The RYA and the Peters saga.

[Kurrawong_Kid]

I am more than a little disappointed that the RYA has not appealed to those of its members effected by the Peters collapse to see if it can be of help in any way. I have not heard it has.

Whilst accepting that the RYA cannot use its funds to mount actions to recover lost deposits etc., I should have thought it could find out the size of the problem, ascertain what legal redress is open to its members effected, maybe suggest appropriate experienced lawyers to whom its members could turn and perhaps coordinate action. Maybe it could liaise with the Administrators to mitigate the effects on yachting customers.

I joined in the late 50's an "association"; nowadays it seems more like a training organisation either of Olympians or Instructors and has the affontry to call itself the "Governing Body of the Sport"! Perhaps it needs to reassess some of its priorities so members do not lose confidence and not bother to rejoin. If it does not want to represent "boaters" then perhaps it should change the title so we know what we are subscribing to.

 

[sailorman]

Well said Kid /forums/images/graemlins/wink.gif

 

[sailorman]

YBM Forum doin its bit 4 readers

http://www.ybw.com/forums/showflat.php/Cat/0/Number/1552252/an/0/page/0/gonew/1#UNREAD

 

[ChrisE]

Sorry Kid, can't agree. How can a body that represents the wide church of boaters take on a failed commercial enterprise? Boat companies going bust are a feature of the yotting landscape, or at least they have been for the 15 or so years I've been involved.

I can't imagine the AA getting too upset about a car company folding....

 

[Malcb]

[ QUOTE ]
I am more than a little disappointed that the RYA has not appealed to those of its members effected by the Peters collapse to see if it can be of help in any way.

[/ QUOTE ]

As a member of the RYA I ask the question "Why the hell should it?" That's not what it exists for.

 

[Kurrawong_Kid]

What is it for but to represent yachtsmen etc.?

 

[Kurrawong_Kid]

The RAC has certainly got a legal department which will give advice to members in the event of trouble. The RYA has a legal department too. Certainly it could pressure on the BMF to get its house in order.

 

[BrendanS]

Both will help members out, but publicly, neither will go hunting problems with vendors, though behind the scenes, you may well see more action that will never be publicly commented on.

 

[wotayottie]

[ QUOTE ]
The RAC has certainly got a legal department which will give advice to members in the event of trouble. The RYA has a legal department too. Certainly it could pressure on the BMF to get its house in order.

[/ QUOTE ]

Two different organisations. The RYA is the governing body for a sport and represents sailors with government. It isnt geared up to deal with large numbers of individual problems, though in my experience it does try to help if it can. The RAC is a breakdown organisation with insurance interests and exists only to supply individual services.

What does "Certainly it could pressure on the BMF to get its house in order" mean? The BMF has nothing to do with the financial stability of its member companies - its simply a representative body. And whatr could the RYA do? The insolvency procedures are very well established in law and the accountants dealing with Opal would ignore any representations from the RYA as indeed they would also from the Government.

 

[maxwell edison]

The RYA publishes a booklet Buying a New Yacht . Chapter 4 deals with buying through an agent and points out risks involved. Appendix 3 is a simple four line document for a builder to sign which protects the buyer if the agent cannot meet his obligations.
Changing the subject slightly to where no agent is involved, most UK boat builders use a form of contract agreed jointly by BMIF/RYA so presumably it is fair to both parties.
It seems to me that the RYA is doing all that can reasonably be expected of it. Incidentally, I am not a member.

 

[moondancer]

[ QUOTE ]

It seems to me that the RYA is doing all that can reasonably be expected of it. Incidentally, I am not a member.

[/ QUOTE ]

I think you are probably right. Certainly I don't think it is in its remit to get actively involved. The most it could, and perhaps should do, is campaign for the industry to provide some sort of standardised insurance (as has been discussed on other threads) protecting in the event of manufacturer, importer or dealer going into some form of administration.

I believe it is for the industry, ie the BMF in the absence of any other organisation, to take action to ensure that confidence in the industry is not damaged big time - and that consumers do not lose money in the future. In my view the geographical and contractual diversity of the supply chain means that contract and client/escrow account solutions do not and will not work across the industry - some level of insurance funding needs to be looked at.