Misleading MBY article about buying a new boat?

  • Thread starter Thread starter Deleted User YDKXO
  • Start date Start date
I thought that the reason Volvo had gained such a dominant position, was that they supplied engines, but got paid at the end of the build ? If so then thats a large subsidy from Volvo, and who owns the engines it all goes wrong?
 
J, were you lending to the builder or the punter? If the latter, how does (s)he escape personal liability to Lombard if the builder goes t.u.? Were you lending to personal companies owned by the punter, without PGs?

We were lending to the punter. I cant really recall the exact nature of the deals as i left over 10 years ago. On a build where Lombard was funding the build with stage payments they got assignment of title. It may simply have been that the customers felt that Lombard would manage this more responsibly than they would ( for effectively... at the time ... little or no charge). Next I suspect ( and please don't challenge me on this as it was al on time ago!) but I suspect they may have had a view that if Lombard did not in the end secure good title to the vessel / part vessel that they would have a defence of "well you thought this was ok and you have messed it up so not my problem".

They would have had PGs yes ( if not in their own name) so ultimately yes they would be liable, but had a party bigger than they were involved in the transaction.

I know it happened on some very big transactions a few times. It was not an every day transaction, and I would imagine was seen as an economic way of introducing a more powerful partner in to the mix, with some perceived defence if it went wrong.
 
I thought that the reason Volvo had gained such a dominant position, was that they supplied engines, but got paid at the end of the build ? If so then thats a large subsidy from Volvo, and who owns the engines it all goes wrong?

Just like you see at the bottom of your car service bill something along the lines of
" all parts remain the property of " franchise " until this invioce is settled "
As mentioned above they know the serial No,s .
Therefore send a few chaps with a bag of spanners and a lorry with a hiab to recover there goods .
 
I have bought new three times, but on each occasion it was either a stock boat or a nearly stock boat nearing end of completion & required a very small deposit anyway. If we ever go bigger (will be for the kids if we do now) I would not be happy giving large amounts up front & that would either lead me to doing a deal with someone big enough & sound enough to accept a reasonable % deposit & balance on delivery, or looking at stock & nearly new.
 
How can deposits and stage payments be both protected in a client account and at the same time be used by the builder to fund the building of the boat? Surely this is a complete nonsense or am I missing something here?

I read the article again and my blood nearly boiled at the lazy and frankly, wrong, statement that money will be safe in an account from which it has been taken out.
 
Top