Definitive paperwork required to purchase a Widebeam for safety compliance

[Momac]

So where does the BMF say all UK boats need a RCR assessment  each time they are sold for continued use in the UK ?

Edited December 28, 2022 by MartynG

[Tony Brooks]

22 minutes ago, MartynG said:

https://www.rya.org.uk/news/collaboration-between-leading-leisure-marine-associations

 

,

 

The first column specifies CE marked so should have been built and documented to the relevant RCR/RCD. However what about the case where a boat was not CE marked or no longer has the documentation it should have had when new.

 

It seem to me this is where there is a financial risk to a purchaser when they come to sell it - especially as it has been shown many narrow boats do not meet the relevant RCR/RCD so never fully met the required standards. If for whatever reason a broker refuses to handle the boat without a post construction certificate the owner will have to pay for it plus any rectification costs. If the owner decides to sell privately they may well find they have to accept a lower price than they would with the RCR/RCD certificate.

 

We can argue about the minutia relating to what standards are applicable and the lack of enforcement but the above seem to be the case until some case law is obtained.

 

[Momac]

7 minutes ago, Tony Brooks said:

 

The first column specifies CE marked so should have been built and documented to the relevant RCR/RCD. However what about the case where a boat was not CE marked or no longer has the documentation it should have had when new.

 

 

 

If it never had a CE plate  it was never legally in use unless it was exempt.

It would be foolish to remove  a valid CE plate would it not? It would  equally foolish to lose the original paperwork but academic for the reasons noted below. 

 

In the case of boats already legally in the UK (and with a CE plate if it should have one) there is no need to do anything . No new RCR assessment is required . No paperwork is required  to be shown to anyone. No government body is required by any regulation to do anything. No government body is required by regulation to be notified about the sale. So the RCR does not apply.

 

 

[PD1964]

51 minutes ago, Tony Brooks said:

 

It seem to me this is where there is a financial risk to a purchaser when they come to sell it - especially as it has been shown many narrow boats do not meet the relevant RCR/RCD so never fully met the required standards. If for whatever reason a broker refuses to handle the boat without a post construction certificate the owner will have to pay for it plus any rectification costs. If the owner decides to sell privately they may well find they have to accept a lower price than they would with the RCR/RCD certificate.

 

 Maybe with brand new boats that have been bought in the last couple of years and are being sold after a couple of years ownership.

  Brokers will still sell old boats over 5 years of age without a PCA or RCD/RCR(as has been stated many times on similar RCD/RCR threads) without the owner paying to get up to date confirming paperwork or being turned away by the broker for not having an up to date RCD

  

Edited December 28, 2022 by PD1964

[Tony Brooks]

13 minutes ago, MartynG said:

If it never had a CE plate  it was never legally in use unless it was exempt.

It would be foolish to remove  a valid CE plate would it not? It would  equally foolish to lose the original paperwork but academic for the reasons noted below. 

 

In the case of boats already legally in the UK (and with a CE plate if it should have one) there is no need to do anything . No new RCR assessment is required . No paperwork is required  to be shown to anyone. No government body is required by any regulation to do anything. No government body is required by regulation to be notified about the sale. So the RCR does not apply.

 

 

 

So you keep saying, so what expertise or knowledge do you have go make such definitive statements.

 

It seems brokers have been demanding a post construction certificate before they will handle boats without the relevant RCR/RCD documents and plate. You can argue until you are blue in the face that they do not need to do this but it seems they think differently.

 

Likewise, in the case of a private sale, you can argue until kingdom come that a boat does not need the plate and document to be legally sold but if the purchaser does not accept your interpretation a knowledgeable vendor may  very well offer a lower price.

 

A purchaser of a post 1997 boat without a CE mark and the relevant documents needs to be aware of the possible problems when they come to sell it.

 

 

4 minutes ago, PD1964 said:

 Maybe with brand new boats that have been bought in the last couple of years and are being sold after a couple of years ownership.

  Brokers will still sell old boats over 5 years of age without a PCA or RCD/RCR. As has been stated many times on similar RCD/RCR threads without the owner paying to get up to date confirming paperwork or being turned away. 

  

 

That is contrary to what has been reported here. I would agree if you placed "some" in front of "brokers".

[Momac]

9 minutes ago, Tony Brooks said:

 

It seems brokers have been demanding a post construction certificate before they will handle boats without the relevant RCR/RCD documents and plate. You can argue until you are blue in the face that they do not need to do this but it seems they think differently.

 

Likewise, in the case of a private sale, you can argue until kingdom come that a boat does not need the plate and document to be legally sold but if the purchaser does not accept your interpretation a knowledgeable vendor may  very well offer a lower price.

 

A purchaser of a post 1997 boat without a CE mark and the relevant documents needs to be aware of the possible problems when they come to sell it.

I don't doubt any of that .

But that doesn't make it right.

 

By the way I have the CE plate an the paperwork for my boat so I have no financial  interest in the matter .

 

 

 

 

[PD1964]

1 hour ago, Tony Brooks said:

 

So you keep saying, so what expertise or knowledge do you have go make such definitive statements.

 

It seems brokers have been demanding a post construction certificate before they will handle boats without the relevant RCR/RCD documents and plate. You can argue until you are blue in the face that they do not need to do this but it seems they think differently.

 

Likewise, in the case of a private sale, you can argue until kingdom come that a boat does not need the plate and document to be legally sold but if the purchaser does not accept your interpretation a knowledgeable vendor may  very well offer a lower price.

 

A purchaser of a post 1997 boat without a CE mark and the relevant documents needs to be aware of the possible problems when they come to sell it.

 

 

 

That is contrary to what has been reported here. I would agree if you placed "some" in front of "brokers".

 You have mentioned this on most of the RCD/RCR threads regarding complying paperwork and brokers and have never come up with any real evidence or names of brokers that are turning boats away because they do not have an up to date RCR/RCD . I’m not talking about brand new boats or new self-fits, I’m talking older second hand boats like you mentioned post 1997.

  Surly with the hundreds/thousands  of second hand boats that have been sold over the last couple of boom years, there must be loads of non-complying RCD/RCR cases out there, that have had legal action taken for failure to comply?

  Or does the lack of legal action for non complying boats, show that the RCD/RCR is not a factor when selling a secondhand Narrowboat?
  

Edited December 28, 2022 by PD1964

[Tony Brooks]

9 hours ago, PD1964 said:

 You have mentioned this on most of the RCD/RCR threads regarding complying paperwork and brokers and have never come up with any real evidence or names of brokers that are turning boats away because they do not have an up to date RCR/RCD . I’m not talking about brand new boats or new self-fits, I’m talking older second hand boats like you mentioned post 1997.

  Surly with the hundreds/thousands  of second hand boats that have been sold over the last couple of boom years, there must be loads of non-complying RCD/RCR cases out there, that have had legal action taken for failure to comply?

  Or does the lack of legal action for non complying boats, show that the RCD/RCR is not a factor when selling a secondhand Narrowboat?
  

 

There has been an instant given by another member given here and I am not going to try to find it, I think the same thread had another example. I have also had a PM from a member confirming that this has happened but declining to name the broker and asking that their name not be passed on. I conclude that either those members are lying or it is or has been happening. Of the two I think the likelihood, especially in view of the posts from Alan, that the other members are NOT lying so it has happened or is happening. I claim no more than that. Unless it can be shown that those other members have been lying I will continue to warn that buying a boat without the CE mark and documentation MIGHT have financial consequences for the purchaser at a later date.

 

The fact that, so far, trading standards have not prosecuted anyone in the inland sector as far as we know does not alter that.

 

I find it interesting that people, like yourself, who do not seem to like that very modest warning use the lack of Trading Standards action and general comments about the volume of boats sold to justify their position. That is despite civil cases based on non-compliance being quoted. It is also interesting that when another member who seems to support your position has declined to give his experience or expertise in the area of CE marking and non-compliant boats. Making claims based on "common  sense" and what an individual thinks and trying to pass them off as facts does not seem very sensible to me, as they say, "the law is an ass".

 

Those members who seem to be claiming that there are no potential financial consequences arising from buying a post 1997 boat that does not have the marks and documentation should perhaps offer to personally indemnify a purchaser who acts on their advice if such a consequence occurs at a later time.

 

 

[PD1964]

1 hour ago, Tony Brooks said:

 

There has been an instant given by another member given here and I am not going to try to find it, I think the same thread had another example. I have also had a PM from a member confirming that this has happened but declining to name the broker and asking that their name not be passed on. I conclude that either those members are lying or it is or has been happening. Of the two I think the likelihood, especially in view of the posts from Alan, that the other members are NOT lying so it has happened or is happening. I claim no more than that. Unless it can be shown that those other members have been lying I will continue to warn that buying a boat without the CE mark and documentation MIGHT have financial consequences for the purchaser at a later date.

 

The fact that, so far, trading standards have not prosecuted anyone in the inland sector as far as we know does not alter that.

 

I find it interesting that people, like yourself, who do not seem to like that very modest warning use the lack of Trading Standards action and general comments about the volume of boats sold to justify their position. That is despite civil cases based on non-compliance being quoted. It is also interesting that when another member who seems to support your position has declined to give his experience or expertise in the area of CE marking and non-compliant boats. Making claims based on "common  sense" and what an individual thinks and trying to pass them off as facts does not seem very sensible to me, as they say, "the law is an ass".

 

Those members who seem to be claiming that there are no potential financial consequences arising from buying a post 1997 boat that does not have the marks and documentation should perhaps offer to personally indemnify a purchaser who acts on their advice if such a consequence occurs at a later time.

 

 

Another one that scare mongers over the issue. As I said hundreds/thousands of second hand boats sold over the last few years through brokers and privately. A lot, if not the majority would not of had complying RCD/RCR’s, yet you still scare mongers over prosecution and financial loss. What planet are you living on? It’s obviously not a major consideration when buying or selling a second hand boat.

Edited December 29, 2022 by PD1964

[GUMPY]

Can someone phone round a few brokers asking if you need paperwork for a 15year old boat. Could then get a definitive answer🤔

No paper work no CE plate no RCD here but I do have to get a survey this year for insurance 🥱

[PD1964]

3 minutes ago, Loddon said:

Can someone phone round a few brokers asking if you need paperwork for a 15year old boat. Could then get a definitive answer🤔

No paper work no CE plate no RCD here but I do have to get a survey this year for insurance 🥱

🤫 The forum RCD/RCR police will have you reported for having a non-complying boat 🤐

[Tony Brooks]

24 minutes ago, PD1964 said:

Another one that scare mongers over the issue. As I said hundreds/thousands of second hand boats sold over the last few years through brokers and privately. A lot, if not the majority would not of had complying RCD/RCR’s, yet you still scare mongers over prosecution and financial loss. What planet are you living on? It’s obviously not a major consideration when buying a second hand boat.

 

That is all right then, just do an ostrich and ignore what looks like the law and call those who simply warn that there MIGHT be financial consequences of buying a boat without its marking and paper work "scare mongers". If you are so sure that you are correct then simply offer to indemnify anyone who takes your advice and gets caught out. I am sure that you could buy insurance for them at little cost if the underwriters agree with your assessment of risk..

 

I think that we have also had an admission from a member that they knowingly bought a secondhand boat without compliance at a reduced price, but I suppose in your eyes that does not constitute a financial loss - or alternatively they were lying and it never happened. I am not talking about Alan here, but even in Alan's case it seems to confirm there MIGHT be a subsequent financial loss to the purchaser.

 

I have given my warning that there MIGHT be a financial loss later on while you and some others seem adamant there is no chance of it. I am secure and happy with my warning, while until you show that you are, personally, happy to indemnify a purchaser of a non CE marked boat against future loss it shows that you are not confident in your assertions.

 

 

[Tony Brooks]

6 minutes ago, PD1964 said:

🤫 The forum RCD/RCR police will have you reported for having a non-complying boat 🤐

 

Now you are being silly. No one has suggested that they will report anyone for having a non-compliant boat. No one has even said that such a boat should not be bought. What has been said is that doing so MIGHT cause a financial loss one way of another when it comes to selling it. I think I can name two others who said they would happily buy a non-CE marked boat based on their assessment of the risks involved.

 

On the present evidence the chances of facing a criminal prosecution resulting form resale seems to be so small as to be all but non-existent. The chances of facing a civil action seems to still be small but a bit more likely. Both of these risks seem to be insignificant when compared with the risk of having to pay for a post construction assessment or accept a lower offer than would be the case of a CE marked and documented boat. Trying to claim otherwise seem to go against human nature in wanting a bargain if possible.

[PD1964]

4 minutes ago, Tony Brooks said:

 

Now you are being silly. No one has suggested that they will report anyone for having a non-compliant boat. No one has even said that such a boat should not be bought. What has been said is that doing so MIGHT cause a financial loss one way of another when it comes to selling it. I think I can name two others who said they would happily buy a non-CE marked boat based on their assessment of the risks involved.

 

On the present evidence the chances of facing a criminal prosecution resulting form resale seems to be so small as to be all but non-existent. The chances of facing a civil action seems to still be small but a bit more likely. Both of these risks seem to be insignificant when compared with the risk of having to pay for a post construction assessment or accept a lower offer than would be the case of a CE marked and documented boat. Trying to claim otherwise seem to go against human nature in wanting a bargain if possible.

Are you for real? I was having a laugh with that reply, just like I have a laugh with your long replies that really say nothing to support your argument and beliefs in the RCD/RCR being a factor to worry about on a Narrowboat. Just scaremongering.

 

[TheBiscuits]

7 minutes ago, PD1964 said:

Are you for real? I was having a laugh with that reply, just like I have a laugh with your long replies that really say nothing to support your argument and beliefs in the RCD/RCR being a factor to worry about on a Narrowboat. Just scaremongering.

 

 

Tony Dunkley said much the same about river licence/ pleasure boat certificate and BSS certificate.  It didn't work out particularly well for him.

[Tony Brooks]

16 minutes ago, PD1964 said:

Are you for real? I was having a laugh with that reply, just like I have a laugh with your long replies that really say nothing to support your argument and beliefs in the RCD/RCR being a factor to worry about on a Narrowboat. Just scaremongering.

 

 

That seems to be a problem in your thought processes. You and others are making firm statements and giving advice in a way that could be construed as being expert advice. If push ever came to shove a court would hold you to a higher standard than the man on the Clapham omnibus. I agree that outcome is very unlikely but it is a potential danger non the less.

 

Laugh away to your hearts content, buy as many non-compliant boats as you wish, but do not advise other people to take a course of action unless you are 100% sure it will not carry any risk for them.

Edited December 29, 2022 by Tony Brooks

[Momac]

 

 

Just now, Tony Brooks said:

 

 You and others are making firm statements and giving advice in a way that could be construed as being expert advice.

This is an internet discussion forum , not an expert advice centre .

 

[Tony Brooks]

Just now, MartynG said:

 

 

This is an internet discussion forum , not an expert advice centre .

 

 

I agree, but posting statements that look and read as expert advice is not wise unless you are 100% sure of your facts. It is not even fair to the questioner.  This is why I talk about a POTENTIAL financial loss and use words like MIGHT. That means I am not 100% sure, but on balance it MIGHT be the case. The questioner can then make up their mind.

[Barneyp]

14 hours ago, MartynG said:

https://www.rya.org.uk/news/collaboration-between-leading-leisure-marine-associations

That document says that boats don't need to be recertified, it doesn't say they don't need a copy of the original certificate.

14 hours ago, MartynG said:

So where does the BMF say all UK boats need a RCR assessment  each time they are sold for continued use in the UK ?

They don't say an assessment is needed at each time of sale, they do say that the original or most recent certificate should be available.

[PD1964]

1 hour ago, Tony Brooks said:

 

That seems to be a problem in your thought processes. You and others are making firm statements and giving advice in a way that could be construed as being expert advice. If push ever came to shove a court would hold you to a higher standard than the man on the Clapham omnibus. I agree that outcome is very unlikely but it is a potential danger non the less.

 

Laugh away to your hearts content, buy as many non-compliant boats as you wish, but do not advise other people to take a course of action unless you are 100% sure it will not carry any risk for them.

  I don’t advise and I also don’t scaremonger, but you keep mentioning financial risk and the potential consequences of not having a complying boat, that brokers will not sell it, you could end up paying for a PCA, you’ll have to sell it privately with a substantial price reduction. However you offer no actual facts or hard evidence that any of these is a regular occurrence when selling a boat. That’s why I laugh as in the real world theses thing do not happen.

[Barneyp]

13 hours ago, PD1964 said:

 ...........

  Or does the lack of legal action for non complying boats, show that the RCD/RCR is not a factor when selling a secondhand Narrowboat?
  

The lack of legal action clearly shows that it isn't a problem for most people at the moment.

The fact that the BMF have told brokers not to sell boats that don't have the correct RCD/RCR paperwork, and that SOME brokers seem to be enforcing this means it could become a problem in the future. 

 

Regardless of what the law actually says, if people start to think the paperwork is a requirement they will expect it, and the price of boats may go down.

 

When buying a narrowboat there are hundreds of things to consider, from what type of toilet/stern/layout/fridge/engine etc, what colour is it, hull thickness, has it been well maintained, and hundreds more things.

The correct RCD/RCR documentation should be included in that list, thats not to say don't buy without it, just be aware and make an informed decision.

[IanD]

18 minutes ago, Barneyp said:

The lack of legal action clearly shows that it isn't a problem for most people at the moment.

The fact that the BMF have told brokers not to sell boats that don't have the correct RCD/RCR paperwork, and that SOME brokers seem to be enforcing this means it could become a problem in the future. 

 

Regardless of what the law actually says, if people start to think the paperwork is a requirement they will expect it, and the price of boats may go down.

 

When buying a narrowboat there are hundreds of things to consider, from what type of toilet/stern/layout/fridge/engine etc, what colour is it, hull thickness, has it been well maintained, and hundreds more things.

The correct RCD/RCR documentation should be included in that list, thats not to say don't buy without it, just be aware and make an informed decision.

An accurate summary of the real-life situation 🙂

 

Are you sure about the highlighted bit? "Told" is a strong word, this normally means "instructed" not "suggested", in which case you'd think brokers (at least, those who are members) would do what they're told by their own trade association...

 

https://britishmarine.co.uk/About-us

[PD1964]

As you say not all brokers are members of the BMF and I doubt as you say “Told” is the correct wording, maybe advised as best practice . The BMF members cover a vast network of Marina’s and services. Both offshore and inland waterways and as Offshore seams a bit more strict with complying documentation, I imagine their advice would be followed more to the letter in the Offshore industry than Inland.

[Momac]

I wonder how many boats out there that should have a CE plate etc and  dont have it ?

Perhaps the people who own such boats don't buy /sell through brokers?

 

This broker , who is a member of BMF according to his website, has made his own mid up

https://www.abnb.co.uk/useful-information/faq-rcd

 

[MtB]

What happens if the owner of a craft loses their RCD certificate, issued by the builder back in the mists of time?

 

Is there a central register it can be checked against for compliance or could the seller be like cars used to be?

 

"Yes mate it definitely has an MoT (or RCD) but the dog ate it (or it fell in the cut)."