What to do if surveyor is negligent

[clyst]

What's not right is a survey taking less than two hours. When we bought our current boat the surveyor was there from 10 in the morning until about 6.

sorry, I read that as if you were saying that the poster was telling porkies .

 

[alahol2]

... It would not be so bad but I only really had a survey to satisfy the demands of an insurance company....

Did you say this to the surveyor? There are surveyors around who will give a cursory look at a vessel if it's for 'insurance purposes' and issue a clean bill of health; possibly believing this is what the owner requires. This may not tie in with the 'ethics' of surveying but I am grateful that I can get a relatively cheap survey done for the insurance company. I know my boat inside out and I doubt there is very much a full survey could reveal that I don't already know.

 

[minkysailing]

Did you say this to the surveyor? There are surveyors around who will give a cursory look at a vessel if it's for 'insurance purposes' and issue a clean bill of health; possibly believing this is what the owner requires. This may not tie in with the 'ethics' of surveying but I am grateful that I can get a relatively cheap survey done for the insurance company. I know my boat inside out and I doubt there is very much a full survey could reveal that I don't already know.

I have been following this thread with interest and concern and have been up to now reluctant to 'wade-in' as this matter could go legal, and the reputation of a surveyor may be on the line and the stakes are high. Some of the advice has been very construction other advice not so.

As to be expected the original post has turned into a surveyor bashing thread suggesting that all surveyors are in someway colluding with brokers and boatyard, and the service we offer is not independent. This personally goes against all my principals of being independent and offends me.

With regards to the post of alahol2, your experiences are not common practice and do not reflect in anyway the scope of a survey for insurance purposes. A cursory 'look around' is not acceptable for purposes of an insurance survey and if a surveyor has done this they leave themselves open to serious repercussions should an insurance claim be made due to a defect that was not raised during a survey.

I am sure that you are grateful of being able to satisfy your insurance provider with a inadequate cheap survey, but be very careful you do not invalidate your policy by failing to have a 'Full Condition Survey' which is what your insurers require.

With regards to the original post, it is clear to me based upon the information provided, that the surveyor appointed did not carry out a full Pre-Purchase Survey as was requested, and areas of the vessel that have later been found to be defective were not fully inspected at the time of the survey. If the above proves to be correct, then the surveyor is liable and if not through his insurance company, then personally he will need to compensate his client.

 

[alahol2]

With regards to the post of alahol2, your experiences are not common practice and do not reflect in anyway the scope of a survey for insurance purposes. A cursory 'look around' is not acceptable for purposes of an insurance survey and if a surveyor has done this they leave themselves open to serious repercussions should an insurance claim be made due to a defect that was not raised during a survey.

Maybe 'cursory' was overstating the point. The surveyor obviously checked things like through-hulls, gas installation, rudder hangings, chain plates etc. What he didn't do is a full 'tap' test on the hull and deck, empty the lockers to check all the tabbings on the bulkheads, remove head linings to check wiring etc etc.
If a survey is a survey why do surveyors distinguish between full condition, insurance, pre-purchase, pre-sale etc? Presumably they are looking at things with a different depth/range/intensity?

 

[minkysailing]

A Pre-Purchase Survey is conducted for a purchaser on a vessel he is considering purchasing. It should cover everything that is reasonably accessible unless the scope of the survey is dictated otherwise. The report should be comprehensive including photographs were applicable and include recommendation to assist the purchaser in making an informed decision on the purchase.

A Condition Survey is job specific and can be anything from looking at one specific part of the vessel to looking at the vessel as a whole. A CS is normally commissioned by the vessel's owner or by another interested party (Insurance, Finance etc)

An Insurance Survey is normally a condition of a vessel's policy when the vessel reaches a certain age or is operated such that the insurance company wishes an independent assessment of the vessel's condition. The purpose of an Insurance Survey is two fold, one to provide the insurance company with an assessment of the vessel's condition and value and if any safety or structural related defects exist. Ultimately protecting the underwriters from claims due to poor maintenance or age related defects. The second purpose is for the benefit of the insured to provide guidance with on-going maintenance so preventing claims etc.

Pre-sale surveys are commissioned by the vendor and allow the vendor to more fully understand their vessel's true condition and value. The survey covers all aspect of the vessel (much the same as a Pre-Purchase Survey), but will go on to make recommendations in respect of preparing the vessel for sale.

 

[Paddingtonbear]

It shall email the surveyor the following simple questions.
When you did the survey did you use a moisture meter?
When you did the survey did you use a tapping hammer or rubber mallet?
Did you take any photographs?
How long did the survey take?
How much of the survey report was contemperaneous and how much was cut and pasted from your previous survey of the boat?

The idea of having Minky's videos on professional websites is a great one.
Thanks again for all you support and great advice.

 

[oldfatgit]

Fine, but ask for evidence from him. What measurements did he record with the moisture meeter? What did the hammer soundings reveal? Don't ask if he took photographs, ask to see all photographs. Ask at the yard where the boat was if anybody saw him leave and at what time. The danger is that to your questions he simply says, yes, yes, yes, 8 hours, none. In which case you may be no further forward. Where possible aim to ask questions you already know the answer to.

 

[Paddingtonbear]

The fact is that I already do know the answer to the questions as we were present for the final 40 mins or so of the survey and it finished around midday. If he had used either a hammer or rubber mallet on the deck he would have found the sites of the rot as he would have done if he had used a moisture meter.
If he answers no to any of the first questions it means he is negligent and if he answers yes he is incompetent because he has missed the rot.
I 'know' that he did not take any photos as I have not seen any.

It is likely that he will refuse to answer which will demonstrate that he has perhaps something to hide.

 

[chinita]

Whilst I can empathise with your position I think you should calm down for a while.

Firing off e-mails is not going to achieve anything.

You need to lay out your case, on paper, to yourself. Then sleep on it, then discuss key elements with the boatyard and anybody else whose opinions you value. Confirm timings, actions, who said what to whom and when. Avoid heresay.

Dates, times and places need validating.

Keep your powder dry. In any sort of negotiations it is very important not to give too much information away too soon.

 

[sarabande]

PB

please consider the advice especially in the last two replies from OFG and Chinita. You must plan to win the war, not just one battle.

The surveyor seems to be in a pretty exposed position wrt a possible claim, and you need to establish facts, down to the fine details. Pictures, statements, dates. Tedious but all quiet stuff, no volcanic emails or 'name and shame' stuff on the forum. Give him leeway to make an initial defence, but if that cannot be sustained against the facts (or facts as you perceive them), then ask for the name of his professional indemnity insurer and take it on from there.

Neither the surveyor nor his insurer is going to want to pay out anything if at all possible, so they will look for any excuse or reason to counterclaim for negligence or - perish the thought - some form of defamation.

It's the nature of the process that you sometimes amy appear to be hitting your head against a brick wall, but persevere and tick-tock calmly through all the legal hoops, and you will achieve a fair result.

 

[jonic]

PB

please consider the advice especially in the last two replies from OFG and Chinita. You must plan to win the war, not just one battle.

The surveyor seems to be in a pretty exposed position wrt a possible claim, and you need to establish facts, down to the fine details. Pictures, statements, dates. Tedious but all quiet stuff, no volcanic emails or 'name and shame' stuff on the forum. Give him leeway to make an initial defence, but if that cannot be sustained against the facts (or facts as you perceive them), then ask for the name of his professional indemnity insurer and take it on from there.

Neither the surveyor nor his insurer is going to want to pay out anything if at all possible, so they will look for any excuse or reason to counterclaim for negligence or - perish the thought - some form of defamation.

It's the nature of the process that you sometimes amy appear to be hitting your head against a brick wall, but persevere and tick-tock calmly through all the legal hoops, and you will achieve a fair result.

That is excellent advice- and to be fair there are always two sides and we on the forum currently do not know them.

 

[lw395]

Whilst I can empathise with your position I think you should calm down for a while.

Firing off e-mails is not going to achieve anything.

You need to lay out your case, on paper, to yourself. Then sleep on it, then discuss key elements with the boatyard and anybody else whose opinions you value. Confirm timings, actions, who said what to whom and when. Avoid heresay.

Dates, times and places need validating.

Keep your powder dry. In any sort of negotiations it is very important not to give too much information away too soon.

Very sound advice.
I would add that I have found it pays to think clearly about where you want to be in two years. You either want to escape from the whole saga of wooden boats with minimum losses, or you want to get the boat fixed and on the water.
Getting old boats fixed is never straightforward. It often involves compromises. I suspect your disagreement with the surveyor is just one hurdle in the way.
What is your budget for the whole project? It must be a significant amount more than the value of this dispute?

One thing that strikes me is that virtually anything that the surveyor should have found, I would also expect the boatbuilder to have found before starting work.
I suspect a lot of people with wooden boat experience are thinking it is not as clear cut as you visualise it. Every wooden boat restoration saga seems to contain tales of more problems being found as soon as you start.

 

[capsco]

Very sound advice.
I would add that I have found it pays to think clearly about where you want to be in two years. You either want to escape from the whole saga of wooden boats with minimum losses, or you want to get the boat fixed and on the water.
Getting old boats fixed is never straightforward. It often involves compromises. I suspect your disagreement with the surveyor is just one hurdle in the way.
What is your budget for the whole project? It must be a significant amount more than the value of this dispute?

One thing that strikes me is that virtually anything that the surveyor should have found, I would also expect the boatbuilder to have found before starting work.
I suspect a lot of people with wooden boat experience are thinking it is not as clear cut as you visualise it. Every wooden boat restoration saga seems to contain tales of more problems being found as soon as you start.

Surely the difference between the surveyor finding issues and the boatyard finding them is that you have paid a not an insignificant sum to the surveyor, to help you decide if you even want to take it to a boat yard,who will then just proceed, informing you of further work needed as they progress.

 

[lw395]

Surely the difference between the surveyor finding issues and the boatyard finding them is that you have paid a not an insignificant sum to the surveyor, to help you decide if you even want to take it to a boat yard,who will then just proceed, informing you of further work needed as they progress.

To some extent, but the surveyor is limited by the need to avoid damage, because he is not acting for the owner.
The surveyor identified significant, expensive problems. Enough to put off many buyers.

If this went to court, and the boatbuilder was called as a witness, how would he answer the question 'were these problems apparent before you started dismantling the boat?'
Certainly enough to label the boat a 'project'.
The OP would have a strong case if the boatbuilder had found a load more problems without starting work, as it is, it is a bit of a grey area.

Did the Op not get the boatbuilder to quote on the work before buying?

 

[Keith-i]

As people have already said, keep it simple. Write to your surveyor stating that the defects were far more extensive than he identified and that you have suffered a financial loss as a result of his lack of thorough investigation. Once you get into correspondence with him you can show your cards WRT the extent of defects and any proof you have that a competent surveyor would have identified them. Put the onus on him to explain his position. You are not acting as judge and jury, so asking for photographs and evidence of his inspection are not your duties - leave that to the expert witness and the court. Bear in mind you are claiming off him not his insurers so you don't make any reference to insurance in any correspondence.