Pre Purchase Surveys

[ChiHead]

When buying from a broker is he obliged to highlight or at least mention any non obviouse issues that were found by previous pre purchase surveys that may have caused other perspective buyers to walk away.
I just ask as obviously you could spend a lot of money on a survey only to find something that was already known by the broker and owner.

 

[neale]

They are not obliged to, but why not ask the question. Have any potential purchasers walked away from this boat after having a survey done and if so why? A good broker should hopefully be upfront with you.

 

[jrudge]

Interesting question. If a trader describes something as "excellent condition" but knows it is faulty (or doesn't!) they are misrepresenting the product / vehicle.

Now a broker does not own the vessel, but I would assume has to act in good faith and if they KNOW ( i.e. not opinion or rumour, but fact form a prior survey for example) I would have thought they should reveal this if asked.

 

[jrudge]

BMF membership code of practice


Members shall provide Clients with bespoke accurate and reliable information being mindful of their requirements when making any recommendation; such information shall include but not be limited to price, specification and time of delivery of their products. Furthermore, Members shall not dishonestly misrepresent nor misdescribe their products or services.

Members shall represent their goods and services accurately to the best of their knowledge. To that end, no Member shall intentionally commission or use advertising which tends to misrepresent or mislead Clients, the industry or the public at large. In particular, Members shall not advertise vessels for sale without the consent of the owner or joint broker.


So I would say that if they knew of a material fault found by another survey, sufficient for someone to drop out AND they were BMF registered they would have to disclose it.

The flip side is that the owner has an incentive to fix it also or it will just fail survey again


Also topical the current VAT thread

h. Members shall use their best endeavours to verify the complete history of ownership of any craft offered for sale as well as the VAT status of craft, informing prospective clients of any known VAT liabilities.

 

[Greg2]

My understanding is that not only should they disclose it for ethical reasons but if they don't they would effectively be misrepresenting the boat, which could have consequences.

 

[Momac]

The brokers client is the vendor.
He has no contract with a prospective purchaser.
The broker should not lie and should answer any questions honestly - but I don't think it is his job to point out defects.
.

 

[Greg2]

The brokers client is the vendor.
He has no contract with a prospective purchaser.
The broker should not lie and should answer any questions honestly - but I don't think it is his job to point out defects.
.

Actually, I think it is. There is an obligation on the Broker to represent the boat accurately and whilst it might be a defence if the vendor didn't inform the Broker of a problem it wouldn't if the Broker was aware of a problem.

 

[ontheplane]

I think it depends on whether the Broker knows of the fault - i.e. if they either see the survey themselves, or if the prospective purchaser says "I am not proceeding with the sale as there is a XXYY in it which shouldn't be there so I am pulling out - can I have my deposit back please"

Or if the buyer just says "I don't wish to proceed" and doesn't give any more info (I don't actually know if that ever happens)!

 

[Gentlemanracer]

If the broker puts you in touch with the failed purchaser and his surveyors agree, for a small consideration you could get benefit from previously commissioned reports. Done it, worked out well. I got a few quid back for structural & power-train (& oil samples) surveys; results not considered an issue with the next chap along, who planned a quite different use profile for the boat. For me, the boat was excellent but... unexpectedly a lard ass, but that was personal disappointment after the sea trial and sadly no point in me buying her. Of course, if reports are stale (i.e. the boat's conditions have moved on since the surveys) then there's no value left in them anyway and its time to commission fresh. Hope this helps!

 

[Jim@sea]

The brokers client is the vendor.
He has no contract with a prospective purchaser.
The broker should not lie and should answer any questions honestly - but I don't think it is his job to point out defects.
.

His job is not to volunteer information which could prejudice a sale.

 

[Montemar]

His job is not to volunteer information which could prejudice a sale.

Of course however he has a moral obligation to not lie when asked a direct question. A lie would then mean misrepresentation of the boat's condition which elevates (reduces?) it to a legal problem. All you would need is proof that would hold up in court. N'est-ce pas?

 

[Imperial One]

Any good and knowledgeable broker would tell an owner of any apparent issues that are likely to affect a sale when he lists the boat.
In addition, I always ask an owner does he/she know of anything that needs attention now or is anything planned to be done prior to selling the boat.
That way I am as well informed as I can be prior to any viewing, sea trial or survey.

Jim@sea is right that it is not our job to prejudice a sale but I believe, rightly or wrongly, that I have a duty not to hoodwink anybody either. I rather care about my reputation and integrity.
Buyers and sellers are potential repeat customers for any business and need looking after accordingly.

If a sale falls through because of a survey issue which the buyer is unhappy about then it is basically a very simple thing to explain to the owner that they need to remedy this issue before the next survey or drop the price to cover it and declare it as needing attention. Sure some owners don't like this but that's life. If its broke it needs fixing, plain and simple. If they still don't want to attend to an issue then I would certainly mention to any future potential buyer that "the issue" might need consideration when making an offer.

Slight thread drift but as it was mentioned above; In just the same way, if a paper chain on a boat is incomplete - and that includes VAT proof not being available - then it needs sorting out as well.
It is essential to keep ALL original paperwork you can and if you have lost something then get a certified copy of it.
You will probably not be asked to show it to any officialdom but if you do and you don't have it.........

 

[Montemar]

Actually the broker merely has to decline to answer citing, for example, confidentiality or health and safety or any current politically correct gobbledygook. By not answering the decision/problem becomes the buyer's. All very undesirable but caveat emptor.

 

[Ripster]

Interesting thread. I went after a MOBO once that failed miserably on the survey (mainly mechanicals and electricals) and I pulled out from the deal and got my deposit refunded in full. Thankfully, I had written in my own changes to the standard agreement and got these agreed before signing up. Anyway, I then discovered that the boat had had a previous buyer who had the same survey experience and had pulled out. After this, another forumite had yet another survey done and the issues popped up again. On this third occasion, the broker refused to refund. A threatened court case using his survey and mine was needed to force a refund including legal fees. Not once was any of the previous surveys or failures mentioned by the brokers or anyone. What I learned was, rightly or wrongly, no-one is going to make you aware on any current or potential issues so ALWAYS have an independent survey done. When buying a boat - caveat emptor 100%. All IMO of course.

 

[Imperial One]

Montemar, Ripster
Sadly both of the above are perfectly valid posts and opinions.
Firstly, I personally dislike all this nodding to politically correct BS as anyone who knows me will attest. Any good broker will want to get a deal for his vendor and will inform a buyer of anything that may get in the way of this happening. But I guess there are some out there who may not share my (old fashioned?) views.
Secondly, the broker concerned in Ripsters post sounds like one to avoid.

Next time any of you are looking for a boat give me a call.
Not everything I know of is on my website and FWIW I can only recall ever having to refund a deposit and that was to a buyer who could not raise the finance when they turned out not to be the 'Cash buyers' they purported to be!
Perhaps I can look forward to maybe helping properly next time round? :encouragement:

 

[volvopaul]

Owners can be just as bad for not declaring materiel defects that can play a massive outcome in the result of a sale, what annoys me are people from all parties that waste brokers and buyers time and money where surveys and lift out charges are concerned. I was a victim of this when selling my last boat to take a part exchange which was described as a good boat, I travelled from Southampton to South Wales to find the boat broke down on its sea trial with major engjne issues and had osmosis on the hull. It turned out the best waste of time as the deal still went through and both parties were happy. Buying or selling a boat is a massive learning curve, if your not up to speed on every angle pay the experts to do this for you.