Rocna Anchors acquired by Canada Metal Pacific

[GrantKing]

stainless

Whilst the latest memorandum purports to address the question of the steel used in galvanised anchors it's interesting to note that everything has gone very quiet indeed on the reports of low grade stainless being used on nice shiney Rocna anchors.

Nothing has been said about this.........

Well Rigger would you like to be the one to tell the owner of the meg*****$$$$$$$$ Nordhavn that his bright and shiney 150kg Rocna is only 316 stainless instead of 2205, and the shank is edge laminated instead of solid ?

But then maybe they all think that he will just have it on show instead of getting it dirty.

Thats one sale that is very very easy to trace, along with the other large ones including the period that they are claiming in 2010 as known and admitted faulty.

 

[Djbangi]

Rigger and Grant,

Its the BP scenario. Admit to nothing, it will go away. Who has heard recently of the BP oil spill? Its yesterdays news, today its Greece - tomorrow who knows? - but BP well below the horizon.

It you can get away with not admitting to sale of out of spec gal anchors, maybe 5,000 of them, during 2009 you can certainly get away with ignoring the few shiny anchors made from 316? stainless. Certainly you can understand the issue - admit liability and lose bonus for the year, or brazen it out.

Basically all anchor made in China did not meet the advertised specification, whether they were made from Q420, Q620 or 316 stainless. The advertised specifications were higher and they were all claimed to be RINA compliant. Most might be Q420 and 316 (which CMP is ignoring) - but none met specification - at all!

And the perpetrators of the scam are still gainfully employed by the people the public are now asked to trust.

Get real.

But the real issue is actually the 316 and Q412 shanked anchors with the same shank thickness of the originally stated design based on Bisplate 80 - which has twice the strength of Q412 and 316. Its a simple safety issue. Yes, you'll get your bonus - but do you sleep soundly every night (thinking about that phone call)

 

[Ex-SolentBoy]

Well Rigger would you like to be the one to tell the owner of the meg*****$$$$$$$$ Nordhavn that his bright and shiney 150kg Rocna is only 316 stainless instead of 2205, and the shank is edge laminated instead of solid ?

But then maybe they all think that he will just have it on show instead of getting it dirty.

Thats one sale that is very very easy to trace, along with the other large ones including the period that they are claiming in 2010 as known and admitted faulty.

If you are thinking of the new Nordhvn 76', I met him last week. He was on his maiden trip, and we rafted alongside him in Dartmouth. Very nice boat. We discussed anchors and he had chosen the Rocna and deliberately oversized it himself. From the accent I assumed he was from Aussie, but he could have been Kiwi I guess. Sorry, but I have always struggled with the difference!

I can assure you that after discussing sailing with him he is definitely going to be useing it. The boat is currently based in Cowes I think.

 

[Chris_Robb]

This saga gets even more remarkable as time goes by. The man who would be liable for the cost of replacement is the man who is advising customers about whether their anchors are up to standard??????
With Bumbury's track record for integrity I wonder how likely it is that people will get a straight answer?

None

 

[stevenpolgar]

Rocna and the steel specifications.

I have read with interest over many months these forums regarding the steel grades used in the shank of the anchors. I am personally aware that the original specifications regarding the shanks were never met by the Chinese manufacturer. In fact in 2008 there were serious issues in obtaining Bissalloy of similar steel grades in China. The Chinese manufacturer is not really to blame as the Bambury's and Grant King " dug their own grave" as they tried so hard to cast anchors without any technical ability in this area. They all worked to obtain RINA certification in China using New Zealand made anchors and bypassing any Quality Control or Quality Assurance that they basically "lost the plot". The current liquidation of Hold Fast could not have happened to better people and now the truth will come out.
The Bambury's reign has now finished and what is left is just a lot of "flotsam and jettsom " for the rest to clean up.

 

[GrantKing]

150kg ss

If you are thinking of the new Nordhvn 76', I met him last week. He was on his maiden trip, and we rafted alongside him in Dartmouth. Very nice boat. We discussed anchors and he had chosen the Rocna and deliberately oversized it himself. From the accent I assumed he was from Aussie, but he could have been Kiwi I guess. Sorry, but I have always struggled with the difference!

I can assure you that after discussing sailing with him he is definitely going to be useing it. The boat is currently based in Cowes I think.

It was shipped direct to the builders yard in Taiwan at the end of feb 2010

 

[youen]

refund

Is there any body here who own a Chinese anchor and who get a refund from his chandler.In France The French distributor and Rocna certify:The anchors sold in France are conform to the specifications asked by the Classification Society and are exempt of any défect.I am waiting a reply telling me which classification society and suggest the distrutor to read Grant King post but...

 

[Ex-SolentBoy]

Is there any body here who own a Chinese anchor and who get a refund from his chandler.In France The French distributor and Rocna certify:The anchors sold in France are conform to the specifications asked by the Classification Society and are exempt of any défect.I am waiting a reply telling me which classification society and suggest the distrutor to read Grant King post but...

Please read my previous posts. I have been offered a refund by my chandler in the uk.

 

[FishyInverness]

Is there any body here who own a Chinese anchor and who get a refund from his chandler.In France The French distributor and Rocna certify:The anchors sold in France are conform to the specifications asked by the Classification Society and are exempt of any défect.I am waiting a reply telling me which classification society and suggest the distrutor to read Grant King post but...

Youen, you must have a version of Consumer Rights legislation in France? If the company refuses to replace a product which was not to it's advertised specification, then that is your next approach, use that legislation to get your refund.

 

[youen]

Yes but it will take a long time and all the post as written by Grant King and I think he is alone telling another story that the "official one " told by Rocna

 

[GrantKing]

rubbish

Is there any body here who own a Chinese anchor and who get a refund from his chandler.In France The French distributor and Rocna certify:The anchors sold in France are conform to the specifications asked by the Classification Society and are exempt of any défect.I am waiting a reply telling me which classification society and suggest the distrutor to read Grant King post but...

When does this sort of rubbish and hiding the truth end?

There was no Classification Society specifications met.
The only parts met in certification were for seabed tests with fabricated NZ made Bis80 shanks, not with Chinese cast Rocna's.

Rina stated that if the current anchors were not the same as the tested anchors then the tests would have to be done again. They were told they were the same in 2009!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!11

The drawings that were approved were all for fabricated plate blades not for cast blades.
Rina were not told that the current anchors were cast.

You purchased an anchor that was NOT bis80 as advertised and was not up the standard as loudly promoted by bambury and Smith.

Get real everybody it is getting to be another joke and full of misinformation.

The limited Rina certification statements published were only obtained by bribery and corruption, the proof of which is currently before the courts in NZ, I know because I filed the proof and it will be published shortly by the press who are waiting for the release of the documents.

Youen, you have consumer rights and those rights do not include being fed manure as though you are a mushroom and to be kept in the dark.

Time to come clean everyone because I have had enough of reading more lies and rubbish that is still being penned by those who made the changes, denied them and then when caught out still try to keep the misinformation going.

 

[FishyInverness]

Yes but it will take a long time and all the post as written by Grant King and I think he is alone telling another story that the "official one " told by Rocna

Unfortunately this is the fate of the consumer sometimes Youen. Sorry to say but you will have to take that time and effort to get your money back.

In the end, as Grant has just vociferously attested!, the evidence shows you didn't get what you paid for, but when a retailer attempts to avoid their obligations (and they do, in every aspect of consumer products and services, sometimes retailers just don't want to give you your money back and they'll tell you anything to avoid it, or sometime they're lazy, or the person you're speaking to is uninformed and unaware or a jobsworth) you have to take the slow route.

 

[youen]

I think I am going to wait the results of the judgment in NZ Court.

 

[Dockhead]

Unfortunately this is the fate of the consumer sometimes Youen. Sorry to say but you will have to take that time and effort to get your money back.

In the end, as Grant has just vociferously attested!, the evidence shows you didn't get what you paid for, but when a retailer attempts to avoid their obligations (and they do, in every aspect of consumer products and services, sometimes retailers just don't want to give you your money back and they'll tell you anything to avoid it, or sometime they're lazy, or the person you're speaking to is uninformed and unaware or a jobsworth) you have to take the slow route.

Indeed. In the UK, it is actually a criminal offense for a retailer to misinform a consumer about his rights. I can't imagine that it's much different in France. If you were sold one thing and delivered another, as long as the difference is not immaterial, you have the right to return it, period.

 

[youen]

They say your anchor is conform and certify it .I must have proof they are wrong if i want to have a chance to get a refund.

 

[Dockhead]

The relevant legislation is the Sale of Goods Act of 1979. Here is a good layman's guide to it:

http://www.oft.gov.uk/business-advice/treating-customers-fairly/sogahome/sogaexplained

"Customers do have a legal right to a refund, repair or replacement if an item they purchased

* does not match the description
* is not of satisfactory quality
* is not fit for purpose.

Each of these circumstances would mean that the item does not conform to contract and therefore it can be described as faulty."

Chinese Rocnas were sold as (a) made of Q&T 800 steel (and with a whole essay by the designer about how crucial to performance this exact specification is); and (b) RINA certified. They were delivered neither as this, or that. The situation is very simple, legally.

 

[GrantKing]

consumer rights france

They say your anchor is conform and certify it .I must have proof they are wrong if i want to have a chance to get a refund.

read this:http://eur-lex.europa.eu/LexUriServ/LexUriServ.do?uri=OJ:L:1999:171:0012:0016:FR:PDF

and this: http://www.brittany-internet.com/BrittanyNews/ConsumerRightsFrance/tabid/169/Default.aspx

in particular the goods must conform in respect of :

(d) show the quality and performance which are normal in goods of the same type and which the consumer can reasonably expect, given the nature of the goods and taking into account any public statements on the specific characteristics of the goods made about them by the seller, the producer or his representative, particularly in advertising or on labelling.

In other words take it back and take a copy of the legislation with you if you have to.

It only took a minute with a google search for "consumer rights in france", try it yourself.

 

[Chris_Robb]

Message Pulled???

Stephen Polgars post seems to have been pulled, perhaps someone would explain why this has been done?

 

[Rigger Mortice]

They say your anchor is conform and certify it .I must have proof they are wrong if i want to have a chance to get a refund.

The first thing I would be doing is asking them to produce a copy of the certification which they claim shows that your anchor is OK. It is they who need to proove that it is OK, not you who needs to prove it isn't.

You already have the evidence that it is not made with the Bisalloy material which Bumbury and Smith boasted about.

 

[vyv_cox]

Stephen Polgars post seems to have been pulled, perhaps someone would explain why this has been done?

Post #625?