seeking advice - small claims for boatyard error?

[agg221]

If the piece of box-section is simply held on with a single bolt, it would be fairly easy to at least correct the orientation by finding a piece of box-section which is twice as wide but the same height, so that mount could be swivelled around. I would mount it so that the open ends are front and back, so that the engine mounting bolts were accessible. If you measure the height accurately from the bottom of the foot to the longitudinal bearer (large bit once painted white) and re-set it to that, it should be possible to remove one mount at a time and change them over. I also note that the single bolt holding it down is an 8.8. You could replace that with a 10.9, 12.9 or 14.4 if you can find one, which would considerably strengthen the installation while waiting to get it welded. It may even be possible to get a piece of U-channel welded to the new piece of box section so that the base of the U butts up against the inside face of the longitudinal bearer. This could potentially be bolted through sideways to hold it far more securely, without needing any welding.

 

All the above contains quite a lot of supposition about access and what the issues with the other mounts are, but if I was in this situation I think I would end up looking for a low-cost solution which would mean something that could be done with the engine in-situ. The biggest risk I can see is fatigue failure in the bolts if they are under-specified (which is impossible to know) but since they haven't failed yet, it is reasonable to think that if you simply change them for higher tensile ones it will buy you at least as long as you have had so far since the engine was installed.

 

Alec

[blackrose]

39 minutes ago, Tony Brooks said:

 

But according to the OP that fails to address the fact that the mounts are oriented to accept transverse thrust rather than prop thrust. Just how vital  that is I do not know, but it is wrong.

 

So can't the orientation of the mounts or spacers be changed, or the mounts themselves be changed? I just think the hassle and costs of doing some comparatively minor remedial work may well work out less hassle overall than taking legal action. But that's just me, the OP is obviously free to choose their own course of action.

Edited January 3, 2023 by blackrose

[nicknorman]

It’s hard to see from the picture but usually these flexible mounting have a slot at one end to allow for some lateral fine adjustment of engine alignment. But with the mounts at 90 deg that isn’t going to work, so there is no scope for lateral fine adjust. Also the engine is sitting rather high in the mount bolts which is a bad thing.

Any engine installation should be carried out in accordance with the manufacturer’s installation instructions. I’m not sure which engine it is but for example here is the relevant part of the installation manual for our Beta 43. Note the orientation of the mount, and the slot? And the height.

OP should compare the engine installation manual with what was actually done.

[Laurie Booth]

3 hours ago, Richard10002 said:

 

In my experience, a moneyclaimonline is a long protracted process in these underfunded days. I entered a claim against Currys a while ago and a bit of research suggested that it would take around 9 months to get to court. Arbitration was offered, which was done over the phone, and I decided beforehand to agree to much less than I was claiming, on the basis that having it hanging was irritating, annoying, and stressful, and life is too short.

 

It doesn't sound like the OP has the money to do the job quoted for, nor the time to wait for the outcome of a court case, although it is always possible that the yard gives in shortly after being served, or at arbitration.

A solicitor took me to the small claims court which took 2 years and ended up in Bristol County Court, I won the case and the solicitor lost their job with the firm.

[Barneyp]

3 hours ago, Peanut said:

The problem, at what point is poor of shoddy workmanship so bad that you can get a remedy.  There is consumer law that covers this, and it is a well trodden path.

Here is just one example of the advice available, but relating to building work:

https://www.confused.com/home-insurance/guides/how-to-deal-with-shoddy-workmanship

The principal is the same, but in this case, you will need to show that the boatyard failed to install the engine properly, and that the mounts are likely to fail or cause damage due to being wrongly installed or alligned,  They were contracted to do a proper job, and it has now come to light that they didn't.  Rose, as a consumer, would not have had the technical knowledge to know this, and relied on their professional service.

She needs someone to help her through this,

typo

 

The OP could go down the poor workmanship route, just because there hasn't been a total failure yet doesn't mean there won't be in the future (the engine and its mounts should last for considerably more than 2 years), also the lack of a complete failure doesn't mean that excess wear hasn't been put on some components by the incorrect installation.

 

Alternatively the OP could just make the point that the company was paid to install the engines in accordance with the manufacturers instructions, if there is a statement from the manufacturer saying it has not been then it is an open and shut case, they didn't do what they were paid to do.

If what they did is "as good", "ok" "good enough" or even "better" doesn't matter, they broke the contract or agreement by not doing what they were paid to do.

 

I agree that nothing in small claims court is certain and can take time. But putting in a claim isn't that expensive and may make the boatyard make an offer. 

 

Also the OP paid for a brand new engine and professional installation, I'm not sure I'd be happy with some of suggestions being made on this thread, it would feel like a bit of a bodge job.

 

In the end it is for the OP to decide if they have the energy and ability to put in a claim.

[LadyG]

I've flicked through this thread, and it's difficult. One has to be pragmatic. First thing is to find a respected engineer in this field and get him to assess the problem, with a clear written report as to what is required to get this sorted, ie installed according to manufacturer's instruction.

This report, in outline should be sent to the boatyard, giving them the opportunity to repair to spec. This would mean OP to cover the survey cost, but he could then attempt to recover that cost in small claims. He can ask for this payment at any stage, though it's not likely he will get it.

You note that I have not recommended the boatyard get the full report, only the essentials, this is because you don't want the boatyard to have all your ammunition in his hand, in case you end up going to court. Other than that, I would think that keeping your intentions transparent, to emphasise that you are not going away and that a bodge fix will not satisfy you.

I hope you get satisfaction, it's very difficult, as the boatyard will not make it easy for OP, in my experience.

When looking for an engineer to write a report you need to be upfront with the story to date. 

Keep a diary of every communication. I use email communications to confirm any conversation.

 

 

 

Edited January 4, 2023 by LadyG

[matty40s]

1 hour ago, LadyG said:

I've flicked through this thread, and it's difficult. One has to be pragmatic. First thing is to find a respected engineer in this field and get him to assess the problem, with a clear written report as to what is required to get this sorted, ie installed according to manufacturer's instruction.

 

It's not difficult at all.

The engine mount has been installed against installation instructions.

[Higgs]

There is a shortage of finances involved here. Most professional opinions in writing and signed won't be free. As much as it sticks in the craw to suggest, I'd cut my losses and continue to use the boat and engine as is, and save to get the repair done asap. Learn from the experience and possibly mention, if not already done, where not to go when having an engine installed. It's all frustrating to deal with, but dealing with the problems of getting satisfaction can add to an already bad day. 

 

 

[Tony Brooks]

9 hours ago, blackrose said:

 

So can't the orientation of the mounts or spacers be changed, or the mounts themselves be changed? I just think the hassle and costs of doing some comparatively minor remedial work may well work out less hassle overall than taking legal action. But that's just me, the OP is obviously free to choose their own course of action.

 

The OP says the mounts are thrust sensitive so yes they could simply be twisted through 90 degrees BUT then they won't fit onto the spacer pieces, the pieces look too short. If the spacer is twisted through 90 degrees as well then it looks as if they will only haver s few mm overlapping the inner edge of the bed. I don't think that degree of cantilever trying to support a vibrating engine being supported by a single run of weld will be satisfactory so to twist the mount through 90 degrees needs a much larger modification that four weld runs.

 

I notice that the engine foot is supported a long way up the mount stud so a suitable thick and wide piece of steel could be welded across each bed with a suitable cantilever and then the mounting block welded to that. The advantage of that is that it is fairly simple and it brings the foot down the stud closer to the mount.

[Tony Brooks]

9 minutes ago, Higgs said:

There is a shortage of finances involved here. Most professional opinions in writing and signed won't be free. As much as it sticks in the craw to suggest, I'd cut my losses and continue to use the boat and engine as is, and save to get the repair done asap. Learn from the experience and possibly mention, if not already done, where not to go when having an engine installed. It's all frustrating to deal with, but dealing with the problems of getting satisfaction can add to an already bad day.

 

I agree with that, it is a pragmatic way forward. If it has done two years without a problem it is likely to do far more. Although if the blocks are really held down with just the one bolt (as it looks they might be in the photo) then those four runs of weld might be a good idea.

 

I have been thinking about the RCR bod talking dire consequences of the prop hitting something. That would tend to cause the engine to try to twist on its mounts and from the info given I think the rear mounts would resist that better the way they are mounted than if they were correct. Just look at the rubber section in the sketch. However, that brings us back to whether each mount is effectively secured by a single boly to the bed or not.

[Higgs]

3 minutes ago, Tony Brooks said:

 

I agree with that, it is a pragmatic way forward. If it has done two years without a problem it is likely to do far more. Although if the blocks are really held down with just the one bolt (as it looks they might be in the photo) then those four runs of weld might be a good idea.

 

I have been thinking about the RCR bod talking dire consequences of the prop hitting something. That would tend to cause the engine to try to twist on its mounts and from the info given I think the rear mounts would resist that better the way they are mounted than if they were correct. Just look at the rubber section in the sketch. However, that brings us back to whether each mount is effectively secured by a single boly to the bed or not.

 

I'm no expert on these things, but I'd have a solid weld done on the box section and possibly some triangular bracing plates below the overhanging part. Just a thought. 

 

 

[Tracy D'arth]

If its run for 2 years without failure I would carry on. Suing is only for people with enough money that they can afford to lose.

Though good the Small Claims Court is not going to be of help if the OP has to get lots of professional help and reports and make the repairs before claiming.

The court will not accept estimates but only invoices for completed repairs.

[LadyG]

56 minutes ago, matty40s said:

It's not difficult at all.

The engine mount has been installed against installation instructions.

I mean it is difficult to get it sorted if the boatyard are intransigent, which they likely will be. See above.

@Tracy D'arth

Edited January 4, 2023 by LadyG

[LadyG]

17 minutes ago, LadyG said:

I mean it is difficult to get it sorted if the boatyard are intransigent, which they likely will be. See above.

@Tracy D'arth

I did write a two paragraph essay about my experiences with two instances where I was in the right but had to walk away, finance and stress involved.

One refused to give me the name of her insurance company, and as I predicted early on with her, it became acrimonious, as she refused to bear responsibility.

The other instance, I had to sack the first solicitor when selling my house, the whole mess was discovered by the second solicitor, but by that time it had to be left undisturbed in case the buyer got wind of it! 

Each cost me at least £3000 in lost money. At the time I asked the house solicitor company for £5000 compensation, that was the level that I would have felt reasonable. Of course they denied responsibility.

Edited January 4, 2023 by LadyG

[pearley]

Good luck in getting an independent engineer who is prepared to put his opinion in writing. Verbal yes, but in writing and prepared to stand up in court?

[Arthur Marshall]

1 hour ago, LadyG said:

I did write a two paragraph essay about my experiences with two instances where I was in the right but had to walk away, finance and stress involved.

One refused to give me the name of her insurance company, and as I predicted early on with her, it became acrimonious, as she refused to bear responsibility.

The other instance, I had to sack the first solicitor when selling my house, the whole mess was discovered by the second solicitor, but by that time it had to be left undisturbed in case the buyer got wind of it! 

Each cost me at least £3000 in lost money. At the time I asked the house solicitor company for £5000 compensation, that was the level that I would have felt reasonable. Of course they denied responsibility.

My house sale purchase solicitor did the job so badly that when I came to sell it five years later it turned out I hadn't finished buying it. The boatyard installing my self draing deck installed it so it drained into the boat instead of the canal, and fitted a prop tube not properly sealed so it failed and leaked water in, fast. The guy who refitted the gearbox left half the bolts out of the flexible coupling and didn't tighten the few he bothered with. The engineer who fitted a new leakoff pipe set it to rub against the rockers so it wore through into a massive hole in a week. The one who fitted a new one set them so the rocker box covers wouldn't fit. The RCR guy who came for a gearbox problem took one look, said he didn't understand Listers and went home. The electrician who rewired the engine room (a BSC examiner) did it so badly it failed the next inspection. The guy who rebuilt the engine to cure a massive oil leak left a gasket out so left me a new leak instead. All these guys came recommended and with good reputations.

Plenty more examples over the last thirty years. I now expect every job I can't do myself to have to be done at least twice, and paid for accordingly. Narrowboating is, really, a cottage industry and the art of the bodge is crucial, probably because most of us have little money and want jobs done as cheap as possible and as fast as possible. The 2 out if 3 rule applies - good, fast, cheap. All boats are different, so a yard will try to do their best bearing in mind the limits of their time, experience and competence and your ability to pay. Really, all you can do is shrug and get the latest bodge fixed to your satisfaction while bearing in mind that every single engineer who comes out will criticise the previous one's work.

[Alan de Enfield]

6 minutes ago, pearley said:

Good luck in getting an independent engineer who is prepared to put his opinion in writing. Verbal yes, but in writing and prepared to stand up in court?

 

 

They are generally called 'Expert Witnesses' and cost £1000's per day.

[Tony Brooks]

12 minutes ago, pearley said:

Good luck in getting an independent engineer who is prepared to put his opinion in writing. Verbal yes, but in writing and prepared to stand up in court?

 

Personally, if my understanding of the situation and facts stands up to inspection I am so appalled at this I would be happy to stand up in court and also give my opinion in writing, but I am not sure the court would consider me qualified enough to be considered an expert. Then there would be a question of how I would get to the boat to inspect it and then to the court. If it is in London it would have to be by public transport. If not in London or other congestion/pollution charge area Even at HMRC rates travelling any distance by car would soon mount up so doing it just for expenses is likely to cost a fair bit. If the OP is short of funds I agree with others, a court case is not the way to go, the best has to be made of a bad job ad once again, four runs of weld will probably be the cheapest way.

[Laurie Booth]

19 minutes ago, Arthur Marshall said:

My house sale purchase solicitor did the job so badly that when I came to sell it five years later it turned out I hadn't finished buying it. The boatyard installing my self draing deck installed it so it drained into the boat instead of the canal, and fitted a prop tube not properly sealed so it failed and leaked water in, fast. The guy who refitted the gearbox left half the bolts out of the flexible coupling and didn't tighten the few he bothered with. The engineer who fitted a new leakoff pipe set it to rub against the rockers so it wore through into a massive hole in a week. The one who fitted a new one set them so the rocker box covers wouldn't fit. The RCR guy who came for a gearbox problem took one look, said he didn't understand Listers and went home. The electrician who rewired the engine room (a BSC examiner) did it so badly it failed the next inspection. The guy who rebuilt the engine to cure a massive oil leak left a gasket out so left me a new leak instead. All these guys came recommended and with good reputations.

Plenty more examples over the last thirty years. I now expect every job I can't do myself to have to be done at least twice, and paid for accordingly. Narrowboating is, really, a cottage industry and the art of the bodge is crucial, probably because most of us have little money and want jobs done as cheap as possible and as fast as possible. The 2 out if 3 rule applies - good, fast, cheap. All boats are different, so a yard will try to do their best bearing in mind the limits of their time, experience and competence and your ability to pay. Really, all you can do is shrug and get the latest bodge fixed to your satisfaction while bearing in mind that every single engineer who comes out will criticise the previous one's work.

At least the RCR man was honest and I assume you were not charged by RCR.

[Up-Side-Down]

I think the answers to your problem can be distilled from the range of comments and observations above, Rosie. Pragmatism is the key, however. 

 

I've been involved with a very similar situation, even down to it being a Beta engine, although the level of incompetence with the engine installation (at the boatyard of an 'approved' Beta agent) was far greater than in your experience. In fact it beggared belief and the report I compiled for Trading Standards makes extraordinary reading – (looked at it only last week by a strange coincidence as the boat has just come up for resale).

 

If you want to PM me I can give you an idea of what Beta's reaction will be and how you might employ pragmatism and the engineering wisdom of this forum to your situation.

[Tracy D'arth]

New member, won't have enough posts to send you a PM I think.

[LadyG]

13 minutes ago, Tracy D'arth said:

New member, won't have enough posts to send you a PM I think.

It's only about ten posts, he can just post some rubbish, like wot we all do from time to time! Favourite beers, holidays from hell.

Edited January 4, 2023 by LadyG

[Jon57]

1 hour ago, Arthur Marshall said:

My house sale purchase solicitor did the job so badly that when I came to sell it five years later it turned out I hadn't finished buying it. The boatyard installing my self draing deck installed it so it drained into the boat instead of the canal, and fitted a prop tube not properly sealed so it failed and leaked water in, fast. The guy who refitted the gearbox left half the bolts out of the flexible coupling and didn't tighten the few he bothered with. The engineer who fitted a new leakoff pipe set it to rub against the rockers so it wore through into a massive hole in a week. The one who fitted a new one set them so the rocker box covers wouldn't fit. The RCR guy who came for a gearbox problem took one look, said he didn't understand Listers and went home. The electrician who rewired the engine room (a BSC examiner) did it so badly it failed the next inspection. The guy who rebuilt the engine to cure a massive oil leak left a gasket out so left me a new leak instead. All these guys came recommended and with good reputations.

Plenty more examples over the last thirty years. I now expect every job I can't do myself to have to be done at least twice, and paid for accordingly. Narrowboating is, really, a cottage industry and the art of the bodge is crucial, probably because most of us have little money and want jobs done as cheap as possible and as fast as possible. The 2 out if 3 rule applies - good, fast, cheap. All boats are different, so a yard will try to do their best bearing in mind the limits of their time, experience and competence and your ability to pay. Really, all you can do is shrug and get the latest bodge fixed to your satisfaction while bearing in mind that every single engineer who comes out will criticise the previous one's work.

With luck like that ,don’t do the lottery.😱😱

[Up-Side-Down]

29 minutes ago, Tracy D'arth said:

New member, won't have enough posts to send you a PM I think.

Thought that restriction had been lifted

[magnetman]

37 minutes ago, Up-Side-Down said:

I think the answers to your problem can be distilled from the range of comments and observations above, Rosie. Pragmatism is the key, however. 

 

I've been involved with a very similar situation, even down to it being a Beta engine, although the level of incompetence with the engine installation (at the boatyard of an 'approved' Beta agent) was far greater than in your experience. In fact it beggared belief and the report I compiled for Trading Standards makes extraordinary reading – (looked at it only last week by a strange coincidence as the boat has just come up for resale).

 

If you want to PM me I can give you an idea of what Beta's reaction will be and how you might employ pragmatism and the engineering wisdom of this forum to your situation.

When I put a new Beta marine engine in a boat they had the option of "special feet" because they known their engines are not a match for previous installs. They made the feet up as needed and engine went straight onto the existing bearers. I'm rather surprised a boatyard wouldn't advise on this. I suppose it may have been an advantage of ordering the engine in person and getting to talk to the Beta people at their workshop.

 

I wonder if they might use this as a way to point out that the problem could have been steered away from had someone had the diligence to look at what they offer as options with new engines.