Yacht survey - technical + legal question

It is a pretty rotten thing to happen to anyone but I fear it is part of life. You could try a quick approach to the broker but I suspect he is on firm ground. I don't know the ins and outs of the law but I suspect if you try any 'legal' stuff you would end up little better off and and a lot more upset. Have a couple pints, a good swear and move on.
 
[ QUOTE ]
Actually regarding my last post, even if he is a cow- boy I can't see why anyone would do it.

[/ QUOTE ]

There are good and bad brokers as in car sales ... Some one may come along later and buy without lift-out...... broker doesn't really care ... c'mon. Legal side and all that - most buyers who find problems walk away with deposit or compromise in hand.

I personally think that it is time that people DID start hitting brokers etc, with small claims against lack of sensible work on part of broker. The fees / %age they extract from sales .. they should check the boats they sell - not do this "Vendors information etc." rubbish.
 
[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
Actually regarding my last post, even if he is a cow- boy I can't see why anyone would do it.

[/ QUOTE ]

There are good and bad brokers as in car sales ... Some one may come along later and buy without lift-out...... broker doesn't really care ... c'mon. Legal side and all that - most buyers who find problems walk away with deposit or compromise in hand.

I personally think that it is time that people DID start hitting brokers etc, with small claims against lack of sensible work on part of broker. The fees / %age they extract from sales .. they should check the boats they sell - not do this "Vendors information etc." rubbish.

[/ QUOTE ]

come on sbc, I totally agree that rubbish brokers like rubbish surveyors etc should called to account. You are a surveyor, I can't imagine you think every broker should have to pay for every boat he listed, to be lifted and surveyed before he listed it in the hope he might sell it. (It's no sell no fee).

Then again it might be a fantastic marketing tool. "Come to me all my boats pre-surveyed."

Thing is there would be legal implications as regard to time between survey and sell, limit of use and to who's benefit the survey was for.

Incidentally if you buy a boat FROM a broker. ie. one he has taken as a part exchange and owns, you are covered by the sale of goods act and other consumer legislation.

In this instance I strongly doubt the broker was witholding information, but maybe the vendor withheld from the broker. In which case both parties could make a claim against the vendor.
 
[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
Actually regarding my last post, even if he is a cow- boy I can't see why anyone would do it.

[/ QUOTE ]

There are good and bad brokers as in car sales ... Some one may come along later and buy without lift-out...... broker doesn't really care ... c'mon. Legal side and all that - most buyers who find problems walk away with deposit or compromise in hand.

I personally think that it is time that people DID start hitting brokers etc, with small claims against lack of sensible work on part of broker. The fees / %age they extract from sales .. they should check the boats they sell - not do this "Vendors information etc." rubbish.

[/ QUOTE ]

come on sbc, I totally agree that rubbish brokers like rubbish surveyors etc should called to account. You are a surveyor, I can't imagine you think every broker should have to pay for every boat he listed, to be lifted and surveyed before he listed it in the hope he might sell it. (It's no sell no fee).

Then again it might be a fantastic marketing tool. "Come to me all my boats pre-surveyed."

Thing is there would be legal implications as regard to time between survey and sell, limit of use and to who's benefit the survey was for.

Incidentally if you buy a boat FROM a broker. ie. one he has taken as a part exchange and owns, you are covered by the sale of goods act and other consumer legislation.

In this instance I strongly doubt the broker was witholding information, but maybe the vendor withheld from the broker. In which case both parties could make a claim against the vendor.

[/ QUOTE ]

Ok I agree that lift-outs etc. may be extreme .... but I think more care in information gathering is certainly called for. I know "Well-Known" brokers who - their "questionaires" to vendors are sparse to say the least. I think possibly to stay out of this problem.
When you put a house on the market ... there are very few Agents who do not come to check over the house and assess themselves ... and advise pricing etc. to vendor. I know many boats that brokers have never seen even when giving keys to possible buyers ... but the %age fee payable to a Boat Broker is higher than a house transaction....

Sensible levels of assessment of the boats they offer and more open honest presentation.

I remember years ago looking at a boat - Centaur - broker I am sure hadn't checked the boat at all .. gave me the keys with the words ... "It's a Vicar who's selling and it's in pristine condition - well what would a VIcar do ?".
I climbed up on board .... boat was only about 100 yds from Brokers office. It stank of mildew .... gear was lazily discarded as though someone had just completed a sail ... and hadn't tidied up. I honestly do not think it was other buyers had done it in checking the boat.
When I went back to brokers and told what I found ... and the splayed keels etc. They shrugged shoulders and literally ignored it - basically knowing I was going to walk away.
 
I presume that you and your friend had actually gone on board and had a look around this boat before commissioning a survey?

Assuming you did, did it appear (to yourselves) on first impressions to be a 'well sorted and maintained' boat? You don't have to be a surveyor in order to form an initial impression of a boat as to if it appeared to be immaculate, or a complete tip. You didn't mention anything about this. I presume it must have appeared to be in reasonably good nick, for you to then commission a survey.

Is it not at all possible that the damages might have been sustained as a result of a grounding since the last haul-out? And quite possibly the current owner was not fully aware of the extent of damages?

You said "We suspect that this boat has had some serious damage in the past and a poor repair". If the bottom section of the rudder is missing, then it is fairly obvious that it has sustained some 'serious damage'. Not a suspicion, but a certainty! Re 'a poor repair', I doubt that the keel would have been 'repaired' while ignoring the fact that the rudder was damaged......

How can the broker 'know the state of the boat underwater'? Are you expecting him to put on a mask & snorkel in mid-winter and jump in and have a look before allowing the boat on his books? He has to rely on what is reported to him re the general condition of the boat. And I would hope that he would at least have a look around to confirm that the boat is at least generally clean and tidy while she is in the water.

As others have said above, be grateful that you have found the damages now, rather than later, and that you will get your deposit back in full.
You could try making a very silly offer, to take into account the estimated costs of repairs - however keel mis-alignment is a serious issue, and a BIG job which ever way you look at it.

I am currently involved in a case of a boat that 'fell over' while on hard standing in a boat yard, due to negligence by the yard re proper chocking. The keel on this boat is 'bent' ie mis-aligned, and all of the transverse structural floors stiffening the hull bottom in way of the keel will have to be re-done - it is going to be a very big job, and probably the boat will be declared an insurance write off as a result.
If you do decide to make a silly offer - remember that repairs invariably always cost at least twice (or three times) what initial estimates indicate.
 
[ QUOTE ]
the %age fee payable to a Boat Broker is higher than a house transaction....

[/ QUOTE ]

But then they do perform the role of estate agent and solicitor in most cases, therefore surely they are justified in charging more than an estate agent?
 
It is extremely unlikely you will get any recompense, even if you go to the Small Claims Court.

As a broker, I always go over boats offered in some detail myself, and quiz the owner about unseen areas if the boat is afloat. I will never conceal known faults - it is simply bad business to do so. Every now and then, however, something major wrong comes up on survey, almost always this is a surprise to the owner as well.

With a privately owned boat it is rare for major underwater damage to occur without the owner being aware of it, but it can happen - perhaps when a boatyard is moving a boat between lift-in and her berth. I knew one yard where it was not uncommon for the front edges of keels to get banged on a cill in the yards hurry to get boats out or in early on a tide. The other cause is lending the boat to someone who then doesn't admit he's run her aground.

There are however dishonest sellers who don't admit to known faults, and lazy brokers - funnily enough the lazy ones (who have not seen the boat themselves and just send you off with the keys) are often in flashy offices. The smaller the boat the worse this syndrome gets!
 
This is an opportunity not just a loss. The rudder wouldnt worry me at all - its not integral to the boat and can easily be repaired. I am suspicious of the 2 inches anyway ( that sort of impact would likely remove the rudder altogether) so my suspicion would be that the rudder damage was less than at first appears and solvable. The keel is a different issue and unless there is serious internal damage / repair it is likely that it has been put on slightly out of line. But then if you ever measure a boat you will likely discover that it is not symetrical anyway, which is one reason why most boats sail better on one tack than another.

One great thing about GRP is that it is almost infinitely reapairable. At the same time, you have a great negotiating position. So my inclination ( and I havent seen the boat and might well think differently if I had) would be to get a cost for any repairs, double the figure and knock it off your offer to the vendor. His position is weak.

There are lots of other issues to consider such as level of equipment, state of the rest of the boat etc, but a bit of bottom fishing is one way of turning this to profit. You will never do that through the courts.

The key issue is your surveyors view of the repairability.
 
Perhaps there are other lessons to be learned from this sad experience;
Unless you are prepared to shrug off the costs of a crane-out and survey, consider only boats that are for sale out-of-water?
OR tell the broker that you have an interest, but will persue it only if the boat is first craned out at his, or the owner's, expense?
Personally, I would not arrange a survey for a boat I could not inspect below waterline.
 
Perhaps brokers (or potential buyers) should invest in an underwater camera to have a quick "inspect" of the hull prior to lift out - it'll pick up major problems - like no prop or big gashes on the rudder/keel.....
 
Not an answer to your legal wranglings, but our Westerly Sealord has a keel that doesn't line up with the keel stub on the hull either, and its definitely been like that from new. Our surveyor (James Green - who I commend) used to work for Westerly's and he remembers all the Sealords being delivered with keels not quite straight on the moulding. Its only cosmetic - but a surveyor or person not in the know would think the boats had been badly damaged at some point.

I'll post some pics if I can find some.

Just a thought - and sorry about your wasted £700.
 
[ QUOTE ]
Not an answer to your legal wranglings, but our Westerly Sealord has a keel that doesn't line up with the keel stub on the hull either, and its definitely been like that from new. Our surveyor (James Green - who I commend) used to work for Westerly's and he remembers all the Sealords being delivered with keels not quite straight on the moulding. Its only cosmetic - but a surveyor or person not in the know would think the boats had been badly damaged at some point.

I'll post some pics if I can find some.

Just a thought - and sorry about your wasted £700.

[/ QUOTE ]

Well in that case it might not be wasted, negotiate a large sum off to repair the rudder and use the keel issue as further leverage. (if the boat is sound regarding the keel.)
 
I had a similar situation with a major broker on the south coast last year. No mention of problems in their literature but when lifted the keel could be moved 4" either side of centre. It was a moulded in keel!
Broker had been marketing boat for best part of a year I found out so, unless I was the first to make an offer they must have known.
I spoke to the RYA legal dept who confirmed a broker is legally obliged to disclose any information they have on problems. This is distinct from a private seller who is not obliged in that way, but has to honestly answer any specific questions.
The YBDSA didn't want to know. They are the brokers association and feel no responsibility towards customers
My problem then became trying to prove there had been a previous survey. Needless to say they didn't help on that one. Ended up deciding it wasn't worth the effort and swallowed the surveyors fee. I did get my deposit back but had to be quite forceful.
Interestingly the broker kept the boat on their web site for several weeks after I told them of the problem. I was able to make the problem more widely known through the owners association.
Good luck with trying to recoup your costs - but don't hold your breath
 
I am just gobsmacked that there are now two posts on here from people who have commissioned professional independent surveys on boats, are then disappointed with the findings and then want someone else to pay for the survey. Because the broker or owners "must have known".

A surveyor has years of experience, undergoes long and complex training to achieve his qualification and will spend one to two full days surveying the boat before making his report. Yet you feel someone without his training or experience should spot anything first, and if they don't "They must have known" so therefore must pay for your survey. Not only that, both these cases refer to areas beneath the waterline!

"Broker had been marketing boat for best part of a year I found out so, unless I was the first to make an offer they must have known."

Its not unusual for a sub 30ft older design to be on the market for 18mnths with no survey or even a viewing. You probably were the first, what proof, evidence or anything at all do you have to support your theory.

"My problem then became trying to prove there had been a previous survey. Needless to say they didn't help on that one."

Well how can you help prove something that hasn't happened?


This is what a survey is for. We are talking about secondhand privately owned goods. I am truly amazed that if the results are not to someones liking they don't want to pay for the survey and immediately suspect someone has been underhand, even though they have no proof whatsoever.

I think it's typical of today's blame culture.


( before anyone says so I do not agree with anyone witholding information, but the reality is brokers have a legal obligation not to and there is no point in doing so, it would just create so many problems with no gain anyway. It all comes up on survey and there is nothing worse than a bad survey with unexpected results. Far better that a buyer is well briefed first than have a negative view halfway through the process)
 
I absolutely agree with everything you say.

I'm not a broker, have never been a broker, but I am happy to say that I have friends who are yacht brokers and friends who are ship brokers.

I am now starting to give more credence to the horror stories concerning both buyers and sellers that they tell me.

I did once turn a boat down on survey. The broker concerned did his best to make light of the defects found, but I reckoned that was him doing his job; it certainly never occurred to me to ask the broker to pay for the survey!

(NB - one absolute rule - never buy a boat from a YM contributor...)
 
The brokerage listing agreement between the owner and the broker specifically states that " all known defects must be declared by the owner". If the owner has prior knowledge of a defect but fails to disclose it to the broker, then there may be a case for a claim being made, which would ultimately be against the owner.

Apart from highlighting the above point, as brokers, we specifically ask about defects and previous surveys.

A survey is a contract between a buyer and a surveyor. Any material defect/s arising, causing a sale to collapse and not rectified by the owner will need to be declared by the broker to continue marketing the boat.

With the web, there is no excuse for not providing plenty of information on boats for sale and as I buyer I would want high levels of detail & extensive photos. I would certainly want the knowledge that the broker has been on board the boat so that I could quiz them - and all before I jumped in my car !

If you are a buyer, ask lots of questions and use your eyes, ears, nose and common sense when viewing. If you can tick all those boxes as satisfactory, then, agree an offer and pay for a lift out, pressure wash & a survey.
 
A chap in the selling end standing up for the customer and the importance of delivering a good service! If you are for real rather than just employing a clever marketing tactic then I would like to wish you the very best of luck with your business.
 
But look at the "problems" discovered by survey .... now I don't think anyone needs years of study to realise there is a huge chunk of rudder missing or that the keel wobbles. I would have though that in normal circumstances the owner should be aware of both problems - the missing chunk of rudder could've been via heavy grounding and the wobbly keel would probably be felt whilst sailing.
For us the surveyor is there basically to tell us if (in his opinion) the boat is sound using skills and experience beyond ours.

For below the waterline faults it is very difficult for the individual to determine and at that point a dryout or liftout needs to be done hence the huge annoyance for a purchaser when an obvious fault is discovered.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

Other threads that may be of interest

R
Brokers.
Replies
6
Views
456
Irish Rover
Irish Rover
Frogmogman
My next boat.
2 3
Replies
40
Views
1K
fredrussell
F
P
Essential pre purchase or even pre survey checks
2
Replies
28
Views
869
Refueler
Refueler
I
Sadler 32
3 4 5
Replies
93
Views
3K
Mark-1
Mark-1
M
net worth of yacht brokers
2
Replies
35
Views
2K
Tranona
T

Share this page

Top