Made offer on Yacht, but heard nothing yet.

[lpdsn]

Very odd not to get a response from the seller.

Seriously, the seller might've being doing all sorts over Christmas. Might not even have seen the offer yet. Or he couldn't been so overwhelmed with actually receiving an offer that he decided to blow the lot on a skiing holiday in the Alps and is now in a Swiss hospital with a broken leg.

 

[Spyro]

Made an offer on a yacht on Brokerage last Wednesday. So far broker has been unable to make contact with the seller and they haven’t replied to his emails yet.

What are the chances of Santa delivering the good news tomorrow??

Actually, hopefully we’ll hear later in the week and hopefully it’s good news.

Merry Christmas to everyone.

Alistairr.

Have you asked the broker again if he has contacted the seller?

 

[steveeasy]

Presuming you had evidence of your arrangement with the dealer you could hardly fail as it is a clear breach of contract for which countless thousands of plaintiffs have successfully sued. For the tort of contract, unlike for negligence, there is no need to demonstrate loss.

I just thought it was quite amusing a dealer made an offer to a broker to buy my boat. that offer was take it as it was no survey. pick it up next week. as described by broker in writing. I accepted the offer. I was told dealer coming next week. Then I get message the dealer has inspected the vessel and it not to his satisfaction.

I spoke with the broker. I asked if his offer was formal and I got a yes and no. So it seams the offer was made without viewing the boat. so nothing is black or white is it. even when you think it is. my evidence would be via the broker.
Steveeasy

 

[Lucky Duck]

I am intrigured by the use of the word "tout". What does it imply? Is it a legal term?

Tort - https://www.collinsdictionary.com/dictionary/english/tort

 

[superheat6k]

... it only becomes binding if it is accepted. ...

So you agree with me then that in placing an offer, you ARE legally obliged to honour a contract if said offer is accepted, which is why the buyer should protect his position in this case.

BTW not sure what thread Kingfisher 3 has been reading, I assume he prefers forums where no one says anything at all !

 

[superheat6k]

I am intrigured by the use of the word "tout". What does it imply? Is it a legal term?

The word 'tout' as I used it was colloquial for 'a tentative price enquiry without obligation' . Apologies to any pedants I may have upset.

 

[Tranona]

So you agree with me then that in placing an offer, you ARE legally obliged to honour a contract if said offer is accepted, which is why the buyer should protect his position in this ca !

Yes, once there is a contract it is legally binding.

That is not, however what you were describing. If I read you correctly you were saying an offer is legally binding and you could not withdraw it. You then went on to describe your approach to negotiation with the vendor to justify your offer. This all happens before a contract and implies no commitment on either side until all terms are agreed and both sides enter into a contract.

The OP is in this first stage. He is showing interest in the boat to the extent of making an offer, so he is just an interested party. Of course he would like a response from the vendor to his offer, but neither have any obligation to the other.

 

[steveeasy]

Yes, once there is a contract it is legally binding.

That is not, however what you were describing. If I read you correctly you were saying an offer is legally binding and you could not withdraw it. You then went on to describe your approach to negotiation with the vendor to justify your offer. This all happens before a contract and implies no commitment on either side until all terms are agreed and both sides enter into a contract.

The OP is in this first stage. He is showing interest in the boat to the extent of making an offer, so he is just an interested party. Of course he would like a response from the vendor to his offer, but neither have any obligation to the other.

Hi Tranora,
little confused regarding the above. the OP has made an offer. If the seller accepts it, then this is a binding contract. or not. If the OP has made the offer and it stews say for a couple of weeks. then the seller accepts it, is this a binding contract.

Do we accept when both parties have agreed to the offer this creates a binding contract without a written contract in place. Just trying to get absolute clarity.

Thanks

steveeasy

 

[Tranona]

Hi Tranora,
little confused regarding the above. the OP has made an offer. If the seller accepts it, then this is a binding contract. or not. If the OP has made the offer and it stews say for a couple of weeks. then the seller accepts it, is this a binding contract.

Do we accept when both parties have agreed to the offer this creates a binding contract without a written contract in place. Just trying to get absolute clarity.

Thanks

steveeasy

Yes, in theory once an offer has been accepted a contract has been made. It does not have to be written, just has to meet the basic requirements to show there is a contract between the individuals. Any basic law textbook has the basic requirements for a contract to exist.

However a simple "I offer, I accept" in a conversation is potentially shaky and difficult to enforce, not least because some of the requirements such as capacity to contract are usually not discussed at this stage. An example here would be that the seller has to have title to the boat before he can contract to sell it, but this may not have been considered - just assumed - at the time of the offer. In a complex transaction such as a boat purchase it makes sense to agree all the terms and conditions in a written contract which clearly shows the rights and obligations of both parties.

Having said that many transactions do go through with just a shake of hands. Disputes usually arise further down the line when both parties have something to lose if it goes pear shaped so a written contract at least provides a focus to get the deal done.

There is a good description of the process on both the RYA and YDSA sites and a model contract.

 

[superheat6k]

Yes, once there is a contract it is legally binding.

That is not, however what you were describing. If I read you correctly you were saying an offer is legally binding and you could not withdraw it. You then went on to describe your approach to negotiation with the vendor to justify your offer. This all happens before a contract and implies no commitment on either side until all terms are agreed and both sides enter into a contract.

The OP is in this first stage. He is showing interest in the boat to the extent of making an offer, so he is just an interested party. Of course he would like a response from the vendor to his offer, but neither have any obligation to the other.

My initial response to this thread was the suggestion the OP considers withdrawing the obligation aspect of his offer pending a response from the vendor, thus leaving him free to consider any alternatives that might arise. That does not remove the offer entirely, but does entitle him to re-affirm his offer at a later date (or not of course).

There may be a perfectly reasonable explanation as to the delay, or the OP could find himself unwittingly contracted with Mr Awkward. Wishing to buy or sell a boat is one thing, but having to deal with certain individuals can make the whole process of concluding a sale and purchase contract very difficult. I have been involved many contracts (not specifically boat transactions) where had I better known the nature of those with whom I had to deal with it would have been simpler and indeed preferable to avoid such a contract entirely in the first place.

 

[Malo37]

Don't be messed about. Tell em your offer is withdrawn in 24 hrs if not accepted.

 

[ashtead]

While somewhat late in the day now for the OP clearly the most prudent course in entering into pre contractual discussions or expressions of interest with the broker is to state explicitly than any such indicative offer remains subject to contract and that subsequent discussions until usual written binding contracts have been concluded are STC . I doubt very much that most boat buyers when making email offers to sellers or their sales brokers include such a standard paragraph of phraseology but it might assist and give a court clarity as to intention should a seller seek to enforce a sale by pleading the existence of a binding contract should the Potential purchaser have concerns. I would expect the RYA website might contain more detailed guidance on the process though around making expressions of interest .

 

[Spyro]

It's an initial offer which means subject to survey and further discussion nothing more. The usual process is then a deposit and a survey. It might be a different matter once passed that stage.

 

[Tranona]

My initial response to this thread was the suggestion the OP considers withdrawing the obligation aspect of his offer pending a response from the vendor, thus leaving him free to consider any alternatives that might arise. That does not remove the offer entirely, but does entitle him to re-affirm his offer at a later date (or not of course).

There may be a perfectly reasonable explanation as to the delay, or the OP could find himself unwittingly contracted with Mr Awkward. Wishing to buy or sell a boat is one thing, but having to deal with certain individuals can make the whole process of concluding a sale and purchase contract very difficult. I have been involved many contracts (not specifically boat transactions) where had I better known the nature of those with whom I had to deal with it would have been simpler and indeed preferable to avoid such a contract entirely in the first place.

Not sure where the "obligation" bit comes from. Certainly not in the OP. He has simply made an offer and has had no response. He does not need to do anything (except perhaps chase) until he has a response.

Cannot imagine how he could find himself "unwittingly contracted with Mr Awkward" just on the basis of making an offer. There needs to be a higher level of engagement with the vendor than just making an offer. Anyway a broker is involved so he will follow the correct procedure and any exchanges will be subject to contract.

 

[steveeasy]

Not sure where the "obligation" bit comes from. Certainly not in the OP. He has simply made an offer and has had no response. He does not need to do anything (except perhaps chase) until he has a response.

Cannot imagine how he could find himself "unwittingly contracted with Mr Awkward" just on the basis of making an offer. There needs to be a higher level of engagement with the vendor than just making an offer. Anyway a broker is involved so he will follow the correct procedure and any exchanges will be subject to contract.

Traona,
your advice is allways very helpful and concise. Thank You. I would have assumed with the ops position he could be held to his offer if he did not withdraw it. Clearly without some formal agreement/contract in place it would be hard to enforce the offer if accepted. Nothing informal is black or hite.

Steveeasy

 

[sailaboutvic]

when it comes to boats offers only come into play once a contract is signed and what ever deposits stated in the contracted is paid, in other words even if a contract is signed by both party's but the deposit isn't paid, the seller can withdrawn out of the contract as the buyer is in breach of contract.
A buyer can make as many offers he likes on tens of boats if he like and then withdraw every offer,
Same apply to a sell, he can accept 5 offers but until contract are sign nothing is binding.

This is why brokers have a procedure of doing things and private buyers should take notice.

Viewing , offer , contracts, deposit, survey, sea trail, completion.
Stages can be missed out for example ,as in where a buyer don't wish to have a survey or sea trail,.
By doing it in this way you not only stop time wastes and dreamers , but both the buyer and seller are protected.

 

[steveeasy]

It's an initial offer which means subject to survey and further discussion nothing more. The usual process is then a deposit and a survey. It might be a different matter once passed that stage.

There is the scenario though where its not a complex sale. and the offer is without survery or trial or anything else. the offer is that for that boat sat there. if that offer is accepted, some would say that is the contract even with a broker involved. not a strong though without a written and signed contract in place.

Steveeasy

 

[Tranona]

when it comes to boats offers only come into play once a contract is signed and what ever deposits stated in the contracted is paid, in other words even if a contract is signed by both party's but the deposit isn't paid, the seller can withdrawn out of the contract as the buyer is in breach of contract.
A buyer can make as many offers he likes on tens of boats if he like and then withdraw every offer,
Same apply to a sell, he can accept 5 offers but until contract are sign nothing is binding.

This is why brokers have a procedure of doing things and private buyers should take notice.

Viewing , offer , contracts, deposit, survey, sea trail, completion.
Stages can be missed out for example ,as in where a buyer don't wish to have a survey or sea trail,.
By doing it in this way you not only stop time wastes and dreamers , but both the buyer and seller are protected.

While what you say is a good description of what happens in practice, it is not actually true.

As I explained earlier there is no requirement in law for there to be a written contract, nor for there to be any deposit to make it binding.

Law students go through their first term at uni learning the rules of contract and understanding how they work when there is a dispute. My copy of "Contract in a Nutshell" is still in the bookshelf above me, having served its purpose 40 years ago and then for my daughter 15 years later.

While it is true that most boaat transactions use a formalised process and written contract, many still take place with only verbal agreement under the general rules of contract which only require evidence of offer and acceptance, capacity to contract, intention to be legally bound and consideration. There are well established tests (by case law mostly) for each of these.

Most of us never see any of this because there are no disputes in most transactions. If there is a written contract then that in addition to general rules provides the basis for resolution. Otherwise it is the facts of the specific case against the general rules that decides. This can often be difficult in the absence of a written contract because of the difficulty of getting reliable evidence and the assumption of shared understanding between the parties as to what was agreed, hence the good advice to use a recognised procedure.

 

[sailaboutvic]

While what you say is a good description of what happens in practice, it is not actually true.

As I explained earlier there is no requirement in law for there to be a written contract, nor for there to be any deposit to make it binding.

Law students go through their first term at uni learning the rules of contract and understanding how they work when there is a dispute. My copy of "Contract in a Nutshell" is still in the bookshelf above me, having served its purpose 40 years ago and then for my daughter 15 years later.

While it is true that most boaat transactions use a formalised process and written contract, many still take place with only verbal agreement under the general rules of contract which only require evidence of offer and acceptance, capacity to contract, intention to be legally bound and consideration. There are well established tests (by case law mostly) for each of these.

Most of us never see any of this because there are no disputes in most transactions. If there is a written contract then that in addition to general rules provides the basis for resolution. Otherwise it is the facts of the specific case against the general rules that decides. This can often be difficult in the absence of a written contract because of the difficulty of getting reliable evidence and the assumption of shared understanding between the parties as to what was agreed, hence the good advice to use a recognised procedure.

Tranona I agree there many way of buying boat or any thing else come to that ,
I have brought land on the shake of a hand, I also brought land on the condition of test drill results.

but what I was describing was tried and I tested ways that most brokers would go about doing their business, it's also a very good way for private buyer to take the same route.

Of course it goes without saying, if one was selling a £500/£2000 boat and buyer just wanted a bill of sale/ hand over a wallet of cash and sail it away, then what I wrote don't apply.

Although I be interested in what part you don't find is " it is not actually true" is posting.

 

[Tranona]

Although I be interested in what part you don't find is " it is not actually true" is posting.

You started with the words "when it comes to boats" and then described the common procedure as it that was special and specific to boats.

All I am saying is that is not true. There is nothing unique to boats that is different from normal contract law and for a contract to be binding it does not need to be in writing, nor does it have to include the terms and conditions that are commonly used in written contracts for boats.