Missing / Destroyed proof of VAT document

[boatmaster]

Hi Folks

The address i promissed, wasnt Newcastle upon tyne sorry, must have dreamt that bit. too much going on i guess.

National Clearance Hub
Custom House
Salford
Manchester
M50 3XX

Hope this helps anyone in a similar predicament.

 

[Tranona]

Just one punters opinion of the situation, a punter who has saved his pennies for the last 5 years and is ready to change his boat but feels like a 'Mark' and doesnt want to risk loosing 5 years of savings.

Pete

Why do you keep having this tirade against brokers and their supposed failings? There is no evidence that they systematically misbehave in the way you imagine they might. There is no compulsion for you to use their services, and if the vendor of the boat you want to buy is using one, there is no compulsion for you to pass any money through him or to rely on him to check that the documentation is correct.

Hopefully by listening to what goes on here you will have learned enough to ensure that you do not lose on any transaction involving a boat.

So happy hunting - hope you find the boat you are looking for, sell your existing boat for your asking price through a free ad and live happily ever after.

 

[jhr]

Pete

Why do you keep having this tirade against brokers and their supposed failings? There is no evidence that they systematically misbehave in the way you imagine they might.

Not systematically, no, but you only need to see what happened to customers of Peters when they went under, to realise what might happen if a broker goes bust whilst in possession of your money. The marine industry is precarious at the best of times and (a) I don't suppose any Yacht Brokers are rated Triple A and (b) these aren't exactly the best of times.

Yes, there are other ways of paying for a boat, and safeguards that can be put in place, but don't you think Brokers should be offering these already, as part of their service?

 

[DAKA]

There is no evidence that they systematically misbehave in the way you imagine they might.

Evidence to Joe Public is only available after a court case.

They take 18 -36 months to process, so please be patient !

misbehave is an odd phrase , legally Yacht Brokers are perfectly in their rights to utilize clients funds to offset against their overdrafts, so to that extent I have to agree with you that Yacht Brokers arnt currently misbehaving, they are just acting in a business like manner looking after their own interests.

You claiming it was my imagination was something I had to endure previously , however we have now got access to the BAP case notes which add damming evidence that it is no imagination, its real.

Its a shame I have failed to get my concerns across to you, despite my past dealings with dodgy Yacht Brokers it is not my current crusade to harm in any way current Yacht Brokers*, it is my belief that most boat buyers and sellers are being mislead by Yacht Brokers (unwittingly due to poor supervision/guidance from Yacht Brokers associations) as to the best way to purchase/sell a boat.
The current system adds lots of unnecessary risk to both buyer and seller.
The Yacht Broker (unless dodgy) doesnt really benefit much from the poor practice save a few measly scraps of interest.
I cant see why a reputable Yacht Broker would object to holding a deposit in a correctly formatted client account and allowing the exchange to place place under an escrow agreement.
In most cases the deposit would be around the value of the Yacht Brokers commission.

Adding this security would increase boat sales and be in the interests of Yacht Brokers, buyers, sellers and the Brokers associations.

Its been asked before and went unanswered so I ask again...........

Are there any Yacht Brokers reading this that routinely offer the use of Escrows.

Is there a reason why the Yacht Broker wants to hold someone elses cash in his bank account.

My posts are not about having a go at Yacht Brokers, they are about trying to improve the current system which is risky and open to abuse.
sincerely

Pete
* qualified remark

 

[Tranona]

Pete

Where is your evidence that brokers use clents funds to support their overdrafts? The guidelines for clients accounts are quite clear that they cannot be used in this way.

The subject of this thread was incomplete documentation, and even then from the information provided it is not clear whether anybody has been misled. The document turned out to be faded and only partly legible. No suggestion that any claim was made that a document existed that didn't. Also not clear whether the purchaser inspected the documents before handing over the cash.

So not an entirely satisfactory state of affairs in relation to this transaction, but hardly the basis for claiming imperfections in the system!

 

[DAKA]

Well to be fair it wasnt me getting it out of context this time , I just suggested the OP check his cash was in a clients account and I specifically said dont panic.

I agree this is the wrong thread to start this in detail however I dont agree the system isnt flawed .

Just to demonstrate to you that my sole purpose in life is not to have a pop at Yacht Brokers , my next post will be about Volvo Penta

Have a nice day
Pete

 

[nrbx]

Hi Guys,

To clarify.

We're at the stage where i have paid for the boat, but not yet handed over / recieved any documents.

The current owners are now dragging their feet on completion knowing i leave until 7th Jan tomorrow which is not great.

I offered to collect the paperwork today and take it to the broker so that they can get paid and we can complete, but they wont allow this.

I agree with your advice DAKA and if they won't be completing on the time scale agreed i will be requesting the money back and picking another boat Not worth the risk!

The boat has been financed by the previous 2 owners, so i suspect a copy of the VAT invoice does exist. It also appears it will be possible to restore the current faded copy as a worst case resort.

Cheers,

 

[DAKA]

I agree with your advice DAKA and if they won't be completing on the time scale agreed i will be requesting the money back and picking another boat Not worth the risk!

Once you have your money back the risk has gone and you can buy the same boat you have invested so much time, effort and money into.

There are otherways of buying this boat through the same broker but avoiding some of the risks.

Of course if you feel the Broker has misled you, you dont have any legal relationship with the Broker and once you have your money back you are now free to deal direct with the owner.

Its horrid when things go wrong, I hope you get it sorted soon.

 

[Tranona]

Of course if you feel the Broker has misled you, you dont have any legal relationship with the Broker....

Sorry to nitpick, but this is not necessarily the case. The Misrepresentation Act 1967 may apply. If the broker (or the owner) claimed that a certain document existed and it did not then that could be the basis for cancelling the contract (if serious) or claiming damages for loss in value or additional expenses.

 

[Major Catastrophe]

Pete

Why do you keep having this tirade against brokers and their supposed failings? There is no evidence that they systematically misbehave in the way you imagine they might.

There are a lot of boat owners in N Wales who lost lots of money and even all of their money when their boats were seized by the liquidators of a local brokerage/boat firm.

Many of them had boats in Port Dinorwic and had notices pinned to their 'masts' before they were seized.

Buyer beware and DAKA's advice is vital.

Ask you broker where your money is going before you hand it over.

 

[Tranona]

In all the interminable threads on this subject, this is the first mention of a case such as this. There is obviously more to it if boats were being seized as this would unlikely be anything to do with moneys in client accounts (which is what Pete's beef is about). Do you have more details?

Normally boats can only be "seized" if there are outstanding accounts - for example for moorings, supply of goods or services. Difficult to see how any brokerage activity would result in an unpaid debt to the broker unless the client had witheld commission.

Think you may be falling into the same trap as Pete used to in failing to distinguish between a broker and a trader. Legally distinctly different although the same person or firm can be either according to the nature of the transaction.

 

[Major Catastrophe]

I assume you are talking to me.

I talk of Deva Marine, which was discussed on here in detail in 2007.

Mentioned here.

In this thread, Misterg says: "The concept of a 'client account' was debated (to death!) here recently, and without wishing to re-kindle the fire, I believe that the upshot was that there was no special legal status afforded to such an account in general business (maybe there is for solicitors & legal firms, though). Money held in escrow should be 'safe' however.

As an aside, Network Yacht Brokers (who took over some of Deva Marine when they went bust) state that a deposit on a sale (10%) will be held in an escrow account (good), however the 90% appears to be paid direct to them, and isn't passed on to the seller until 28 days after the boat changes hands. If anything happens in this time, the seller is up the creek, and you better hope the buyer has moved the boat off the premises - In Deva Marine's case, the Administrators kept both the money and the boat in a number of cases (no connection, but they were a local company).

Several people have posted here that they lost money (angelawild1 springs to mind, and was featured in an editorial in one of the mags), but I probably isn't fair to expect them to comment, when they're possibly in the middle of legal proceedings."

I actually witnessed as a boat was removed from the marina by the administrators and the owner lost £135,000

As Deva is now running again I don't want to go into too much detail.

Deva marine was both a trader and a broker.

Found some more check out post #18 here. "I've seen a Jeanneau Prestige in Port Dinorwic marina with a reposession notice on it in the last couple of days, so it will be interesting to see what comes out in the next few days... "

Later in the thread this pops up, "Hi, I am new to this forum I also have a new boat on order with Deva, I have left my my own boat there as trade in and also
paid a deposit. The adminstrator is claiming title to my own boat and intends to sell it.I have spoken to the importer of the new boat to told that no money has been paid at all so I have no title to the new boat. Can anybody help? is there a crediters committee. "

I have no idea of the outcome.

 

[PaulGooch]

<snip>

As an aside, Network Yacht Brokers (who took over some of Deva Marine when they went bust) state that a deposit on a sale (10%) will be held in an escrow account (good), however the 90% appears to be paid direct to them, and isn't passed on to the seller until 28 days after the boat changes hands.

<snip>

I purchased out current boat through Network Yacht Brokers in 2008. I think things may have changed since 2007. We paid them a 10% deposit, then paid the 90% a couple of days before the handover. Although i can't find it, i'm 99.999% sure that at the outset, we had a letter from NYB stating that all moneys were held in a separate client account.

I do agree that there need to be a proper system put in place for boat sales. I don't accept the argument that just because there aren't mass problems, there is no need.

 

[Tranona]

It is difficult to see how a privately owned boat can become an asset of a brokerage business as by definition the person is not a broker once he owns the boat (and it is therefore one of his assets that could be taken by a creditor) but a trader.

That is why it is important to understand the nature of the transaction. In the Opal case, most (maybe even all) of the folks who lost money had placed deposits and stage payments on either new boats or boats owned by Opal. In this case the deposits etc may not have been paid into a client account, even if Opal had promised to do so. My reading of the court case and judgement is that the client account was mostly used for brokerage (where Opal was an agent and trustee) and that there was always sufficient funds to meet the claims on it. What was not there was deposits etc that were not paid directly into that account and therefore no trust had been created. All the others were unsecured creditors in just the same way as the people who lost money in the Courts collapse and what you are every time you place a deposit for a new car from a dealer, for example.

BTW I am not saying that people do not lose money when businesses go bust - they clearly do in all kinds of businesses, nor that there is not bad practice around. Just that I have yet to see a specific case where a broker has stolen money from a client account. Plenty of lawyers do it (comparatively) and it is so common that lawyers have created a compensation fund. If lawyers were as law abiding as brokers seem to be there would be no need for the fund!

 

[Tranona]

I do agree that there need to be a proper system put in place for boat sales. I don't accept the argument that just because there aren't mass problems, there is no need.

Well there is a "proper system" in place, otherwise no business would take place. How would your system differ from what happens now?

 

[PaulGooch]

Well there is a "proper system" in place, otherwise no business would take place. How would your system differ from what happens now?

As you seem blinkered to the possibility that buyers can, and do, lose money during the course of boat purchasing transactions, there seems little point entering into an discussion with you.

 

[Tranona]

As you seem blinkered to the possibility that buyers can, and do, lose money during the course of boat purchasing transactions, there seems little point entering into an discussion with you.

The very last thing I am is blinkered! Please read what I write. People lose money. There are risks in any business. The risk in buying boats (in terms of losing money) is largely in the purchase of new boats or boats owned by traders, NOT brokerage, which has its own risks, but not particularly related to the way the finances are handled. I am just interested in what you see that is wrong and can be "improved". Because every time the question is asked nobody really has any ideas - they just say it is wrong. I thought as you volunteered a better system, you might have some idea of what it might look like, thats all.

 

[boatmaster]

It seems to me, (and this is not directed at any one individual on the forum) that generally brokers are the enemy and no matter what they do, it will always be subject to criticism. its a shame really because they play a vital role in the second hand market and its future.

 

[DAKA]

It seems to me, (and this is not directed at any one individual on the forum) that generally brokers are the enemy and no matter what they do, it will always be subject to criticism.

I strongly disagree with that, I have as much reason as most to aim at several marine companies who were all a party to nothing sort of an organised scam that involved Brokers and dealers from the North of England to Poole, some very well known too.

However I dont hold a grudge against all Brokers, I am possibly more aware than most of the dangers, the surprise and the problem is that a few appear to want the problems swept under the carpet instead of addressing them.

Yacht Brokers associations could recommend to Brokers that sales should proceed either

1) by use of a dedicated ring fenced clients account opened for each individual client.

2) The use of Escrow agreements where the bulk of the cash is passed to the boat owner/mortgage company and not left in the charge of a a Brokers friendly high st bank who allow the clients cash to be used to credit the Brokers own account.



There is no more point in arguing with me or Tranona as we are only forum members with our own ideas that are a irrelevant, what matters is getting the attention of the Yacht Brokers associations, ( Rachel popped up a few weeks back from one of the associations but disappeared as quickly as she came when she couldnt understand the concerns).

In a nut shell this forum has many cleaver people on it who are able to understand complex issues but the people that should be sorting the problems out are either too thick or prepared to turn a blind eye in the interests of safeguarding their own organisations income.

If you own a grubby little Fish and chip shop there are loads of associations that will give you a certificate as the best for ***** as long as you pay and become a member.
Yacht Brokers associations are operating in a similar way, there are just too many associations which means a Broker can do what ever he wants including using the clients cash for running his own business.
If there was only one Yacht Brokers association and it was made compulsory to be a member then the Brokers Association could have real teeth and get it sorted.

The current situation is that if a Brokers Association tried to tell their members they have to act responsibly then the Brokers would leave and join a different association, the associations are just too weak hence attempt to pull the wool over the marks eyes.

 

[Tranona]

Yacht Brokers associations could recommend to Brokers that sales should proceed either

1) by use of a dedicated ring fenced clients account opened for each individual client.

2) The use of Escrow agreements where the bulk of the cash is passed to the boat owner/mortgage company and not left in the charge of a a Brokers friendly high st bank who allow the clients cash to be used to credit the Brokers own account.

They already do that. The guidance on Client Accounts and separation from operating accounts is there

There is no reason why an individual cannot use an escrow account or any other means of transfer funds that the seller agrees to provided he bears the cost.

You have no evidence that brokers routinely use funds in client accounts for their own purposes, so why do you persist in seeing it as a "problem"?