem that unless you had the details of how the boat was prepared and painted, before you agreed to buy the boat then "these details " could not be said to have induced the contract. Thus you would probably have no comeback at all in the law of contract.

If you had been given these details before you agreed to buy the boat, and you could prove now that these steps were probably not followed, then you might have an arguable case of misrepresentation.

If you are going to go legal, get another surveyor and make sure he is qualified, (remember your previous suveyor was paid to stop you buying a pup.His advice at this stage may be more than a little biased.)

You may have some recourse if the boat was surveyed negligently, but that would depend on the terms on which you retained your surveyor. This would be especially true if you had the details of the application of the paint , or these were readily available and the process used was wrong.

There is a general rule aganst recovering for pure economic loss in tort, but there is an exception that covers holidays and other transactions where the object is enjoyment or pleasure etc.

For your own peace of mind, Try a few letters as advised elsewhere. But be carefull not to get yourself into a potentially expensive litigation that you may not win, and which may become more prominant in your life than sailing the boat.

Keep in your mind that you want a boat not a court case.


Tony.

use or do not use this advice, entirely at your own peril.
 
I think you may have an answer as to why the paint blistered but don't know whether that means a claim is valid. I'm sure others can comment on that part.

You say gelcoat was rubbed right back and washed down with acetone.

Acetone is the worst thing to use, especially if over a thin / non-existent gelcoat. The laminate would be like a sponge, absorbing the acetone. All sorts of chemical reactions could result but probably your problem is the solvent later evaporating on a sunny day and the pressure causing blisters in the paint on top.

Many people swear by acetone. Personally I think it should be banned, both from effects on paint and also health of user!
 
http://www.justclaim.co.uk/index.php

They have a good forum.

I haven't read the rest of this thread as I've had it with legal matters, but I would write a stern letter threatening legal action, and then follow up with a summons. It doesn't cost you much, might make him settle (don't be too ambitious with a setlement!), and it also feels good to hassle people legally who have stitched you up!

But be warned - the legal route is stressful, very time consuming, and rarely worth the effort. You will likely get a fraction of what you are asking. I've been involved in two small claims in the past 2 years (on both sides) and been in court for 7 hearings. The whole process is a sham. I 'won' both cases, but was it really worth the effort...?
 
Re: Depends...

I woulds say the problem is that the gel coat was rubbed down (rubbing any polish in) and them acetone was used to clean the rubbed down surface.
Procedures should be.
(1) wipe gel coat with acetone to remove any polish.
(2) abrade hull, hoover dust off.
(3) wash hull off with fresh water.
(4) allow to dry.
(5) Prime/Paint as per paint manufacturers recommendations.
 
Re: Depends...

I'm not sure the acetone would cause the problem. On any kind of day warm enough to apply paint, acetone evaporates very quickly indeed. It's hard to see how it could penetrate the gelcoat and / or permeate the fibres and then wait there until now to try and get out!
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

Share this page

Top