Jump to content
Strawberry Orange Banana Lime Leaf Slate Sky Blueberry Grape Watermelon Chocolate Marble
Strawberry Orange Banana Lime Leaf Slate Sky Blueberry Grape Watermelon Chocolate Marble
Sign in to follow this  
MRBear

buying a brand new narrowboat

Featured Posts

Hi everyone.

 

We have a story to tell you that we'd like your opinion on,

We have been looking for the right narrowboat for about 3 years, nothing met our expectations until we went to this years Crick boat show, we had a lovely day, wandering around, talking to fantastic people and, of course, viewing the boats, it is at this point our story really begins, one of the boats we viewed was a 60ft shearwater  it ticked a lot of the boxes but not all so we carried on with our day, however,  we returned to the shearwater later in the day, it looked stunning, was the right layout for us and had a host of upgrades with individual prices next to each upgrade and they added even more sweeteners to the deal,all for £89,950, or so we thought, we paid our deposit on the day and left excited about our wonderful new boat. how wrong we were.

It wasn't too long as the communications went back and forth  that it was pointed out to us that the upgrades listed and priced took our boat price from £89,950 to £99,970, they even sent us a copy of the list as used at the show but cushioned it slightly with a crick show discount which took the price down to £95,175, it was still painful as we had £5000 kept aside for a few extras and a major purchase of a solar system, but we loved the boat so we thought what the hell, we'll wait for a year to get our solar system and re-directed our funds to the purchase of our boat.

We were quoted 6 to 8 weeks for the alterations to be done and our boat to be delivered, so we waited in eager anticipation, the 2 months passed, the works were not complete, so we gave them another month and eventually we took delivery of a stunning, brand new, upgraded boat on September 1st. We had a few niggles or snags but nothing too distressing, until the official handover, which was done by a great guy who was sub-contracted to do the handover, wow, was he thorough, so thorough infact that we discovered that 1 of the upgrades, which was a 95kgf bow thruster at a cost shown on the upgrade document priced at £3120 was not installed, instead there was a 55kgf bow thruster unit. 

We contacted the dealer to express our concerns and to either get the unit changed to the 95kgf as we expected or a refund for the non-upgrade, what returned was quite unexpected, 1stly they tried to say they hadn't charged for the upgrade, so we added the base price to all the declared upgrades and pointed out to them that they had indeed charged us the stated price for the upgrade, the next thing we got was them saying it was an honest typing error and that we had paid for a 55kgf bow thruster but they offered us a £50 shopping voucher, which we refused, because we bought this boat as it had so many stated upgrades, they advertised these upgrades on the stand at Crick and further reinforced these upgrades and the prices when they corrected us on the boat price total.

so, here's our question,

 

Are we right to think that we should either have the 95kgf bow thruster installed as advertised and reinforced by emailed document or a refund for the stated upgrade?

 

We'd love to hear your thoughts

 

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I agree, you should either have the larger bow thruster or a refund for the difference.

 

I would ask another boatyard to provide a quotation for how much they would charge to upgrade the bow thruster. Then tell the supplier of your boat that if they don't upgrade or refund, you will get it upgraded and take them to the Small Claims Court to sue for the cost.

 

At this stage they will probably capitulate and offer a refund for the difference.

Edited by cuthound
To remove a letter masquerading as a space

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Basically if you have documentation stating what the boat should have then you are perfectly within your rights to expect the boat to have that. 

 

As Cuthound says, threaten them with Trading Standards and Small Claims Court. 

 

Before you do this though, ensure that there’s nothing else that requires attention. You might as well get it all sorted in one go. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

thank you for this, we needed someone to tell us that we were right.

we do have an extensive email trail, 1 of which has the upgrade list attached, and this is the 1 where they corrected our boat price from £89,950 to £99,970

 

Thankyou so much guys

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

^^^^ What they said, but I'd say do get the money back and not the bigger thruster that in practice you'll find was an unnecessary upgrade anyway. Sounds like there may have been a bit more "upselling" being done here too, so either make sure you've got the spec you paid for or get the money back in those unnecessary additions too.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

The way they seem to be behaving, I could guess that they will have to receive the court summons before they even begin to give way. I would write a letter outlining what you agreed at the show, what they subsequently added to the price, the fact that the Bowthruster is 55, rather than 95 as agreed and paid for and that, if you dont receive the full amount of the upgrade cost in full within 7 days, you will be issuing a summons for the full amount plus costs.

 

It sounds like you have evidence from them showing that a 95 Bowthruster was part of the deal, and you have evidence that the Bowthruster fitted is a 55..... shouldnt be a problem for a judge to find in your favour, (although you can never say never with judges and the law).

 

If you do this, you then have to follow through and issue the summons on the 8th day. This will cost you but, until they know you mean business, they can continue to fob you off until the cows come home.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
52 minutes ago, Richard10002 said:

If you do this, you then have to follow through and issue the summons on the 8th day. This will cost you but, until they know you mean business, they can continue to fob you off until the cows come home.

The cost is pretty small though (£25??) and the procedure is very straightforward. I helped a guy with a claim last year and the defendant settled at mediation, covering his costs and out of pocket expenses to boot. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
57 minutes ago, Richard10002 said:

The way they seem to be behaving, I could guess that they will have to receive the court summons before they even begin to give way. I would write a letter outlining what you agreed at the show, what they subsequently added to the price, the fact that the Bowthruster is 55, rather than 95 as agreed and paid for and that, if you dont receive the full amount of the upgrade cost in full within 7 days, you will be issuing a summons for the full amount plus costs.

 

 

I'd say this is the behaviour of a company on the skids and within an ace of bankruptcy. Anything to wring a few quid of profit out of your new build. You may turn out to have been lucky to get it even delivered. 

 

Pursue them through the courts and they may well just fold rather than pay up, I reckon. How long was their order book?

 

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
3 hours ago, Mike the Boilerman said:

 

 

I'd say this is the behaviour of a company on the skids and within an ace of bankruptcy. Anything to wring a few quid of profit out of your new build. You may turn out to have been lucky to get it even delivered. 

 

Pursue them through the courts and they may well just fold rather than pay up, I reckon. How long was their order book?

 

 

You could be right.

 

Having said that, I have known several new house builders who seemed to get a kick out of screwing the customer in similar situations, and even in much worse situations than a less powerful bowthruster than ordered and paid for. They were definitely not going bust. The most recent one reminded me of Donald Trump, in his willingness to agree to anything in return for the deal, no matter how unrealistic, then happily reneging where either the inevitable happened, or it suited him. He actually relied on people not being willing to take him to court, and I don't know of anyone who did.

 

I have also heard quite a few times of someone who treated people badly, meeting with someone who treated people even worse, resulting in a bit of schadenfreude.

 

Sometimes it is better to write off a bad situation, try to forget about it, and enjoy the boat.

 

 

Edited by Richard10002

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I would talk to trading standards first as they might be ‘interested’. They will at least advise you on the best way forward.  If/when trading stds contact the boat builder it might be enough to get them to start sensible negotiations.  Be very clear as to what you want (and know what you are prepared to accept), otherwise when negotiating you will come across as just unhappy.

Edited by Chewbacka

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

According to the internet, they re a division of a company called Narrowboats Ltd. operating from Wincham Wharf. Their web site suggests a thriving company, and displays a range of narrowboats and widebeams. Does this not give an accurate impression?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
21 minutes ago, Athy said:

According to the internet, they re a division of a company called Narrowboats Ltd. operating from Wincham Wharf. Their web site suggests a thriving company, and displays a range of narrowboats and widebeams. Does this not give an accurate impression?

Athy, any company that wants to market their products can produce a lovely website without actually ever having made anything, its called marketing. You must have seen "artist's impressions" ?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
5 minutes ago, LadyG said:

Athy, any company that wants to market their products can produce a lovely website without actually ever having made anything, its called marketing. You must have seen "artist's impressions" ?

Yes indeed, but these are actual photographs of completed boats.

Edited by Athy

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
4 minutes ago, Athy said:

Yes indeed, but these are actual photographs. 

I could show you pictures of my house, car and boat, but from this can you say if I have actually paid for them all and I have £1M in savings, or I have a huge mortgage, the car on finance and my credit cards all maxed out?

  • Greenie 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
6 minutes ago, Chewbacka said:

I could show you pictures of my house, car and boat, but from this can you say if I have actually paid for them all and I have £1M in savings, or I have a huge mortgage, the car on finance and my credit cards all maxed out?

:D

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
18 minutes ago, Athy said:

Yes indeed, but these are actual photographs. 

Fair enough Athy, but we are all familiar with the expression caveat emptor, the principle that the buyer alone is responsible for checking the quality and suitability of goods before a purchase is made.

 

I wonder if, in the euphoria of purchase, you were clear that the list of extras were not included in the £89,950? 

It is not unknown  for sellers to mislead a keen purchaser by "the sin of omission" that is to say, by not clarifying what is included in the deal.

I sense that post #4 is the source of the angst.

 

Edited by LadyG

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I noticed that, in the list of optional extras on the web site, a bow thruster is mentioned - but it is a 55, not a 95. This looks as if it may have been an honest mistake on the part of someone at the company.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
4 minutes ago, Athy said:

I noticed that, in the list of optional extras on the web site, a bow thruster is mentioned - but it is a 55, not a 95. This looks as if it may have been an honest mistake on the part of someone at the company.

You may have a point if they can demonstrate that they have only ever fitted 55’s. However, if they sometimes fit 95’s then it sounds like sharp practise. If they only ever fit a 55 why on earth would someone ‘accidentally’ type 95?  A typo might read 45 or 65 but 95 appears deliberate. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
2 minutes ago, WotEver said:

You may have a point if they can demonstrate that they have only ever fitted 55’s. However, if they sometimes fit 95’s then it sounds like sharp practise. If they only ever fit a 55 why on earth would someone ‘accidentally’ type 95?  A typo might read 45 or 65 but 95 appears deliberate. 

Possibly. 

   Oddly enough, I have just returned to their web site to check, and I now can't see where I read about the bow thruster.

The heading of the Shearwater page is also at variance with the text beneath it: the former offers 57' and 60' models, the latter 55' and 60'. This, too, looks like an honest mistake (coupled with a lack of proof reading).

   In brief, we should not, having named them, accuse this company of misrepresentation or of any practice which may appear less than honest.

   

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 hour ago, Athy said:

According to the internet, they re a division of a company called Narrowboats Ltd. operating from Wincham Wharf. Their web site suggests a thriving company, and displays a range of narrowboats and widebeams. Does this not give an accurate impression?

This is not quite right.  The Shearwater is a class of narrowboat built by Collingwood and retailed by a couple of companies — Narrowboats Ltd is one, and New and Used Boat Co is another.  The OP hasn’t told us whether he’s dealing direct with the manufacturer or one of the reatailers.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 hour ago, Athy said:

I noticed that, in the list of optional extras on the web site, a bow thruster is mentioned - but it is a 55, not a 95. This looks as if it may have been an honest mistake on the part of someone at the company.

That in itself may not be the main issue here, I think the vendor assumed the Crick Deal may have included a particular list of extras, and that he was going to pay £89,950. Suddenly he was presented with a bill for £99,750 because he asked for extras, and they were added to the £89,950.

I feel for the OP, and in his position, I would ask Trading Standards, if they offer legal advice [ do not be fobbed off by a paralegal opinion ], to discuss the transaction, before firing all guns in one blast.  What I am saying is that this looks like a case for negotiation rather than legislation. 

I assume OP expected to pay the cost of the bow thruster, as this was not included in the list of extras which were listed as part of the Crick Deal.

Does the OP have the boat in his possession?

I would always want to have "ownership" on exchange of moneys, just in case of financial meltdown.

It is easier to be objective when one is not personally involved, of course.

UPDATE : re read the OP main post, he has the boat, therefore I would expect he has paid the higher price, and it would not be easy to get £10K back from the vendor, not easy, but possibly not impossible.

Easier is to accept the existing bow thruster, with a cash payment for the difference between what they offer the 55 and the cost of having the boat altered by an independant boatbuilder.

They will not want the 55 bow thruster back, so they might accept that as an acceptable compromise. This would be the amount you would claim in Small Claims, assuming you are prepared to write off the rest of it.

Small claims is, as far as I can determine, is designed to deal with simple cases which are settled on the day. 

I am not even sure if there are two claims, one for the bow thruster, and one for the excess paid for extras which were offered as Crick Show Deal.

If you decide to try to get some of the cash refunded for the Crick Deal Extras, I think you would need a specialist lawyer, you then need to ask for his fees to be paid, and you need to be sure you are not jeopardising the  opportunity to get the money back from the bow thruster problem. 

PS does the existing bow thruster perform adequately, or not?

 

Edited by LadyG

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
22 minutes ago, Athy said:

I noticed that, in the list of optional extras on the web site, a bow thruster is mentioned - but it is a 55, not a 95. This looks as if it may have been an honest mistake on the part of someone at the company.

The op reads to me that the boat was complete when they viewed it, but some extras/upgrades were agreed and the work carried out - or not as the case may be.

 The question is ‘did the boat before upgrading have a bow thruster or not’ because if it had a 55kgf thruster and you paid to upgrade it to a 95kgf then you did not get what you paid for, if on the other hand it did not have a thruster and you wanted one adding then this might be a typo.  

 

My opinion is that for a narrowboat I would think a 55kgf thruster was typical (in which case this could be a typo) but for a wide boat I would expect something bigger, and it would be more than reasonable when accepting the extras that you believed you were getting the 95kgf.  So is your boat a narrow or wide boat?

Edited by Chewbacka

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
5 minutes ago, adam1uk said:

This is not quite right.  The Shearwater is a class of narrowboat built by Collingwood and retailed by a couple of companies — Narrowboats Ltd is one, and New and Used Boat Co is another.  The OP hasn’t told us whether he’s dealing direct with the manufacturer or one of the reatailers.

Yes, they mention Collingwood as builders and fitter-outers on their web site, though not in reference to this particular model.

 

The O.P. hasn't mention whether the boat at Crick Show was exhibited by Collingwood or by Narrowboats Ltd who, as you say, appear to be a principal agent for the firm.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
20 minutes ago, WotEver said:

You may have a point if they can demonstrate that they have only ever fitted 55’s. However, if they sometimes fit 95’s then it sounds like sharp practise. If they only ever fit a 55 why on earth would someone ‘accidentally’ type 95?  A typo might read 45 or 65 but 95 appears deliberate. 

It might be that 55kgf is their standard narrowboat thruster and 95kgf for a broadbeam, in which case the person typing could easily have typed 95 in error.  I am assuming it is a narrowboat we are discussing.

Edited by Chewbacka

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

If the 55kgf thruster works ok on your boat then I'd leave it where it is and pursue the refund for the upgrade. Installing a 95kgf thruster will require a bigger diameter tunnel so if you want the bigger thruster then the existing tunnel will need to be cut out and replaced.  

6 minutes ago, Chewbacka said:

It might be that 55kgf is their standard narrowboat thruster and 95kgf for a broadbeam, in which case the person typing could easily have typed 95 in error.  I am assuming it is a narrowboat we are discussing.

Yes, I have a 95kgf on my widebeam

14 hours ago, MRBear said:

Hi everyone.

 

We have a story to tell you that we'd like your opinion on,

We have been looking for the right narrowboat for about 3 years, nothing met our expectations until we went to this years Crick boat show, we had a lovely day, wandering around, talking to fantastic people and, of course, viewing the boats, it is at this point our story really begins, one of the boats we viewed was a 60ft shearwater  it ticked a lot of the boxes but not all so we carried on with our day, however,  we returned to the shearwater later in the day, it looked stunning, was the right layout for us and had a host of upgrades with individual prices next to each upgrade and they added even more sweeteners to the deal,all for £89,950, or so we thought, we paid our deposit on the day and left excited about our wonderful new boat. how wrong we were.

It wasn't too long as the communications went back and forth  that it was pointed out to us that the upgrades listed and priced took our boat price from £89,950 to £99,970,

 

 

That's the point at which I would have pulled out of the purchase and asked for my deposit back. Were the previously promised upgrades written down in the contract?

Edited by blackrose
  • Greenie 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!

Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.

Sign In Now
Sign in to follow this  

  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    No registered users viewing this page.

×
×
  • Create New...

Important Information

We have placed cookies on your device to help make this website better. You can adjust your cookie settings, otherwise we'll assume you're okay to continue.