POLL- Do you trust your money with a yacht Broker

Do You trust the value of your boat with an unsecured creditor

  • Yes , I am happy to trust the value of my boat with a Yacht Broker as it is risk free

    Votes: 5 6.2%

  • Yes , I am happy to trust the value of my boat with a Yacht Broker as it is a small risk

    Votes: 33 40.7%

  • No, Iam not happy to trust the value of my boat with a Yacht Broker as it high risk

    Votes: 27 33.3%

  • No, Iam not happy to trust the value of my boat with a Yacht Broker as it a small risk

    Votes: 16 19.8%
  • Total voters
    81
Tranona said:
Very confusing! Not sure why you are obsessed with "polls" - so far 37 people! barely half of those who have shown any interest in the subject. I expect if I had the time and energy to back over these interminable threads I will find at least that number of people who have taken the bother to post about their satisfaction with their dealings with brokers.
Click to expand...

This thread is been directed round in circles, I suggest the way forward is to agree a joint statement and leave it at that.

Rubber duck sums it it well enough, many just dont feel comfortable about handing large sums across.

I expect this could be a simple North South divide where we all actually agree but retain slight differences of attitude.
For example one undisputed fact that the YBW poll shows us is that

95.71% all agree there is a risk
Even the yacht Brokers overwhelmingly agree there is a risk.


I suspect its the hard working people who sacrifice other comforts in order to own a boat that feel the small risk is unacceptable. ( I am happy to admit that I fall into this category, my boat is very dear to me and I will have to sell eventually in order to fund my retirement)

The risk (accepted small) that a yacht Broker can take my retirement pot is unacceptable to me.

A Southerner can easily pick up an annual bonus to the value of my boat, loose it and all he has to do is wait another year for his next bonus.

The small risk becomes acceptable, I now understand why you have been arguing so long, and I am even more readily to agree to differ on this.(obviously not all southerners can scoop a bonus each year, but it is widely accepted the salaries are somewhat higher than the rest of the country)


Agreed statement

There is a risk that a Yacht Broker can take the value of your boat, if you dont mind loosing it then take the risk.
If the amount is significant then ask to see a letter from his bank confirming that the Clients account is ring fenced and ask to see a set of annual accounts from the Broker, if they dont look healthy then choose another Yacht Broker to deal with .
The risk is fairly small

And always remember the Yacht Broker is acting for the seller, if you are are buyer its Caveat emptor



.
 
Last edited:
DAKA said:
This thread is been directed round in circles, I suggest the way forward is to agree a joint statement and leave it at that.

Rubber duck sums it it well enough, many just dont feel comfortable about handing large sums across.

I expect this could be a simple North South divide where we all actually agree but retain slight differences of attitude.
For example one undisputed fact that the YBW poll shows us is that

95.71% all agree there is a risk
Even the yacht Brokers overwhelmingly agree there is a risk.


I suspect its the hard working people who sacrifice other comforts in order to own a boat that feel the small risk is unacceptable. ( I am happy to admit that I fall into this category, my boat is very dear to me and I will have to sell eventually in order to fund my retirement)

The risk (accepted small) that a yacht Broker can take my retirement pot is unacceptable to me.

A Southerner can easily pick up an annual bonus to the value of my boat, loose it and all he has to do is wait another year for his next bonus.

The small risk becomes acceptable, I now understand why you have been arguing so long, and I am even more readily to agree to differ on this.(obviously not all southerners can scoop a bonus each year, but it is widely accepted the salaries are somewhat higher than the rest of the country)


Agreed statement

There is a risk that a Yacht Broker can take the value of your boat, if you dont mind loosing it then take the risk.
If the amount is significant then ask to see a letter from his bank confirming that the Clients account is ring fenced and ask to see a set of annual accounts from the Broker, if they dont look healthy then choose another Yacht Broker to deal with .
The risk is fairly small

And always remember the Yacht Broker is acting for the seller, if you are are buyer its Caveat emptor
Click to expand...

I think that's a pretty good summing up.

We have to say there is a risk because it's impossible to say there isn't-just like the risk from a solicitor, accountant or bank.

But it's important to remember that since the new directive on client accounts from ABYA, there is no risk if the broker goes bust and he has a written in trust client account because the money is ring fenced.

The (small) risk is if he steals it or doesn't put it in there, which is not a risk limited to just yacht brokers.

If concerned I would ask for the PI insurance certificate, and the trust agreement from the bank.

When you make the payment you make sure it is going to the client account by cross referencing the number on the bank letter or if paying by cheque putting client account on the cheque.
 
Last edited:
jonic said:
I think that's a pretty good summing up.

Excellent, just need Tronana to give a little :)

When you make the payment you make sure it is going to the client account by cross referencing the number on the bank letter or if paying by cheque putting client account on the cheque.
Click to expand...

Excellent, good advice :)
 
DAKA said:
Excellent, good advice :)
Click to expand...


Eh? You and Jonic really need to keep up at the back. The "excellent" advice was "When you make the payment you make sure it is going to the client account by cross referencing the number on the bank letter or if paying by cheque putting client account on the cheque" but the person making the payment is the buyer while the person on risk for the breach of trust/non creation of trust/other defects is the seller. So how is the buyer when making the payment going to be acting in the seller's interest? Jeeze.
 
jfm said:
Eh? You and Jonic really need to keep up at the back. The "excellent" advice was "When you make the payment you make sure it is going to the client account by cross referencing the number on the bank letter or if paying by cheque putting client account on the cheque" but the person making the payment is the buyer while the person on risk for the breach of trust/non creation of trust/other defects is the seller. So how is the buyer when making the payment going to be acting in the seller's interest? Jeeze.
Click to expand...

If I have to be 100% honest John, I was attempting to put the thread to bed.
The whole idea of likening it to paying a solicitor made red lights flash to me because as you know the Solicitors have a compensation scheme in place.
I have recently learned that someone topped themselves following an argument on this forum, I assume you are young and fit enough to handle petty arguments as I am but Im not so sure about the age of others who seem to be getting hot under the collar so I think its best to let it go and allow them a dignified route out.
sincerely

Pete
 
jfm said:
Eh? You and Jonic really need to keep up at the back. The "excellent" advice was "When you make the payment you make sure it is going to the client account by cross referencing the number on the bank letter or if paying by cheque putting client account on the cheque" but the person making the payment is the buyer while the person on risk for the breach of trust/non creation of trust/other defects is the seller. So how is the buyer when making the payment going to be acting in the seller's interest? Jeeze.
Click to expand...
What about the deposit,JFM? Isnt that the buyer's money,until exchange?
Smaller beer I know , and the smaller the better.
I am not sure who buys a boat by cheque! Perhaps there are quill pens on the broker's replica Dickensian desk...
 
jfm said:
Eh? You and Jonic really need to keep up at the back. The "excellent" advice was "When you make the payment you make sure it is going to the client account by cross referencing the number on the bank letter or if paying by cheque putting client account on the cheque" but the person making the payment is the buyer while the person on risk for the breach of trust/non creation of trust/other defects is the seller. So how is the buyer when making the payment going to be acting in the seller's interest? Jeeze.
Click to expand...

aaaaaaarrrrrrrrrrrrgghhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhh

We were so close to ending the thread.

90% pay by chaps by the way.

Interestingly I now get quizzed by the bank on the origin of the funds too.
 
gjgm said:
What about the deposit,JFM? Isnt that the buyer's money,until exchange?
Click to expand...

Don't forget the deposit is also to protect the seller if the buyer fails to complete his contractual obligations, or if he damages the boat during seatrial/survey and/or if he fails to put the boat back where he found it.

The flip side is the buyer is also protected because unlike a house sale, he cannot be gazumped whilst spending money on a survey.

If a higher offer comes in it cannot be accepted whilst that agreement is in place.
 
Last edited:
gjgm said:
What about the deposit,JFM? Isnt that the buyer's money,until exchange?
Smaller beer I know , and the smaller the better.
I am not sure who buys a boat by cheque! Perhaps there are quill pens on the broker's replica Dickensian desk...
Click to expand...

The deposit is small beer and keeping it small is the best solution. (I asked for 20k when selling a 500k boat and I don't get the 10% thing). I think a solution to 90% is good enough and I really don't care about the 10%!

But to answer your question, the deposit money isn't the buyer's. It's in limbo, held by a stakeholder. None can know if it is to become buyer's money or seller's money, until nealry the end of the process. If the boat fails its survey or the seller reneges, it becomes the buyer's money. If the sale goes through or if buyer refuses to complete when he should, it becomes seller's money. Thus one or other of buyer or seller will own the money, and is therefore on risk if the trust is breached and the broker runs off with the money, but they do not know (till the end) which of them

BTW, there is no concept of the deposit belonging to someone "until" exchange, because the deposit doesnt exist until exchange. It is only paid at the same time as exchange of contracts.

I am very happy to agree the calls to put this to bed though. It's been done to death! Let's call it a day, yeeehaaaa!
 
jfm said:
The deposit is small beer and keeping it small is the best solution. (I asked for 20k when selling a 500k boat and I don't get the 10% thing). I think a solution to 90% is good enough and I really don't care about the 10%!

But to answer your question, the deposit money isn't the buyer's. It's in limbo, held by a stakeholder. None can know if it is to become buyer's money or seller's money, until nealry the end of the process. If the boat fails its survey or the seller reneges, it becomes the buyer's money. If the sale goes through or if buyer refuses to complete when he should, it becomes seller's money. Thus one or other of buyer or seller will own the money, and is therefore on risk if the trust is breached and the broker runs off with the money, but they do not know (till the end) which of them

BTW, there is no concept of the deposit belonging to someone "until" exchange, because the deposit doesnt exist until exchange. It is only paid at the same time as exchange of contracts.

I am very happy to agree the calls to put this to bed though. It's been done to death! Let's call it a day, yeeehaaaa!
Click to expand...

JFM is of course right.


.....2 DEPOSIT AND PAYMENT
On the signing of this Agreement a deposit of 10% of the purchase price is to be paid by the Purchaser to the Broker as stakeholder. The stakeholder will hold the deposit on behalf of the vendor and the purchaser in a Client Account


.....7 COMPLETION
Upon acceptance of the vessel by the Purchaser, the deposit shall be treated as part payment of the purchase price and within 7 days of acceptance.....


He's also right we should put the thread to sleep now!
 
jfm said:
But to answer your question, the deposit money isn't the buyer's. It's in limbo, held by a stakeholder. None can know if it is to become buyer's money or seller's money, until nealry the end of the process. If the boat fails its survey or the seller reneges, it becomes the buyer's money. If the sale goes through or if buyer refuses to complete when he should, it becomes seller's money. Thus one or other of buyer or seller will own the money, and is therefore on risk if the trust is breached and the broker runs off with the money, but they do not know (till the end) which of them

BTW, there is no concept of the deposit belonging to someone "until" exchange, because the deposit doesnt exist until exchange. It is only paid at the same time as exchange of contracts.
QUOTE]

Sorry, only just read this.
Ok thanks;hadnt thought of it in that way.
What a lot I learn on here!
Click to expand...
 
Interestingly the current MBM (Feb 2012 edition) reports a case of a broker in Netherlands who has sold a boat and after 6 months still hasn't handed the money over to the seller!
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

Share this page

Top