Selling a boat - acknowledged defect - double reduction / contract cancellation ? Is this fair / legal

[Flynnbarr]

Struggling with the whole Superheat6k woe is me issues here so someone will have to explain it….surely just move on instead of whinging and examining the contract in minute detail….

I know he is a well regarded helpful poster on here but before his GB purchase he surveyed and sea trialed an Aquastar…….then pulled out for no other reason than he didn’t feel the love for it…nothing wrong with the boat at all from what he wrote so I’m not getting the moaning…..there were no dissenting voices on that thread ……it’s boats and life just move on.

 

[ari]

Just out of interest, what were the “expenses” incurred by the seller that he/she was hoping to recover from the buyer?
The only example given originally was broker fees, which would not normally be incurred for a non sale.
Survey costs and any lift presumably covered directly by buyer.

Normally when a broker is handling the sale, they organise and pay for the lift and invoice it to the buyer. If the buyer pulls out, it's normal for the broker to subtract and keep the lift fees against that invoice before returning the deposit (ex buyers can sometimes tend to be a bit slow to pay for a lift of a boat that they no longer have any interest in...)

The survey is usually paid direct to the surveyor to avoid any conflict of interests, and there are normally no brokerage fees if the sale is not completed.

 

[Seastoke]

Something does not quite. Ad up , if it’s teak agreed by buyer seller and surveyor but different prices but the buyer has a price in his head already they should come to a compromise , for me you have to remember most boats don’t come with teak decks, if they do they are shit teak on ply , so you are buying a boat . It’s all about price type of boat and year.

 

[ylop]

The only information we have is original first post ... which goes into detail of the sequence of events.

I followed that and commented - THEN mentioned what I would have expected to be a better sequence. But Seller / Buyer apparently ACCORDING to OP's first post had NOT done.

I really wonder sometimes if people READ the posts .. I know I sometimes scroll down and miss later posts - or with some post badly worded - I can get it wrong ... but OP's first post is sequencial and detailed.

Perhaps you place too much literal interpretation in every word in OP’s being exactly correct? Some of us realise that a disgruntled seller complaining about an aborted purchase who hasn’t quoted exactly that contract nor the disclosure is probably not an entirely neutral interpretation of that the contract says.

But now you are catching up where everyone else is at:

What is strange and I wonder if a small bit of info is missing ... >

Buyer - Seller agree a defect exists. Buyer says he's experienced with boats. Buyer - Seller agree reduction on price based on the defect ...

It would be really interesting to see how the buyer describes that same conversation. I would not be at all surprised if he says “it was over priced and I negotiated him down, he asked why and I listed some faults, the teak was particularly bad and he repeatedly said “it won’t be expensive to fix that” then the surveyor pointed out it might be even worse than I thought”!

... I would expect many Sellers to latch onto the 'undisclosed' wording .. as he did 'inform' about defect and agreed reduction.

But the seller and the surveyor seem to have different views on the extent of the defect. Unless the seller has both been very honest about its extent (in which case why did he over price the boat) AND made sure that it is clearly and unambiguously documented the buyer is going to be able to say undisclosed unless he’s been dumb enough to sign a contract that exludes any defect with the deck (or similar).

My suggestion to anyone else reading this ... DON'T agree price reductions BEFORE survey. Of course discuss defects and have general acceptance that survey will determine extent of defect - THEN buyer - seller discuss reduction allowance ...

So your advice to someone viewing a boat who thinks it’s significantly overpriced for its condition is to proceed with the costs of a survey without agreeing if the vendor is just being ambitious with his pricing or is a dreamer? The only person who wins from wasting people’s time like that is the surveyor!

My advice to buyers would be not to enter into contracts which don’t allow them to walk away after survey and sea trial without cause but not all brokers/sellers are so keen on that. Particularly if they know they are selling a boat riddled with minor defects!

do not understand why some are not understanding my point ... its so ******* simple ... forget all the legalese and implied ... OP's post is there for all to read.

Perhaps you should calm down and not swear at people and you’ll find it easier to understand other’s point.

 

[jfm]

Well known Brokers - south coast ....

I knew of a boat that I then was told was with XX broker ....

Drove to brokers (I will use the non capital B ... ) and asked about the boat ... expecting reasonable interest. Guy just literally did not raise his eyes from his playing on phone .. and just said - its on the board somewhere over there ...
I found it on the board after scrolling through most of his boats ... and asked if he had any other 'sheets' on it - there was only a basic one sheet pinned to board. His reply was - 'maybe .. ' ... I asked again - can I have a copy ?

The attitude and failure was enough for me to just say - Be happy with your phone ... and walk out the door. I wished I could have informed the seller ... but I didn't have his contacts ...

That's disappointing but what is your point? Your story has nothing to do with dishonesty and everything to do with poor performance. You get poor performers in all walks of life and the market/Darwin usually deals with it. You can't pass a law saying that people have to be energetic or good at their business, nor can you make that happen by regulation.

 

[dunedin]

Normally when a broker is handling the sale, they organise and pay for the lift and invoice it to the buyer. If the buyer pulls out, it's normal for the broker to subtract and keep the lift fees against that invoice before returning the deposit (ex buyers can sometimes tend to be a bit slow to pay for a lift of a boat that they no longer have any interest in...)

The survey is usually paid direct to the surveyor to avoid any conflict of interests, and there are normally no brokerage fees if the sale is not completed.

So you have almost precisely said what I said in my post (other than where I have done a survey, I paid the marina boatyard directly, not via a broker).
So what exactly are the “costs” the OP as seller thinks they should be reimbursed for? 66 posts in and still a mystery.

 

[Grubble]

60 plus posts so far on not selling a boat and it's only December. Can't wait for mid January when stir crazy sets in for real.

 

[oldgit]

Have probably bought and sold perhaps 30 boats , ranging from a couple of hundred £ to £100K.
Always constrained by and with ( one painful valuable lesson) about the necessity of selling one boat before the purchase of another.
Never used a Broker to buy or sell until the very last of my fleet of ever more complicated parts all waiting to go wrong.
This particular Broker certainly earned my respect and his commision when handling his sale .
Basically the deal was this, an verbal offer was made subject to a sea trial and a minor little B****T VAT problem being sorted, no deposit , no survey.
Did the sea trial and money was in the Brokers Escrow account following day.
About a week from viewing to collection , then the joys of arriving unscathed back at its new mooring.
Whats gone wrong , a shorter list would be ....what still works.
As somebody said.
Suck it up.. Its French, what do you inspect.
Doubt any survey would picked up any of the irritating electrical gremlins waiting patiently inline.
Still my best boat ever and of course my last.

Wife was bit poorly last week and the boat needed something fixing, one got priority, if you have to ask, why are you on this forum ?

 

[ari]

So you have almost precisely said what I said in my post (other than where I have done a survey, I paid the marina boatyard directly, not via a broker).
So what exactly are the “costs” the OP as seller thinks they should be reimbursed for? 66 posts in and still a mystery.

I think it's a bit of verbal overreach by the 'seller', or perhaps he thinks his time should be retrospectively chargeable or something.

 

[Refueler]

That's disappointing but what is your point? Your story has nothing to do with dishonesty and everything to do with poor performance. You get poor performers in all walks of life and the market/Darwin usually deals with it. You can't pass a law saying that people have to be energetic or good at their business, nor can you make that happen by regulation.

Blimey - you really have a thing about me don't you ... can you not just read and scroll on ?? I do get tired of such half-***** posts ...

 

[Refueler]

Perhaps you place too much literal interpretation in every word in OP’s being exactly correct? Some of us realise that a disgruntled seller complaining about an aborted purchase who hasn’t quoted exactly that contract nor the disclosure is probably not an entirely neutral interpretation of that the contract says.

But now you are catching up where everyone else is at:

It would be really interesting to see how the buyer describes that same conversation. I would not be at all surprised if he says “it was over priced and I negotiated him down, he asked why and I listed some faults, the teak was particularly bad and he repeatedly said “it won’t be expensive to fix that” then the surveyor pointed out it might be even worse than I thought”!

But the seller and the surveyor seem to have different views on the extent of the defect. Unless the seller has both been very honest about its extent (in which case why did he over price the boat) AND made sure that it is clearly and unambiguously documented the buyer is going to be able to say undisclosed unless he’s been dumb enough to sign a contract that exludes any defect with the deck (or similar).

So your advice to someone viewing a boat who thinks it’s significantly overpriced for its condition is to proceed with the costs of a survey without agreeing if the vendor is just being ambitious with his pricing or is a dreamer? The only person who wins from wasting people’s time like that is the surveyor!

My advice to buyers would be not to enter into contracts which don’t allow them to walk away after survey and sea trial without cause but not all brokers/sellers are so keen on that. Particularly if they know they are selling a boat riddled with minor defects!

Perhaps you should calm down and not swear at people and you’ll find it easier to understand other’s point.

Sorry .......... CATCHING UP ???????????? are you serious ???? I was on that page long before you even put finger to a key on this ...

Gor blimey Guv !!

 

[benjenbav]

Blimey - you really have a thing about me don't you ... can you not just read and scroll on ?? I do get tired of such half-***** posts ...

I sometimes wonder if reacting against a reaction to a reaction on the internet is the way to madness.

I’m sure I’m much farther down that particular road than most…

 

[Refueler]

I sometimes wonder if reacting against a reaction to a reaction on the internet is the way to madness.

I’m sure I’m much farther down that particular road than most…

I know ... but it doesn't stop ... it just keeps on 'rollin' !!

I'm cool anyway .. having good days since out of hospital ...

 

[ari]

Blimey - you really have a thing about me don't you ... can you not just read and scroll on ?? I do get tired of such half-***** posts ...

Without wanting to sound like we're ganging up on you (absolutely not the case), but surely you can see that he's got a point?

VolvoPaul made the comment: I really take no please in reading posts like this , it just shows how dishonest this industry is because it’s so unregulated

JFM responded quite rightly that there's absolutely nothing in this story to suggest that the broker here has been dishonest, and you've quoted his response and replied with a rant about getting poor service from a broker that in no way was an example of broker dishonesty.

 

[Refueler]

Without wanting to sound like we're ganging up on you (absolutely not the case), but surely you can see that he's got a point?

VolvoPaul made the comment: I really take no please in reading posts like this , it just shows how dishonest this industry is because it’s so unregulated

JFM responded quite rightly that there's absolutely nothing in this story to suggest that the broker here has been dishonest, and you've quoted his response and replied with a rant about getting poor service from a broker that in no way was an example of broker dishonesty.

No rant .. just a post showing the wide range of Broker crap ... what's problem ... you want me to stop posting ?? I must have missed the part in Forum rules that you have to vet my posts ....

Please let it go ... getting a bit annoying

 

[ari]

The irony.

I will indeed leave it there, you're clearly someone who 'knows their own mind'.

 

[jfm]

I know ari - the irony! I have left it too

 

[jandnrowe]

So when looking to purchase a particular boat the would be buyer notes a specific defect, mentions this to the broker / seller and duly takes this into account in his offer to purchase, and considerably below the asking price. Said offer is accepted by the seller as including a reasonable account of the acknowledged defect.

Hence when the buyer signed the contract he had acknowledged the existence of the specific defect and had made an allowance for its potential repair when he made his offer.

In conjunction with this when the seller accepted the offer he agreed to the reduction from asking price to include said defect having been acknowledged.

A standard style sale contract was then signed by both parties. This provided the buyer the right to withdraw for an undisclosed and significant defect being discovered at survey.

Then along comes the buyer's surveyor who quantifies the known defect and (possibly in the opinion of the seller) over blows the extend of the defect and the surveyor's opinion of its required repair suggests a far more complex fix is necessary, but as a result the cost of said repair by the suggested method is at a considerably higher cost. There is no more than the same observations of both the surveyor and buyer available to support the surveyor's view, although he must also consider his Professional Indemnity of course.

As an aside the buyer has also declared himself experienced boat restorer, who might be viewed as more than capable of recognising the extent of the defect and its possible repair options when he made his offer. Buyer beware applies here.

So then the buyer cites this (non) discovery at survey as fair grounds to withdraw from the sale. Although consideration of a further discount is also muted, but rejected by the seller - on the grounds the same discount cannot be had twice.

The seller rejects this view as not being fair to the contract because the buyer had already had full disclosure, and was anyway sufficiently experienced himself to make a sound judgement when he placed his offer..

As this was a declared and acknowledged defect when the sale agreement was made, is the fact his surveyor has an opinion the necessary repair being (possibly) more complex - does this then provide the buyer the right to withdraw ?

To reiterate this was not an undisclosed defect, indeed it was a specific topic of discussion pre offer, and was taken into account within his accepted offer, and subsequent contract of sale.

Or if he does insist upon withdrawal is this a legitimate reneging of the contract on the part of the Buyer, or could the Seller expect to successfully enforce the contract of sale in Law (i.e. in a Court of Law) ?

Or if a lesser acceptance of the Buyer reneging is entertained by the Seller, who has no wish to go to Law, is it reasonable that ALL reasonable costs the seller has incurred in the sale process, plus at least a fair proportion of his Broker's fees be deducted from the Buyer's deposit.

Indeed are there grounds here to entirely withhold the deposit (10% of agree price and itself a five figure sum). This last aspect would at least put the onus of going to Law on the reneging party.

Just asking for a friend !

Reading this a couple of times makes me wonder why the buyer signed a deal, THEN had a Survey. It strikes me the wrong way round for an expensive purchase. I would suggest the buyer loses gis Deposit unless

What's wrong with this? This forum is littered with examples of poor surveying work and sub-standard surveyors. Why shouldn't a buyer ask his mate to survey a boat for him? I know I would if I had such a friend I could trust.

Reading the OP a couple of times, what strikes me is why would the buyer sign and then have a surveyor look at it. It seems the wrong way round to me. Unless the Contract says something like 'Subject to Survey', surely the buyer would lose any deposit paid if they walked away from the deal.
And stop calling me Shirley!

 

[ylop]

Reading the OP a couple of times, what strikes me is why would the buyer sign and then have a surveyor look at it. It seems the wrong way round to me. Unless the Contract says something like 'Subject to Survey', surely the buyer would lose any deposit paid if they walked away from the deal.

it’s absolutely normal to enter a contract, with a “subject to survey” type clause (which the OP refers to - and may allow anything as a cause for rejection, or a material defect). The reason for the buyer to do this is because he will often have fairly significant costs to arrange a survey including paying for lift out/in etc. You don’t want to do that, then have the seller refuse the value you planned to pay nor do you want to pay those costs and have vendor sell to someone else leaving you out of pocket.

 

[Refueler]

Reading this a couple of times makes me wonder why the buyer signed a deal, THEN had a Survey. It strikes me the wrong way round for an expensive purchase. ....

Reading the OP a couple of times, what strikes me is why would the buyer sign and then have a surveyor look at it. It seems the wrong way round to me.....

Been saying that again and again ....