Anyone successfully sued a surveyor ?

[Guest]

3 minutes ago, debbbbs said:

Yes, I can prove ABC owned the boat. It is an ex Canalboat Club boat. ABC now own and manage all Canalboat club boats and have done so for many years. I know this because I have been a Canalboat member for 17 years. The fees paid are supposed to be used to maintain and upgrade the fleet of timeshare boats. The boat we bought was clearly not being maintained, spray was used to hide the odour.

 

 

 

Looking at how long you have owned it though I think you will struggle to enforce your consumer rights.

[debbbbs]

1 minute ago, M_JG said:

 

Looking at how long you have owned it though I think you will struggle to enforce your consumer rights.

When we purchased the boat from ABC in Worcester in October 2021, we took the boat to ABC in Alvechurch. We immediately spoke with the manager  at the marina about the shower. They were busy with other boats and he said they would be able to do something in the spring.  That manager then left. 3 subsequent managers at the marina, and still unable to get them to do the shower we started to look elsewhere.

In October 22 we moved to another marina. In March 2023 we found someone to do the work in June. Hence the timeline.

[Guest]

2 minutes ago, debbbbs said:

When we purchased the boat from ABC in Worcester in October 2021, we took the boat to ABC in Alvechurch. We immediately spoke with the manager  at the marina about the shower. They were busy with other boats and he said they would be able to do something in the spring.  That manager then left. 3 subsequent managers at the marina, and still unable to get them to do the shower we started to look elsewhere.

In October 22 we moved to another marina. In March 2023 we found someone to do the work in June. Hence the timeline.

 

I would say you need an initial chat with a professional solicitor even though you don't rate them.

 

 

[Arthur Marshall]

17 minutes ago, magnetman said:

Is this the boat which sunk? 

Well, it only really sank once over 30 years ago when it still had a deep foredeck that drained through a pipe into the engine bilge, I got flu, it rained all December, auto pump failed as they do, the bilge filled up and it sank as far as it could on the mooring, which wasn't really very far. It just sat down on the mud and sulked. I got a phone call Xmas day and by the time I got there a mate had got a pump into the bilge and refloated me. About five years ago it needed resteeling again (it's probably a 1950s or very early 60s boat) and water started coming in through a hole in the engine bay. That was due to a bit of rubbish steeling at the previous rebottoming in the '90s. We stuck a pad and a brick on the hole and chugged down to Stoke Boats who glued a new boat to its lower half, more or less.

It never really sank in any dramatic sense, just glugged a bit. Old boats do that sort of thing, you expect it, sort of. Never any water inside the boat itself. I keep thinking I've had it 30 years, but it's 35 now. Bought it in 1988. Seven grand, it cost me. Got it out of Exchange & Mart.

[LadyG]

Sry, I thought the OP bought the boat from the hire company, and that they knew about the problem. Check the paperwork.

[Tony Brooks]

8 hours ago, LadyG said:

Sry, I thought the OP bought the boat from the hire company, and that they knew about the problem. Check the paperwork.

 

You can bet the ABC Worcester Ltd. were acting as brokers for their subsidiary, the Canalboat Club that is probably a Limited Company. If not then ABC were pretty silley.

[MtB]

1 hour ago, Tony Brooks said:

 

You can bet the ABC Worcester Ltd. were acting as brokers for their subsidiary, the Canalboat Club that is probably a Limited Company. If not then ABC were pretty silley.

 

But would that not still mean it was a business sale? Just that ABC Worcester Ltd were agents for the underlying business selling the boat? So the correct target for any legal action would be Canalboat Club? 

 

Or is Canalboat club something other than a Ltd Co hiring and selling boats?

 

 

 

[Tony Brooks]

5 minutes ago, MtB said:

 

But would that not still mean it was a business sale? Just that ABC Worcester Ltd were agents for the underlying business selling the boat? So the correct target for any legal action would be Canalboat Club? 

 

Or is Canalboat club something other than a Ltd Co hiring and selling boats?

 

 

 

 

I was just trying to point out that one can not assume that ABC and Canalboat Club are the same legal entity. If they are not, then the OP would probably have (a very weak case) against Canalboat Club ad not ABC. In the same way that a broker is only an agent for the vendor.

 

My view is don't waste money on litigation, either buy a Portapotty or get the side of the tank welded up.  The expensive option would be to fit a new tank, but there is a very good chance that the hull forms part of the tank, only a good inspection can show if it is or not.

[MtB]

1 minute ago, Tony Brooks said:

 

I was just trying to point out that one can not assume that ABC and Canalboat Club are the same legal entity. If they are not, then the OP would probably have (a very weak case) against Canalboat Club ad not ABC. In the same way that a broker is only an agent for the vendor.

 

My view is don't waste money on litigation, either buy a Portapotty or get the side of the tank welded up.  The expensive option would be to fit a new tank, but there is a very good chance that the hull forms part of the tank, only a good inspection can show if it is or not.

 

 

 

Ah I see. 

 

I too would take it on the chin and just fix the problems with the boat I'd purchased. But the OP seems to be litigious in nature rather than pragmatic and practical.

 

I suspect they imagined that by getting a survey they protected themselves from buying a boat with serious problems, or if they still did they would have someone to sue for compensation, but this has turned out not to be the case. 

 

They fell for the same fib/illusion promulgated by house surveyors too. 

 

 

[tree monkey]

11 hours ago, magnetman said:

When I first got onto boats 30 yars ago I discussed this topic with a well known boat surveyor. He was cool. I know there are some {word removed}s in the industry. He was not one of them. 

He described being a boat surveyor as basically just an exercise in not getting sued. That is the main aim. The inspection of boats and production of relevant reports and giving of advice is secondary. 

 

The main thing is to not get sued. 

 

I think he was probably right. 

 

It seems wrong for a number of different reasons but this is the world we live in. 

 

 

 

In defence of surveyors in general and I'm not saying this one wasn't a muppet but the problem is people often want 100% guarantees and often that's just not possible, so the appearance of the various get out clauses.

 

I haven't written a full on 'proper' tree report for a fair few years but it would/will contain a fairly comprehensive get out clause in effect saying the trees OK (assuming it is) but shit happens and even worse shit happens when there's a storm, its the nature of the job unfortunately.

 

[Peanut]

I don't think the cost was just fixing a leak, but the cost of the clean up, ripping the interior up, cleaning, repairing damage and reinstating it all. Going to law will likely cost as much again, with no clear chance of winning. Citizens Advice is free, and may help the OP understand their situation better.

[MtB]

6 minutes ago, tree monkey said:

In defence of surveyors in general and I'm not saying this one wasn't a muppet but the problem is people often want 100% guarantees and often that's just not possible, so the appearance of the various get out clauses.

 

I haven't written a full on 'proper' tree report for a fair few years but it would/will contain a fairly comprehensive get out clause in effect saying the trees OK (assuming it is) but shit happens and even worse shit happens when there's a storm, its the nature of the job unfortunately.

 

 

I think where boats and houses are concerned, even the most diligent surveyor can look and look and look and still miss things. Hence the need for the get-out clauses. 

 

If anything, the surveyor in the OP's case seems to have rather oversold the 'peace of mind' aspect off getting a survey and failed to give due prominence (or any prominence) to the get-out clauses in the contract he struck with them to carry out the survey. So they missed those clauses. So any action the OP takes will revolve around whether or not the get-out clauses the surveyor claims to have, were validly incorporated into their particular contract. 

[blackrose]

12 hours ago, LadyG said:

A prospective purchaser should bite the bullet and when viewing the boat take a torch, take a camera, a hammer, and ask questions. 

 

What's the prospective purchaser supposed to do with the hammer? We can agree or disagree on the usefulness of surveyors, but there's no way that any sensible seller or vendor is going to let some inexperienced and unqualified Herbert loose with a hammer on their hull. Would you let anyone start hammering your hull if you were selling your boat?

 

23 minutes ago, Peanut said:

I don't think the cost was just fixing a leak, but the cost of the clean up, ripping the interior up, cleaning, repairing damage and reinstating it all. 

 

That's another reason I don't have a pump out...

24 minutes ago, tree monkey said:

 ...but shit happens and even worse shit happens 

 

Quite literally in this case.

Edited December 10, 2023 by blackrose

[GUMPY]

I thought of suing a surveyor but found that breeding flying pigs was simpler and more successful.

[Alan de Enfield]

26 minutes ago, Peanut said:

Citizens Advice is free, and may help the OP understand their situation better.

 

When I had my 'problem' I found that (once I managed to get hold of someone) the Citizens Advice were hopeless, they had absolutely no idea about maritime law (which even canal boats fall under). It is a specialist section of the law and many 'land laws' do not even apply to boats.

I found it a struggle to even find a solicitor that knew anything about boat-laws.

 

I ended up with a Barrister with Marine Law as his speciality. There are not many of them about.

 

And, to repeat my earlier post, his advice was 'you haven't got a chance against a surveyor missing things on a pre-purchase survey'.

[blackrose]

It's very difficult for people new to boats. When they come on here with tales of woe about problems with boat they've just bought, the first question they're asked is "Did you get it surveyed before you bought it?" And if the answer is no they get duly criticised and chastised. 

 

Then when they come on here and tell us about a new boat that was surveyed but that problems emerged afterwards, they get told that surveys are worthless.

 

They can't really win can they...

Edited December 10, 2023 by blackrose

[Paul C]

13 hours ago, debbbbs said:

We purchased an ex hire boat from ABC in October 2021.

...............The work would cost £6000.................

Based on his report, we negotiated a reduced price ........................

 

I'd say at this point, you did quite well out of having the survey.

 

13 hours ago, debbbbs said:

 

 This year we finally found someone to refit the bathroom. ..........What should have been a simple bathroom refit became an absolute nightmare..............

The cost so far £10k +

..............should the surveyor who was paid a lot of money be held accountable for his failure to make us aware of an incredibly expensive and upsetting problem ?

 

 

The issue isn't so much that you were ill-advised by the surveyor, but that you paid "Rolls Royce" prices for fixing an issue on an old boat. Yes, poo is stinky and some people just don't want to go near it so they get someone else to do it, but it sounds like a much more approachable DIY repair would have been to decommission the pump out, clean up as best you can (possibly repaint to give a smooth surface finish so it doesn't attract more dirt etc), then use a porta-potti or install a cassette loo instead.

[DShK]

24 minutes ago, blackrose said:

It's very difficult for people new to boats. When they come on here with tales of woe about problems with boat they've just bought, the first question they're asked is "Did you get it surveyed before you bought it?" And if the answer is no they get duly criticised and chastised. 

 

Then when they come on here and tell us about a new boat that was surveyed but that problems emerged afterwards, they get told that surveys are worthless.

 

They can't really win can they...

 

I take the view that a surveyor is basically just paying to have a mate who (potentially) knows more abouts boats than you do, for the day. 

[Arthur Marshall]

19 minutes ago, blackrose said:

It's very difficult for people new to boats. When they come on here with tales of woe about problems with boat they've just bought the first question they're asked is "Did you get it surveyed before you bought it?" And if the answer is no they get duly criticised and chastised. 

 

Then when they come on here and tell us about a new boat that was surveyed but that problems emerged afterwards, they get told that surveys are worthless.

 

They can't really win can they...

 

There is ALWAYS something wrong with a boat. Usually due to the fact that it's a rusting tin box sitting permanently in a puddle, being rained on. Factor in another integral tin box that's been full of corrosive human waste products for ten years...

[Laurie Booth]

13 hours ago, LadyG said:

As the boat was purchased from a business, it should be fit for purpose, so a small claims may be a possibility, against the vendor. Its supposed to be a fairly easy procedure, relatively informal.

Do not let a solicitor send a letter to the Company without your permission, and without agreeing on the contents, word for word as some of them are absolute fantasists. DAMHIK. They know most people expect a letter to be sent out, and a bill to be presented.

I have had two rotten solicitors who made a complete mess of things, and that includes my last house conveyance, which I don't even want to think about, what a mess was how the new solicitor described her actions/inactions. 

With small claims you don't need a solicitor. Citizens Advice do offer some legal advice.

I found small claims to be a nightmare and Citizens Advice terrible.

[tree monkey]

51 minutes ago, MtB said:

 

I think where boats and houses are concerned, even the most diligent surveyor can look and look and look and still miss things. Hence the need for the get-out clauses. 

 

If anything, the surveyor in the OP's case seems to have rather oversold the 'peace of mind' aspect off getting a survey and failed to give due prominence (or any prominence) to the get-out clauses in the contract he struck with them to carry out the survey. So they missed those clauses. So any action the OP takes will revolve around whether or not the get-out clauses the surveyor claims to have, were validly incorporated into their particular contract. 

Absolutely, it should be made clear at the outset as to the limitations of the survey.

[Paul C]

It is unlikely a newbie buyer would be able to take the boat away, get it dry-docked and start hammering/scraping at the hull. If its a surveyor on behalf of, the doors open though.......

[MtB]

12 minutes ago, Arthur Marshall said:

 

There is ALWAYS something wrong with a boat. Usually due to the fact that it's a rusting tin box sitting permanently in a puddle, being rained on. Factor in another integral tin box that's been full of corrosive human waste products for ten years...

 

Yes this is another aspect. Stuff is continuously going wrong with all boats.

 

Point is, the water in the bilge might well have been from a shower leak on the day of the survey. The OP doesn't seem to have discovered corrosion in the shit tank until about a year later. The surveyor will claim the tank was fine on the day of the survey, and only later corroded through. Which may well be what actually happened. 

 

 

 

 

[Peanut]

ABC might well claim that boats left closed up on brokerage, sometimes smell a bit musty, and so, as good brokers, they occasionally like to air them and use a little spray to freshen them up. You see, nothing to see here, move along.

[PeterF]

In terms of taking the boat owner to court, have a look at this cautionary tale of someone taking a boat builder to court over a very very poor paint job and the court siding with the builder. I know that the tale is told from one side, but it shows that it is hard to get any redress in this sort of case.

 

https://noproblem.org.uk/blog/my-day-in-court-with-collingwood-boat-builders/