Corrosion above the waterline

[Richardcn]

Hi all

 

My step-son has been looking at a boat that he's interested in buying but he has some concerns about historic corrosion above the waterline (most visible at the stern and far left of the attached photo). It's almost as if the boat used to sit lower in the water at some time in the past. It's a late 1970's build so I suppose that's a possibility, what do you guys think? Although I haven't read through the detail (yet), it did 'pass' a very recent insurance hull survey. Is it likely that these areas would be ignored for the purpose of such a survey and should he not be too concerned about them, if the report is otherwise good.

 

Regards

Richard

[Alan de Enfield]

If you 'blow up' the picture it really doesn't look like corrosion to me.

 

It almost looks like repetitive damage caused by swinging the backend into something - maybe a tight mooring or hitting steel / concrete edging when moving off.

 

A look at the inside should show if it is impact damage or not.

[Richardcn]

35 minutes ago, Alan de Enfield said:

If you 'blow up' the picture it really doesn't look like corrosion to me.

 

It almost looks like repetitive damage caused by swinging the backend into something - maybe a tight mooring or hitting steel / concrete edging when moving off.

 

A look at the inside should show if it is impact damage or not.

Thanks for your thoughts Alan. I would probably have thought the same were it not for the other 'damage' but maybe I just drew an imaginary line between them. Corrosion or otherwise, would these areas be irrelevant for insurance purposes, being above the waterline?

[Alan de Enfield]

2 minutes ago, Richardcn said:

Thanks for your thoughts Alan. I would probably have thought the same were it not for the other 'damage' but maybe I just drew an imaginary line between them. Corrosion or otherwise, would these areas be irrelevant for insurance purposes, being above the waterline?

Without seeing personally I wouldn't like to comment.

 

Any damage, for me, would be relevant, Remember that what may be above the waterline today, may not be with a full tank of fuel and 3 or 4 folk standing at the stern.

[Richardcn]

2 minutes ago, Alan de Enfield said:

Without seeing personally I wouldn't like to comment.

 

Any damage, for me, would be relevant, Remember that what may be above the waterline today, may not be with a full tank of fuel and 3 or 4 folk standing at the stern.

True. I'll wait to see if it gets a mention in the survey and proceed with caution from there!

[BEngo]

Regardless of what the insurance Co say, this is relevant damage because it is so close to the waterline.  A leak in the stern tube or several people on he back deck could easily put it below water.

 

A good surveyor should at least have put a thickness meter on it, so read the survey.  Then,  unless you paid for the last survey,  get one of your own.

 

If if is at least 4 mm thick the comprehensive insurance folks wont worry (the basic insurance underwriters don't worry at all)  and I would be OK down to about 3 mm provided there was no evident continuing rust or noticeable pitting.

N

[Bee]

Odd. It doesn't look like corrosion but as it is also on the hull at the far left I guess it probably is. It looks deep as well and the side plating is probably only 3/16" on a boat of that age so although it is probably no longer 'active' it needs a close look. It certainly needs a close look inside too as water collects there on top of the flat plate that forms the bottom of the counter. I would be tempted to scrape a bit of it  just in case someone has had a go at it with car body filler (!) As you know its what is under the water that matters most and some of us don't rate surveyors very highly, not because they are scoundrels but because sometimes they miss more than they see. If it has not been overplated then personally I would expect it to need some overplating soon.

[Alan de Enfield]

4 minutes ago, Richardcn said:

True. I'll wait to see if it gets a mention in the survey and proceed with caution from there!

Assuming you are getting your own survey and not relying on an old one !!

Its too late once it is surveyed, (what if he 'misses it' - surveyors have missed far more obvious things)  ask the surveyor specifically to inspect and comment / report on any damage and corrosion he finds and make sure he specifically looks at any that concerns YOU

He is your 'employee' and should follow your instructions.

 

A boat can go from 'passing' a survey with flying colours to 12-18 months later failing badly with very bad corrosion making it on the verge of sinking (as a member on this forum knows)

Edited February 22, 2020 by Alan de Enfield

[Richardcn]

I've got hold of another photo of the boat, this time out of the water. The 'area of concern' appears to extend around the stern and along the stbd side as well. To me, it appears to be a previous waterline. Maybe the boat was much heavier in years gone by?

[Alan de Enfield]

27 minutes ago, Richardcn said:

I've got hold of another photo of the boat, this time out of the water. The 'area of concern' appears to extend around the stern and along the stbd side as well. To me, it appears to be a previous waterline. Maybe the boat was much heavier in years gone by

 

Are you having a survey ?

 

I really don't think that diagnosis of pictures by a couple of old blokes on the internet should really be used as a basis for deciding to spend 'your life savings'.

 

Sorry if that sounds harsh, but I'm sure your money is 'hard earned' and you want reassurance as to spending it wisely. You will get the best advice from someone who has seen it 'in the flesh', just make sure you choose your surveyor wisely and don't try and save money by using the cheapest one.

 

You don't identify where you or the boat are, there maybe an experienced forumite close by who'd take a look and give you an opinion (unless its in London)

Edited February 22, 2020 by Alan de Enfield

[Richardcn]

23 minutes ago, Alan de Enfield said:

 

Are you having a survey ?

 

I really don't think that diagnosis of pictures by a couple of old blokes on the internet should really be used as a basis for deciding to spend 'your life savings'.

 

Sorry if that sounds harsh, but I'm sure your money is 'hard earned' and you want reassurance as to spending it wisely. You will get the best advice from someone who has seen it 'in the flesh', just make sure you choose your surveyor wisely and don't try and save money by using the cheapest one.

 

You don't identify where you or the boat are, there maybe an experienced forumite close by who'd take a look and give you an opinion (unless its in London)

Thank you for your honest comments Alan. Fear not! Fortunately we went through the whole process ourselves a few years ago (and now live aboard) so my step-son has our experience (and caution) to prevent any of the 'normal' newbie mistakes. I was merely trying to work out if my thoughts about the 'damage' being from an old waterline held any water (sorry ;)). Also, I was wondering how a relatively glowing survey could 'miss' these areas but having now read the survey (and many previous threads about surveys/surveyors) I can easily see how. Would anyone like to see the survey figures? As name and location has not been divulged I can't see a problem but... suffice to say the uncleaned hull must have thoroughly masked the areas in question.

 

We will carefully consider if there is a way forward with this boat but I imagine it would just be too much hassle for a first boat. Survey (if owner allows given recent survey), inevitable need for work (plating?), negotiations over who/what/when/where etc. Maybe for an experienced ditch dweller but I doubt for my step-son.

[ditchcrawler]

19 minutes ago, Richardcn said:

Thank you for your honest comments Alan. Fear not! Fortunately we went through the whole process ourselves a few years ago (and now live aboard) so my step-son has our experience (and caution) to prevent any of the 'normal' newbie mistakes. I was merely trying to work out if my thoughts about the 'damage' being from an old waterline held any water (sorry ;)). Also, I was wondering how a relatively glowing survey could 'miss' these areas but having now read the survey (and many previous threads about surveys/surveyors) I can easily see how. Would anyone like to see the survey figures? As name and location has not been divulged I can't see a problem but... suffice to say the uncleaned hull must have thoroughly masked the areas in question.

 

We will carefully consider if there is a way forward with this boat but I imagine it would just be too much hassle for a first boat. Survey (if owner allows given recent survey), inevitable need for work (plating?), negotiations over who/what/when/where etc. Maybe for an experienced ditch dweller but I doubt for my step-son.

Is this your survey or the sellers?

[Mad Harold]

Whatever the cause of the damage or corrosion,it needs immediate attention.

As there are many many boats for sale,I wouldn't bother with this one.

 

[Richard10002]

11 minutes ago, Mad Harold said:

Whatever the cause of the damage or corrosion,it needs immediate attention.

As there are many many boats for sale,I wouldn't bother with this one.

 

If that bit of the hull started as 6mm plate, and is now 4mm plate, it hardly “needs immediate attention”.

 

Looking at it, I think it’s no big deal. Certainly not such that a few old blokes on the internet can make any kind of realistic statement.

 

its very easy to condemn a boat in this kind of situation, and is often what happens when people ask the question.

 

I say this because, when I saw a picture of our boat on the brokers web site, it looked awful and would almost certainly have been condemned here.

 

In the flesh it was nowhere near as bad as in the pictures, such that we offered the asking price there and then. An amazing deal, still floating after over 8 years since we bought it  

 

If the boat and the price is right, and the OP has looked at enough boats to know what they like and what they can get for the money, it could be time for a survey..... 

 

Of course, if the seller won’t allow a survey, (as mentioned in one of the OPs posts, I think), run a mile.

[Richardcn]

33 minutes ago, ditchcrawler said:

Is this your survey or the sellers?

The sellers.

[Flyboy]

1 hour ago, Richardcn said:

I've got hold of another photo of the boat, this time out of the water. The 'area of concern' appears to extend around the stern and along the stbd side as well. To me, it appears to be a previous waterline. Maybe the boat was much heavier in years gone by?

It looks like there's a large bit of one propeller blade missing. Or is it blacking ?

[Richardcn]

12 minutes ago, Richard10002 said:

If that bit of the hull started as 6mm plate, and is now 4mm plate, it hardly “needs immediate attention”.

 

Looking at it, I think it’s no big deal. Certainly not such that a few old blokes on the internet can make any kind of realistic statement.

 

its very easy to condemn a boat in this kind of situation, and is often what happens when people ask the question.

 

I say this because, when I saw a picture of our boat on the brokers web site, it looked awful and would almost certainly have been condemned here.

 

In the flesh it was nowhere near as bad as in the pictures, such that we offered the asking price there and then. An amazing deal, still floating after over 8 years since we bought it  

 

If the boat and the price is right, and the OP has looked at enough boats to know what they like and what they can get for the money, it could be time for a survey..... 

 

Of course, if the seller won’t allow a survey, (as mentioned in one of the OPs posts, I think), run a mile.

Good advice indeed.

 

I guess that 'warning bells' started ringing (rightly or wrongly) when I re-discovered the photo that I took earlier, which made me wonder how I didn't notice any indication in my skim read of the survey when viewing.

[Richardcn]

My step-son has decided to give this one a miss, just too many potential complications for a first boat. I always advise having  a survey, especially for first-time buyers but a having survey knowing that work may well be advised (indeed may then be REQUIRED by the buyers insurers) is a different kettle of fish, for a first boat.

 

Many thanks for all the input guys.

[Alan de Enfield]

1 minute ago, Richardcn said:

My step-son has decided to give this one a miss, just too many potential complications for a first boat. I always advise having  a survey, especially for first-time buyers but a having survey knowing that work may well be advised (indeed may then be REQUIRED by the buyers insurers) is a different kettle of fish, for a first boat.

 

Many thanks for all the input guys.

 

[MtB]

It certainly looks to me like waterline corrosion.

 

I note your son has pulled out but I'm adding a further comment for anyone in the future reading this thread. No-one so far seems to agree with me but to me, this looks as though the boat was once a liveaboard which received no maintenance for 25 years. Long term liveaboards tend to carry a couple of tonnes of personal possessions which lowers the boat in the water by a couple of inches. An old liveaboard emptied of all the junk and generally smartened up for sale, consequently rises out of the water but the old waterline corrosion line often remains visible after blacking. I think this is what's happened here.

 

 

 

 

Edited February 23, 2020 by Mike the Boilerman
Add a bit

[matty40s]

It's not actually that expensive to fix. Get your own survey. If your surveyor found no other corrosion deeper down the hull, he could recommend waterline plating (2" above and below the corroded line). The cost of this could be about £2k and get this taken off your offer.

[Richard10002]

1 hour ago, matty40s said:

It's not actually that expensive to fix. Get your own survey. If your surveyor found no other corrosion deeper down the hull, he could recommend waterline plating (2" above and below the corroded line). The cost of this could be about £2k and get this taken off your offer.

Not only could he “recommend” a tiny bit of plating, but it almost certainly wouldn’t “need” doing, either at all, or for some time.

 

The cruiser stern deck of our boat was very rusty at the time of purchase in 2011. I eventually gave it a good sanding and some paint last year. The steel is no thinner now than it was 8 years ago.

[BWM]

It definitely looks to be pitting of a fair depth and MTB gives a good account of how this may have occurred, if it is only localised it wouldn't be a particularly expensive repair. If it was mine i would consider having the pitting filled with weld.

[ditchcrawler]

Just now, BWM said:

It definitely looks to be pitting of a fair depth and MTB gives a good account of how this may have occurred, if it is only localised it wouldn't be a particularly expensive repair. If it was mine i would consider having the pitting filled with weld.

Now its above the water line assuming there is still 3-4mm + will it cause a problem. The up side is probably no corrosion on the present water line

[Onewheeler]

I've been wondering what the circular feature is above the baseplate on the starboard side. Skin fitting for raw water cooling?