Advice on survey report

[blu]

I’ve put an offer on a boat subject to pre-purchase survey. The survey is tomorrow but due to many problems - I won’t bore you with al the details - the surveyor can’t do it. The marina can only lift the boat tomorrow or in a month time.

The boat has a recent report - important details below - which already states it needs blacking. So if I go ahead with the purchase I’ll do that anyway. 

 

The marina has given me the option of lifting it tomorrow, wait for the surveyor that can come later this week, but I’ll have to pay for the crane to take it back to water if I don’t buy it. 

How does the boat report sound to you experienced boaters?

 

Base/Uxter/Side plate

Recommendation - Advisory: Externally, the vessels  plates should be thoroughly cleaned and the residual corrosion removed and checked for pitting, prior to at least two coats of a bitumastic paint system ‘blacking’ being applied to protect the base plate going forward. The use of an epoxy primer should be considered for longer term protection. 

Recommendation - Advisory: Internally, the plates should be, where access allows, scraped back and cleaned prior to further protective coatings being applied to protect against further corrosion internally. 

Recommendation - Advisory: The shower in the heads should be checked for any signs of leakage. 

 

Weed Hatch 

Recommendation - Priority: Care should be taken when removing the weed hatch lid, especially if the vessel is additionally loaded. The BSS recommendation is for 250mm freeboard above the waterline, which would require the weed hatch to be raised. • Recommendation - Advisory: The anti-cavitation plate should be re-affixed to the weed hatch lid. • Recommendation - Advisory: The weed hatch tunnel walls should be cleaned thoroughly, prior to two coats of ‘blacking’ being applied to protect the tunnel, hatch and anti-cavitation plate going forward. The use of an epoxy primer should be considered for longer term protection. • Recommendation - Advisory: Internally, the area where the weed hatch tunnel butts up against the uxter plate should be cleaned back and protected with painted coatings. • Recommendation - Advisory: Consideration should be given to creating an access point through the steering deck to allow access to the weed hatch below. 

 

Through Hull Apertures 

Recommendation - Urgent: The welded pipe on port at 10.40M should be capped off. This should b carried out by a piece of mild steel welded across the exterior or a marine grade cap fitted on the interior.
Recommendation - Priority: All through hull apertures be securely fastened to hoses using a hose clamp at either end where practically possible. • Recommendation - Priority: Where through hulls are below the recommended 250mm freeboard, hoses should be looped up to deck level to prevent down flooding. 


Thanks a lot!

[Tracy D'arth]

What is the boat?  How old? What are the steel thicknesses, baseplate, sides below gunwale, uxter plate?

Has it already been over plated? Who paid for that survey, please say its not the seller or broker?

The 250mm height for openings and weed hatch upstand is not a necessity unless it is a hire boat. How high is the weed hatch upstand above the water level now? Drains for basin-sink-shower can be lower providing the pipes are attached with no chance of falling off, no push on fittings, a swan neck higher in the boat is one way round the height discrepancy, especially with the shower waste. As long as the basin- sink top is higher and the waste pipe continuous and secure it is fine.

Grit blast and epoxy will be far superior to "blacking".

[blu]

1 minute ago, Tracy D'arth said:

What is the boat?  How old? What are the steel thicknesses, baseplate, sides below gunwale, uxter plate?

Has it already been over plated? Who paid for that survey, please say its not the seller or broker?

The 250mm height for openings and weed hatch upstand is not a necessity unless it is a hire boat. How high is the weed hatch upstand above the water level now? Drains for basin-sink-shower can be lower providing the pipes are attached with no chance of falling off, no push on fittings, a swan neck higher in the boat is one way round the height discrepancy, especially with the shower waste. As long as the basin- sink top is higher and the waste pipe continuous and secure it is fine.

Grit blast and epoxy will be far superior to "blacking".

I'm still going to have my own pre-purchase survey - I'm using this report (which was paid by the seller) just to gauge if I should wait for end of February or do it now but might have to pay extra to lift the boat back to water if I pull out.
 

To answer your specific questions:

Builder	TT Marine	Type	Traditional Stern
Fitted	Unknown	Year	1990
Length	47ft (14.3m)	Beam	6ft 10in (2.1m)

 

It hasn't been over plated
 

[zenataomm]

What type of insurance are intending to cover the boat?

Full cover or comprehensive will demand a satisfactory survey report.

[Bee]

Hmmm. Not a very thorough survey. Presumably no thickness readings? Can't really proceed without those, thickness is important.  Evidence of overplating? If there are areas of doubling then the chances are that more will soon be needed. Is the boat elderly? More than 20 - 30 years and it will need a good inspection, boats also rust from inside out so a poke around under the floor is a good idea. Repairs are a fact of life, there are plenty of commercials still trading in France built in the 1960's but repairs have been done when needed, steel boats are repairable so long as its worth while. EDIT Ah, there are thickness readings, It has lots of metal left.

Edited January 30 by Bee

[Tracy D'arth]

It would seem to be an odd mix of steel plates, for a 1990's hull, was probably 3/8" (9mm) base plate and only 5mm sides. 

Not much serious erosion but insurers are now demanding at least 4mm all over for comprehensive insurance.

I would of expected the shell to be 10-6-4.  TT Marine not known as one of the best shell builders, ex hire boat?

The side plate below water is the worse.  A grit blast and epoxy treatment should stop further metal loss, possible pit welding in the worst places first.

Edited January 30 by Tracy D'arth

[blu]

So hard to make a decision!

 

Thank you all for your input

[Alan de Enfield]

1 hour ago, blu said:

So hard to make a decision!

 

If the survey is more than 24 hours old it is worthless

If the survey was commissioned by the seller it is wothless to a buyer.

With side thicknesses down to 4.2mm you will be making the insurers a 'bit twitchy'.

 

If you want the boat wait until you can have your own survey done on it.

[MtB]

1 hour ago, blu said:

So hard to make a decision!

 

 

No it isn't. You want the boat, so buy it. 

 

Once you have it deal with whatever problems it has. 

 

 

[MtB]

8 hours ago, Alan de Enfield said:

If the survey is more than 24 hours old it is worthless

 

 

For balance, in my opinion the above is a pointless and unhelpful assertion.

 

A survey 24 hours old is worth almost the same as one completed today. Surveys degrade in usefulness as time passes, as the the boat continues to corrode and to be used and to be further worn out. So a survey a year old is of less usefulness than a survey 24 hours old, and more use than a survey five years old. 

 

There is a lot hysteria posted around surveys in my opinion. So what if a survey done today is perfect? Great, buy the boat but bear in mind next week or next year the corrosion may have taken a grip, the stern gear developed serious problems and the windows all started leaking. Therefore it is still best not to buy this boat. This is the logical conclusion of using surveys as a tool to detemine whether to buy a boat. 

 

The reality is, boats degrade with time and with use. A survey gives a useful snapshot of condition at a given point in time, and if having 4.1mm of steel in a few places present to keep the water out scares someone, I'd suggest boating perhaps isn't for them. Next year, than measurement could be 4.1mm, 0.1mm, or possibly even 4.3mm if a different ultrasound thickness reader is used! (Or even than same one with new batteries and/or recalibrated). 

 

Point is, boats need continuous running repairs and maintenance. Yoiu can't stop it by getting surveys. 

 

 

 

 

[LadyG]

The newby purchaser with no experience to allow him to make his own judgement has a quandary.

Looking briefly at the report, I wonder if the reporter actually examined the vessel, its not anything like a survey you would get from your own surveyor, if he was competent.

Each person has their own risk averse/converse status.

I bought a boat that had been epoxied from new, and the hull was inspected by me out of the water.

My instruction to vendor was to coat with epoxy, but he just took the cash and had it launched, that's what people do!

Any boat in the water with a rusting waterline, I would have it out, pressure washed, and if no surveyor available, I'd be down there with a torch, a  wire brush, a hammer, and go over it myself. You can buy cheapo instruments for the hull thickness (?reliablity?), but the owner might well object if you want to scrape off the blacking without restoring it using same stuff.

EDIT, I see there are measurements now posted so no particular difficulties deciding.

Pre purchase nerves are normal.

 

Edited January 31 by LadyG

[Alan de Enfield]

 

I agree that (for me) a survey is a complete waste of £1000 (survey and lift out/in) when at the end of the day if the survey is wrong or has missed something there is no come back on the surveyor.

 

However, for someone who knows nowt about boats being told that nothing major is wrong with the boat, is reasuring and helps with justifying the buying decision.

 

As you know I have not had a survey on any of the last 17 boats I have bought.

 

34 minutes ago, MtB said:

A survey gives a useful snapshot of condition at a given point in time, and if having 4.1mm of steel in a few places present to keep the water out scares someone, I'd suggest boating perhaps isn't for them.

 

But you are assuming that it is the buyer who doesn't know how thick the steel 'needs to be' that is concerned - IT IS NOT.

It is the insurers that have specified an arbitary 4mm thickness. The newby buyer does not know that he will (may) have difficulty getting insurance for one of his biggest ever purchases.

Your comment is not helpful.

[Tacet]

40 minutes ago, Alan de Enfield said:

 

I agree that (for me) a survey is a complete waste of £1000 (survey and lift out/in) when at the end of the day if the survey is wrong or has missed something there is no come back on the surveyor.

 

Firstly, you're assuming that a survey will be materially wrong; this is possible but less than likely.

 

Secondly, if the surveyor is negligent in performing its duties, there is, of course, a come back.  On the other hand, if the surveyor does not do something it was not asked to do or does not identify an issue that the hypothetically reasonably competent surveyor would identify, then you will probably not.

 

A survey is just that; it is not an immediate or perpetual guarantee that the boat is 100%. There is a tendency for buyers not to read survey reports carefully - just breathe a sigh of comfort that a survey has been undertaken without reflecting on its findings.

[jonathanA]

1990 boat, not been overplated, doesn't look like it is in desperate need of doing.  the extracts of the surveyors reports about weedhatch and hull apertures are typical surveyor arse covering. Yes check out the thru hull fittings and make sure they are all good as Tracy said.  

i don't know your circumstances, but if the boat is a good price and you have some cash to sort out any issues, i'd save your money on craneout/survey and put it to getting it blacked and hull survey (for insurance if needed) at your convenience and without time pressure.

worst case get third party insurance until you get a hull survey for fully comp. 

Edited January 31 by jonathanA
sp

[Alan de Enfield]

22 minutes ago, Tacet said:

Secondly, if the surveyor is negligent in performing its duties, there is, of course, a come back. 

 

Except when you try to take one to court and your specialist marine solicitor says "don't waste your money - the small print excludes him from all liability and you'll end up paying all his court costs as well as your own"

 

It cost me over £20,000 to rectify the MAJOR faults he had missed.

[MtB]

19 minutes ago, jonathanA said:

worst case get third party insurance until you get a hull survey for fully comp. 

 

And bear in mind boats virtually never sink from corrosion. Except in the most dire and predicatble circumstances like not being docked for inspection for 25 years.

[truckcab79]

57 minutes ago, Alan de Enfield said:

 

Except when you try to take one to court and your specialist marine solicitor says "don't waste your money - the small print excludes him from all liability and you'll end up paying all his court costs as well as your own"

 

It cost me over £20,000 to rectify the MAJOR faults he had missed.

 

Same with surveyors of  anything generally.  They make it look like a disaster ‘just in case’ and caveat it with all the stuff they say they couldn’t check. 
 

in this instance the seller has commissioned the survey anyway so it’s academic. Buyer has no come-back to the  surveyor on this one.  

[Tacet]

7 hours ago, Alan de Enfield said:

 

Except when you try to take one to court and your specialist marine solicitor says "don't waste your money - the small print excludes him from all liability and you'll end up paying all his court costs as well as your own"

 

It cost me over £20,000 to rectify the MAJOR faults he had missed.

The lesson is therefore to ensure your agreement does not exclude all liability - rather than not to have a survey.

[Alan de Enfield]

1 hour ago, Tacet said:

The lesson is therefore to ensure your agreement does not exclude all liability - rather than not to have a survey.

 

Good luck with that.

 

Here is what we are paying for .......................

 

An old post :

 

 

Don’t expect too much from your surveyor or you will be disappointed.

 

Read a Narrowboat Survey yesterday where the surveyor, had suggested that :-

 

1) There should be a small ladder available to "aid emergency egress" out of the side hatch (a 50 foot boat with fully functioning front and rear doors).

 

2) There were insufficient lifejackets on board for the number of people who could use the boat.

 

3) There was no automatic fire extinguishers in the engine compartment.

 

4) There was no anchor and/or chain aboard.

 

With the usual disclaimer that "I have not commented upon anything I cannot see, opened cupboards, or lifted carpet. I have given the engine a visual appraisal but not heard it running, The survey is for the named person and is valid for todays date only."

 

[Tacet]

But it's not the usual disclaimer, is it?

 

Can anyone produce a direct scan of a survey which excluded opening cupboards?  If so, they should not have accepted such a condition, which is your own point really.

 

If the state of the boat surveying profession is as dismal as you believe, there is a great business opportunity for the keyboard surveyors on CWDF to clean up.

 

 

[truckcab79]

4 minutes ago, Tacet said:

But it's not the usual disclaimer, is it?

 

Can anyone produce a direct scan of a survey which excluded opening cupboards?  If so, they should not have accepted such a condition, which is your own point really.

 

If the state of the boat surveying profession is as dismal as you believe, there is a great business opportunity for the keyboard surveyors on CWDF to clean up.

 

 

I think you’ll find all the opinions and actions are very much keyboard based only on here. 😂

[rusty69]

.... Says some muppet whose sole experience of narrowboats seems to be a two week holiday and buying a project boat that needs years worth of work VS numerous forums members who have owned boats for decades. 😂

[truckcab79]

2 minutes ago, rusty69 said:

.... Says some muppet whose sole experience of narrowboats seems to be a two week holiday and buying a project boat that needs years worth of work VS numerous forums members who have owned boats for decades. 😂

And yet still seem to know very little.  😂

[blackrose]

On 31/01/2024 at 00:00, blu said:

 

How does the boat report sound to you experienced boaters?

 

That's sort of irrelevant because it's not your survey. Anyone could have tampered with it (and I've seen a survey where that had happened) or it might not even be real. The only use of a vendor or brokers previous survey is as a basis to decide whether to spend money on your own survey. Or as a basis on whether to take a punt - which is what you'll be doing if you don't get your own survey. 

[Stroudwater1]

On 30/01/2024 at 20:21, zenataomm said:

What type of insurance are intending to cover the boat?

Full cover or comprehensive will demand a satisfactory survey report.

As we know the OP hasn’t posted all the survey. We got fully comp insurance agreed with a repeat survey in 10 years on the basis of the survey from 2 years ago. 
 

The hull readings seem OK. I think I would save the money on another survey and put it towards getting the boat epoxied. That assumes the OP really likes the boat