seeking advice - small claims for boatyard error?

[Jon57]

1 hour ago, Alan de Enfield said:

 

 

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

It’s all free on here. I’m all for what is right and wrong. But sometimes you have to take a hit and move on. Life’s too short and not worth the hassle. But don’t get mad get even plenty of ways to go about that if your that way inclined.

[Tony Brooks]

1 minute ago, Jon57 said:

It’s all free on here. I’m all for what is right and wrong. But sometimes you have to take a hit and move on. Life’s too short and not worth the hassle. But don’t get mad get even plenty of ways to go about that if your that way inclined.

 

Yes, if the OP decides not to pursue the court action then name names, so others can avoid the bodgers and pass the word on.

[magnetman]

Would there be any harm drafting a letter of intention to use the small claims court and sending it off to the boatyard? Might not come to anything but for the price of a recorded delivery envelope I can't see that anything negative could come of it.

 

Even if you have no intention of actually claiming it can't be any harm to suggest you do. Or maybe it can. I don't know really. Maybe they then take YOU to court. That could be a bit technical I suppose.

[Jon57]

1 minute ago, magnetman said:

Would there be any harm drafting a letter of intention to use the small claims court and sending it off to the boatyard? Might not come to anything but for the price of a recorded delivery envelope I can't see that anything negative could come of it.

 

Even if you have no intention of actually claiming it can't be any harm to suggest you do. Or maybe it can. I don't know really. Maybe they then take YOU to court. That could be a bit technical I suppose.

Even send a link from this thread.👍

[MtB]

Just now, magnetman said:

Would there be any harm drafting a letter of intention to use the small claims court and sending it off to the boatyard? Might not come to anything but for the price of a recorded delivery envelope I can't see that anything negative could come of it.

 

Even if you have no intention of actually claiming it can't be any harm to suggest you do. Or maybe it can. I don't know really. Maybe they then take YOU to court. That could be a bit technical I suppose.

 

 

It certainly clears one's mind about all the issues, composing a 'Letter Before Action". Not a five minute job either, drawing together all the various facts, pieces of paper etc and outlining the bones of one's case in dispassionate writing. Possibly a five hour job rather than five minute, done well. 

 

 

[Jon57]

1 minute ago, MtB said:

 

 

It certainly clears one's mind about all the issues, composing a 'Letter Before Action". Not a five minute job either, drawing together all the various facts, pieces of paper etc and outlining the bones of one's case in dispassionate writing. Possibly a five hour job rather than five minute, done well. 

 

 

5 days in my case 🤣

[magnetman]

4 years and counting for my latest claim.

Not boat related though.

[MtB]

1 minute ago, Jon57 said:

5 days in my case 🤣

 

Lol yes, I can imagine that totally. 

 

Had I written five days myself though, there would have been an avalanche of posts saying why so slow, it can be done in less....

[Tony Brooks]

If the OP decides to write a letter it would be all too easy to say something, based on comment here, that may not be true. We are only going by the photo that does not show all round details. For instance, if that packing piece is welded in place it may be more defendable than if it is secured, together with the mount, by just one long bolt. I would also like to see the identifying characters on the mount so I could seek the maker's data sheet.

 

I think the OP should give us an idea of the location in case a knowledgeable member is willing to have a good look and report back to us. If within about 30 miles of Reading I would happily take a look and provide a written report without charge.

[magnetman]

1 minute ago, Tony Brooks said:

If the OP decides to write a letter it would be all too easy to say something, based on comment here, that may not be true. We are only going by the photo that does not show all round details. For instance, if that packing piece is welded in place it may be more defendable than if it is secured, together with the mount, by just one long bolt. I would also like to see the identifying characters on the mount so I could seek the maker's data sheet.

 

I think the OP should give us an idea of the location in case a knowledgeable member is willing to have a good look and report back to us. If within about 30 miles of Reading I would happily take a look and provide a written report without charge.

 

I can't remember if it was mentioned whether the person with the problem is daggers drawn with the boatyard.

 

If they aren't then perhaps a polite request for the installation to be revisited might work. If not then a simple letter pointing out dissatisfaction and intention to pursue the matter through the courts may be a worthwhile initial step. I don't see why you would need to go into fine details at this stage. Just put the ball in their court so to speak.

[Barneyp]

2 hours ago, Alan de Enfield said:

 

 

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

The OP did mention that the engine manufacturer had said the install was wrong, they may be prepared to put that in writing for free as it protects their position if something goes wrong.

 

And I agree with what others have said about making a claim being a long protracted process, some will enjoy and get some satisfaction from pursuing a claim, for others it can be soul destroying.Think long and hard before starting a claim.

 

I think the OP said she has already approached the boat yard and they don't want to do anything so a detailed formal letter would be the next step.

Edited January 4, 2023 by Barneyp
Spelling

[Tony Brooks]

Just now, magnetman said:

 

I can't remember if it was mentioned whether the person with the problem is daggers drawn with the boatyard.

 

If they aren't then perhaps a polite request for the installation to be revisited might work. If not then a simple letter pointing out dissatisfaction and intention to pursue the matter through the courts may be a worthwhile initial step. I don't see why you would need to go into fine details at this stage. Just put the ball in their court so to speak.

 

What if things are not as they seem? What if the mounts are not as shown in the diagram. Without some sort of informed confirmation of the extent of the apparent bad practice the OP could end up with egg on their face. At present, it seems it is the opinion of an RCR chap verse the people who did the job, with the op, somewhat poorly informed in the middle.

[Barneyp]

21 minutes ago, Tony Brooks said:

 

What if things are not as they seem? What if the mounts are not as shown in the diagram. Without some sort of informed confirmation of the extent of the apparent bad practice the OP could end up with egg on their face. At present, it seems it is the opinion of an RCR chap verse the people who did the job, with the op, somewhat poorly informed in the middle.

Quote below the original post, it's not just RCR who have said it's wrong.

 

 

"now, a couple of years later, an RCR engineer on an unrelated callout advised that the engine had been incorrectly installed as the mounts were the wrong way round and not sufficiently supported - I'll pop a photo in to show - and advising not to run the engine extensively until this problem was resolved. I thought I'd left my breakdown days behind me! Subsequently I've sought second- and third- and fourth- opinions,

from boaters, engineers, mechanics, the even the engine manufacturers, who so far all concur - this is an insufficient and unsafe instal. 

 

The only ones to vehemently deny this are the installing boatyard. "

 

[Tony Brooks]

29 minutes ago, Barneyp said:

Quote below the original post, it's not just RCR who have said it's wrong.

 

 

"now, a couple of years later, an RCR engineer on an unrelated callout advised that the engine had been incorrectly installed as the mounts were the wrong way round and not sufficiently supported - I'll pop a photo in to show - and advising not to run the engine extensively until this problem was resolved. I thought I'd left my breakdown days behind me! Subsequently I've sought second- and third- and fourth- opinions,

from boaters, engineers, mechanics, the even the engine manufacturers, who so far all concur - this is an insufficient and unsafe instal. 

 

The only ones to vehemently deny this are the installing boatyard. "

 

 

OK, fine, encourage the OP to go forward with just word of mouth which we do not know is based on a full physical inspection, verbal descriptions or the photo we have all seem. So far the only person we KNOW has seen the boat was the RCR chap, the rest we have no idea about. I can not do that unless they decide to give up tackling the people who did the job, in that case there can be no dispute of the facts.

[dmr]

Did the op request a top job or tell the boatyard to get the engine in and running as cheaply and quickly as possible? or might the boatyard have somehow "reasonably" concluded that this was what was required. This is why legal action could be difficult.

Maybe send a formal letter warning of legal action, but if the yard does not respond then cut your losses.

Is it a yard where the company own/properly rent the yard, is it it just a couple of freelance/self employed individuals renting the yard on a casual basis, or working in somebody else's yard. If the "company" concerned really has no proper assets then they can easily declare themselves bankrupt/wind up the company and then start again in a slightly different format. It happens all the time. It only takes half an evening on the internet and 30 quid to set up a company.

Did they have proper steel fabrication facilities and skills, or is this maybe the best that they could do?  Little point in taking it back for remedial work if they are not clever enough to fix it. 😀

 

Maybe get the boat fixed elewhere and send them the bill, but again not easy, the cheaper boat fixers (who you want) might not be happy about this and paying a "big" yard big money is a risk 'cus you might not get it back.

 

There is one case of a dispute where the boatyard deliberately wrecked the boat they were working on out of anger and spite.

[Barneyp]

16 minutes ago, Tony Brooks said:

 

OK, fine, encourage the OP to go forward with just word of mouth which we do not know is based on a full physical inspection, verbal descriptions or the photo we have all seem. So far the only person we KNOW has seen the boat was the RCR chap, the rest we have no idea about. I can not do that unless they decide to give up tackling the people who did the job, in that case there can be no dispute of the facts.

If there has only been one physical inspection by the RCR mechanic I agree that they to get another one from some one they trust.

I was just pointing out that the OP says they have got other opinions, how many (if any) included a physical inspection we don't know.

IF multiple other people have already inspected it there is little to gained by one more inspection 

[Jon57]

1 minute ago, Barneyp said:

If there has only been one physical inspection by the RCR mechanic I agree that they to get another one from some one they trust.

I was just pointing out that the OP says they have got other opinions, how many (if any) included a physical inspection we don't know.

IF multiple other people have already inspected it there is little to gained by one more inspection 

Unless they carry some qualifying status/experience its of no use to the poster. They don't seem to responding to the many helpful replies. Hopefully they will be in touch has and when with an update as to whether they are willing to move forward with this 

 

[agg221]

I have once started a 'legal' route, with the initial letter. It was not related to boats at all - I had sent three watches away for service and one came back serviced, one they said they couldn't do and the third which had been in full working order had had bits lost and the hands stuck back on the dial with superglue! I sent them a cheque for the work on the watch which had been serviced and itemised the issues with the third one, the cost to rectify and the reduction in value, from which I derived a figure. I indicated that I expected to hear from them with that figure, otherwise I would have no option but to pursue matters more formally. There are some good templates for writing such letters on the Citizens Advice Bureau website, which I used. I was sent the money, and payment for the serviced watch was waived. I would still rather have not had the damage, but it came out OK. Would I have take it further - probably.

 

The issue is that my watches could be working/not working, sat in a safe/sat on my wrist and it would make no difference. I had time. The OP does not have time. Pragmatically, the installation has held up for two years, looking at the positioning of the one visible mount the engine would not drop if the bolt failed and the likelihood of all four bolts simultaneously failing is low. It could be argued that keeping an eye on it and changing the bolts every 2yrs to ensure they do not reach fatigue life would be an adequate bodge - I would not argue it was a satisfactory outcome but in terms of finance and stress it is the lowest impact approach.

 

I am pretty sure I could come up with a bolt-in solution which met the manufacturer's installation guidelines. I am pretty sure this could be done without taking the engine out, or requiring realignment. That would make it a very low cost solution. Other very low cost solutions have been offered involving simple weld runs in-situ. Whilst morally the OP should not have to pay to remedy the installation, pragmatically that may end up being the best course of action if they feel the need for a fix now, rather than feeling confident in the option of changing the mounting bolts periodically or up-rating them a bit to increase confidence.

 

I fear the moral victory may end up being too slow and too expensive to be viable in this case - coincidentally a position I found myself in when we bought our boat to a lesser extent. I ended up writing off the costs but am happy to share my experience with anyone who may be interested as the seller continues to sell other boats.

 

Alec

[Tony Brooks]

 

 

35 minutes ago, agg221 said:

am pretty sure I could come up with a bolt-in solution which met the manufacturer's installation guidelines. I am pretty sure this could be done without taking the engine out, or requiring realignment. That would make it a very low cost solution. Other very low cost solutions have been offered involving simple weld runs in-situ. Whilst morally the OP should not have to pay to remedy the installation, pragmatically that may end up being the best course of action if they feel the need for a fix now, rather than feeling confident in the option of changing the mounting bolts periodically or up-rating them a bit to increase confidence.

 

I fear the moral victory may end up being too slow and too expensive to be viable in this case - coincidentally a position I found myself in when we bought our boat to a lesser extent. I ended up writing off the costs but am happy to share my experience with anyone who may be interested as the seller continues to sell other boats.

 

Well said

[LadyG]

3 hours ago, Barneyp said:

The OP did mention that the engine manufacturer had said the install was wrong, they may be prepared to put that in writing for free as it protects their position if something goes wrong.

 

And I agree with what others have said about making a claim being a long protracted process, some will enjoy and get some satisfaction from pursuing a claim, for others it can be soul destroying.Think long and hard before starting a claim.

 

I think the OP said she has already approached the boat yard and they don't want to do anything so a detailed formal letter would be the next step.

I don't think it will come to the need for an Expert Witness, who are used in instances where considerable legal or financial action may be envisaged. As far as I am aware the small claims court is designed to  avoid the expense of  Expert Witnesses and Barristers.

I don't see much difference between a surveyor issuing a survey in writing and a report on an engine installation by a surveyor. The fact that it is not installed according to manufacturer advice, well thats pretty damming, and having someone actually issuing a report is added value.

Edited January 4, 2023 by LadyG

[enigmatic]

Are the mounts themselves manufactured by Beta or by some third party like R&D?

 

If not Beta themselves, I assume the mount manufacturer is another party that would have an opinion on the correctness of the installation (and again, may be prepared to offer a professional opinion that the installation is incorrect). 

[magnetman]

Engine mounts is a really good point. 

 

Some yars ago I had a boat with a little lister LPW2 and the engine mounts were bottoming out and making a lot of noise. Boat was most likely from the 70s so over 30 yars old at the time.

I found out who the mount maker was and phoned them up. They sent out new rubbers free of charge in the post for all three mounts. I was well impressed. 

 

Looking at the pictures I have an idea that the mounts used are the same ones the original (BMC?) engine was mounted on. Beta marine do supply flexible mounts but depending on the circumstances they may not actually get used in the installation job. This would be worth checking. 

 

 

[enigmatic]

Just now, magnetman said:

Some yars ago I had a boat with a little lister LPW2 and the engine mounts were bottoming out and making a lot of noise. Boat was most likely from the 70s so over 30 yars old at the time.

I found out who the mount maker was and phoned them up. They sent out new rubbers free of charge in the post for all three mounts. I was well impressed. 

 

Wow, I didn't think anyone would do that outside of warranty, especially not for a 30 year old mount which is clearly just wear and tear and possibly oil damage. Might have to take my own advice and figure out who made my own 24ish year old mounts to ring them up!

[magnetman]

I was amazed. It was actually 4 mounts not 3 but I did get the inserts and fitted two of them into the noisy mounts. It sorted the problem. The other two rubber inserts are probably still on the boat. 

 

This will have been in 2008 as I only had that particular boat for a short time. 

Edited January 7, 2023 by magnetman

[magnetman]

Just had a look on my email account and it was AVA mountings in that particular case. Very good customer service.