Jump to content

Featured Posts

Posted

Hi there

 

I've got a survey on a 2000 Alexander built narrowboat tomorrow, that as far as broker/we can tell ISN'T RCR compliant. 

I've been doing a bit of digging on this area which seems to be a bit grey, although if i'm correct, fairly recent info has been made in this area to make it a bit more transparent with regards to resale of used narrowboats. 

 

How concerned should i be with regards to resale/value in the future, knowing that this could become an issue in the future? Or is it likely that more exemptions might come in to allow for a boat of this age NOT to still have all RCR evidence etc. Maybe wishful thinking?

 

Thanks very much in advance - all thoughts/opinions welcome to help me figure out if I should just walk away here! 

Posted

buying a narrowboat that ISN'T RCR compliant - bad idea?

 

yes !

The legislation will only get stronger and more enforcement, with more and more brokers refusing to handle a non-compliant boat.

 

I bought a boat without the correct RCD paperwork and offered a 33% reduction on the 'market/asking price' (knowing full well I could get the correct paperwork as the manufacturer was still in existence) The seller knowing he was 'on a sticky wicket' accepted the offer.

 

 

It's all up to you - it is (and probably always will be) worth less than a boat which is compliant so it depends on your view of risk and how much you can afford to lose.

 

Posted

and how large a discount you can negotiate. It seems there will always be the option for a private sale in the future, nod-nod, wink-wink, at below "market price".

  • Greenie 1
Posted
20 minutes ago, Alan de Enfield said:

buying a narrowboat that ISN'T RCR compliant - bad idea?

 

yes !

The legislation will only get stronger and more enforcement, with more and more brokers refusing to handle a non-compliant boat.

 

I bought a boat without the correct RCD paperwork and offered a 33% reduction on the 'market/asking price' (knowing full well I could get the correct paperwork as the manufacturer was still in existence) The seller knowing he was 'on a sticky wicket' accepted the offer.

 

It's all up to you - it is (and probably always will be) worth less than a boat which is compliant so it depends on your view of risk and how much you can afford to lose.

 

 

Wasn't that boat a catamaran somewhere in Europe? Not sure how that's relevant to a narrowboat in the UK since Brexit, but I'm sure you'll explain... 😉 

Posted
42 minutes ago, Beats88 said:

 

 

I've got a survey on a 2000 Alexander built narrowboat tomorrow, that as far as broker/we can tell ISN'T RCR compliant. 

 

I suggest first checking for a CE plate on the boat as evidence of RCR compliance. (Actually it would be RCD compliance for  a year 2000 boat )

You might wish to enquire with a possible insurer as to whether they would insure the boat given it is not RCD compliant.

 

Just now, IanD said:

 

Wasn't that boat a catamaran somewhere in Europe? Not sure how that's relevant to a narrowboat in the UK since Brexit, but I'm sure you'll explain... 😉 

What has Brexit or the type of boat got to do  with it ?

RCD and RCR applies to narrowboats just the same as any other sort of boat. The RCR is effectively the post Brexit continuation of the RCD.

 

Posted

If you don't mind me asking, which broker is the boat being sold through? We have a bit of confusion about which brokers are and are not prepared to sell boats without RCD/R compliance paperwork.

Posted
12 minutes ago, Momac said:

I suggest first checking for a CE plate on the boat as evidence of RCR compliance. (Actually it would be RCD compliance for  a year 2000 boat )

You might wish to enquire with a possible insurer as to whether they would insure the boat given it is not RCD compliant.

 

What has Brexit or the type of boat got to do  with it ?

RCD and RCR applies to narrowboats just the same as any other sort of boat. The RCR is effectively the post Brexit continuation of the RCD.

 

 

Because IIRC he bought a boat in Croatia, where different regulations may well apply in practice -- or at least a different attitude to them if the buyer was desperate to sell. I very much doubt that any narrowboat ever sold in the UK has been 33% cheaper because it didn't have RCD paperwork (which is certainly not taken so seriously here, see all the brokers willing to sell without it), hence saying it wasn't relevant.

 

Yes if possible getting a boat with the documentation will reduce future worries, and may be an excuse to beat the price down a little bit. No it's not going to get 33% off or mean it's suddenly impossible to sell in future, along with tens of thousands of others without it... 😉 

Posted

a post compliance assessment would make it legitimate so the most reduction I would have thought would be the cost of that (£6000?) plus the cost of any alterations needed

Posted
1 minute ago, Phoenix_V said:

a post compliance assessment would make it legitimate so the most reduction I would have thought would be the cost of that (£6000?) plus the cost of any alterations needed

But being honest, how many boaters are ever going to spend such a huge sum just to do that?

 

Surely if they bought it without those documents (which is *not* illegal) then they'll assume they can sell it on without them?

 

Because if nothing else it's like any other alteration/refit cost, they'll never get enough extra back when selling to cover the costs... 😉 

 

Assuming the legal position doesn't change so it's illegal/impossible to sell without them, which also seems unlikely in the extreme.

Posted (edited)
1 hour ago, IanD said:

 

Because IIRC he bought a boat in Croatia, where different regulations may well apply in practice -- or at least a different attitude to them if the buyer was desperate to sell.

Croatia is in the EU since 2013. I thing Alan is very good negotiator as the discount he got was clearly very generous.

Its not and never will be illegal to sell or buy a used boat that doesn't comply . But it is illegal to use a boat that should comply but  does not comply .

 

Edited by Momac
,
Posted

Surly it depends on how far out of compliance the boat is so therefore how much would it cost to make it compliant. Then you offer a figure relavent to that. If it gets accepted you buy the boat and then make it compliant so as you can then sell on when you want to

Posted (edited)
9 minutes ago, Momac said:

Croatia is in the EU since 2013. I thing Alan is very good negotiator as the discount he got was clearly very generous.

It snot and never will be illegal to sell or buy a used boat that doesn't comply . But it is illegal to use a boat that should comply but  does not comply .

 

So are the RCD police going to do dawn raids to root out boats without the right documents and bang the guilty boater up in chokey? 😉 

 

Given the the odds of this -- if is actually *is* illegal, which I doubt! -- are as close to zero as to make no difference, if a boater can sell the boat on without the documents why pay £6k+ to get them? They're *never* going to get that back as long as such boats can be sold legally...

 

8 minutes ago, Tonka said:

Surly it depends on how far out of compliance the boat is so therefore how much would it cost to make it compliant. Then you offer a figure relavent to that. If it gets accepted you buy the boat and then make it compliant so as you can then sell on when you want to

Which you can also do without spending the money, of course -- because that's how you bought it in the first place... 😉 

 

The simple fact is that there are boats with the documents which might sell for a bit more because of this, and there are boats without them -- which will almost certainly *never* have them! -- which might sell for a bit less. Nobody who hasn't got loads of money to burn*** for no real purpose is going to convert one to the other... 🙂 

 

*** and if they had, they'd presumably buy one with the documents or get a new boat built

Edited by IanD
Posted

There is no legal requirement for a second hand boat to still have all of its RCD/RCR documentation. If there was the RCD/RCR would impose an obligation on all private owners to retain the documentation supplied when the boat was new, to update that information with any changes (major or minor) and to pass that documentation on with the boat to the next owner. There is no such obligation. And so a boat without its paperwork is not illegal and neither is it necessarily non-compliant with the RCD/RCR.

What has happened is that the UK trade body has advised its broker members that when selling a second hand boat they may nevertheless be deemed to be part of the commercial supply chain covered by the RCD/RCR requirements, and that to protect themselves brokers should not handle to sale of a boat without theRCD/RCR paperwork or a PCA which confirms that the craft meets the technical standards of the RCD/RCR. This interpretation, which is disputed by some within and outside the trade, does provide brokers with the opportunity to sell their PCA services which would otherwise not be needed. So you can see why brokers may be incentivised to follow the party line.

The real concern for the buyer of a second hand boat should be is the boat safe and reliable to use for navigation, to stay on either for short periods or for liveaboard use. And to confirm that the buyer would be better ensuring that there is a current Boat Safety Certificate and by having the boat surveyed.

As has been said, a boat without RCD/RCR paperwork can still be advertised and sold privately perfectly legally.

 

7 minutes ago, Momac said:

But it is illegal to use a boat that should comply but  does not comply .

Can you quote the part of the regulations which say this is the case for a second hand boat which no longer has its RCD/RCR paperwork (and therefore no evidence either way whether it did or did not comply when it was first sold and put into use)? And if you think such use IS illegal, who is committing the offence? The current owner/user or the first owner/user (who may not now be identifiable)?

  • Greenie 4
Posted
5 minutes ago, David Mack said:

There is no legal requirement for a second hand boat to still have all of its RCD/RCR documentation. If there was the RCD/RCR would impose an obligation on all private owners to retain the documentation supplied when the boat was new, to update that information with any changes (major or minor) and to pass that documentation on with the boat to the next owner. There is no such obligation. And so a boat without its paperwork is not illegal and neither is it necessarily non-compliant with the RCD/RCR.

What has happened is that the UK trade body has advised its broker members that when selling a second hand boat they may nevertheless be deemed to be part of the commercial supply chain covered by the RCD/RCR requirements, and that to protect themselves brokers should not handle to sale of a boat without theRCD/RCR paperwork or a PCA which confirms that the craft meets the technical standards of the RCD/RCR. This interpretation, which is disputed by some within and outside the trade, does provide brokers with the opportunity to sell their PCA services which would otherwise not be needed. So you can see why brokers may be incentivised to follow the party line.

The real concern for the buyer of a second hand boat should be is the boat safe and reliable to use for navigation, to stay on either for short periods or for liveaboard use. And to confirm that the buyer would be better ensuring that there is a current Boat Safety Certificate and by having the boat surveyed.

As has been said, a boat without RCD/RCR paperwork can still be advertised and sold privately perfectly legally.

 

Or through a broker who disagrees with the trade body policy, since as you say no law is being broken.

 

Boat with documentation, maybe pay a bit more. Sell it on later the same way, privately or via any broker.

 

Boat without documentation, maybe pay a bit less, don't buy from "compliant" brokers. Sell it on later the same way, privately or via "non-compliant" brokers.

Posted

Can anyone tell me how many prosecutions have been brought forward for non compliance?

 

 

Posted (edited)
6 minutes ago, GUMPY said:

Can anyone tell me how many prosecutions have been brought forward for non compliance?

 

When selling/buying/owning a used boat, not selling a new one -- which is against the law, and I believe has lead to the occasional boatbuilder prosecution...

 

P.S. I bet the answer is "none"... 😉 

Edited by IanD
Posted

Unless someone has evidence to the contrary I don't think anyone  has fallen to the wrath of trading standards not even a boat builder.

 

Posted
1 minute ago, GUMPY said:

Unless someone has evidence to the contrary I don't think anyone  has fallen to the wrath of trading standards not even a boat builder.

 

I'm pretty sure somebody on CWDF posted about a boatbuilder being fined for supplying a new boat without RCR certification -- anyone confirm?

 

But secondhand boats -- nah, never happened, never going to... 😉 

  • Greenie 1
Posted

Is it that it definitely does NOT comply, or that it just has no paperwork to say it does? 

 

As an example, our boat was built in compliance and had a Declaration of Conformity to the RCD, but one of the previous owners mislaid it.

An email from British Marine told me that they do not hold copies, only the manufacturer is required to, and even then only for 10yrs after build.

Posted (edited)
3 hours ago, Beats88 said:

Hi there

 

I've got a survey on a 2000 Alexander built narrowboat tomorrow, that as far as broker/we can tell ISN'T RCR compliant. 

I've been doing a bit of digging on this area which seems to be a bit grey, although if i'm correct, fairly recent info has been made in this area to make it a bit more transparent with regards to resale of used narrowboats. 

 

How concerned should i be with regards to resale/value in the future, knowing that this could become an issue in the future? Or is it likely that more exemptions might come in to allow for a boat of this age NOT to still have all RCR evidence etc. Maybe wishful thinking?

 

Thanks very much in advance - all thoughts/opinions welcome to help me figure out if I should just walk away here! 

When you say it is not compliant, you mean it does not have the RCR / RCD paperwork?.  I would think there are many boats of that age, in that position. I think these Regs were slow to be adopted by narrowboat builders who tend to be small business and who build a  boat and sell it , end of. . I know when I asked my builder about CE mark he nearly exploded! 

There should be some paperwork, recording the build, and the invoice from the hull builder.

The fitter, who may be a separate business should also have produced an invoice.

There should be paper trail showing ownership and transfer of ownership .

Other will fill you in about these Regs which came in about 1999/2000.

My boat is about that age, and I say about because it seemed to be build one year and fitted out another year.

I would not even contemplate giving a discount to pay for some paperwork. £6000 is just out of proportion to any perceived benefit.

Find a good boat, get it surveyed. 

Of course it seems common to  ask for a discount. This may have been factored in to the asking price.

Ask your surveyor about these matters before you send him out to look at the boat. He is the professional, you don't have to take his advice, but its a good idea to hear what he says.

PS the perceived wisdom is that you should commission your own survey. This is an expence, but it is your survey.

People are very different in their attitude to rules and regulations, from totally risk averse to high risk. In this instance, I feel that having RCR/RCD paperwork is well down the list of requirements, its not even on my scale in a boat of this age. 

 

 

 

Edited by LadyG
Posted (edited)
22 minutes ago, Hudds Lad said:

Is it that it definitely does NOT comply, or that it just has no paperwork to say it does? 

 

As an example, our boat was built in compliance and had a Declaration of Conformity to the RCD, but one of the previous owners mislaid it.

An email from British Marine told me that they do not hold copies, only the manufacturer is required to, and even then only for 10yrs after build.

 

If it has the builders plaque showing "build number, no of persons, CE marking etc etc" then in all liklehood it was built in compliance and it is possible that the necessary documents could be acquired from the manufacturer (if still in business) which is what I did.

 

It is the 'certificate of conformity' and the 'owners manual' that are the two primary documents that are proof of compliance.

 

 

A correctly CE marked vessel will have:

    • A WIN (Watercraft Identification Number) marked on the starboard transom in the correct format that clearly identifies the craft. There will be another hidden WIN marked in the hull.
    • A Builders Plate affixed to the vessel which clearly identifies the builder.
    • A Declaration of Conformity, signed and dated by a representative of the boatbuilder; and an Owners Manual.

  • The Declaration of Conformity must show details of the standards used to satisfy the Essential Requirements. It is important to check that the WIN is from the builder who completed (fitted out) the vessel, and not from the shell builder.

    From 3rd August 2017, a part-completed vessel should be CE marked to show conformity to the RCR when ownership transfers from the professional builder to the first owner. A Declaration of Conformity to Annex IV is required, along with an Owners Manual. Previously, vessels deemed to be only part-built would have been supplied with an Annexe IIIa Declaration for a part-completed vessel, which is no longer the case. A part-completed vessel passing from professional builder to another professional builder can be under Annex III paperwork.

 

 

Getting-a-PCA-On-a-Narrowboat.png

 

 

and another example :

 

PCA-Required-on-Self-Build-29-7-24.png

 

 

 

 

Edited by Alan de Enfield
Posted
1 hour ago, David Mack said:

 

 

Can you quote the part of the regulations which say this is the case for a second hand boat which no longer has its RCD/RCR paperwork (and therefore no evidence either way whether it did or did not comply when it was first sold and put into use)? And if you think such use IS illegal, who is committing the offence? The current owner/user or the first owner/user (who may not now be identifiable)?

How can a boat that was not legally first used become legal simply because  it had changed ownership. Even if the paperwork is lost there should be a CE plate and a HIN. If there is no HIN and no CE plate its almost certain the boat was never certified compliant. 

To me when people say there is no evidence I am taking that literally and I assume they are not meaning just some of the evidence is missing.

 

I think as part of any new insurance request the insurers should be asking for the HIN and a photo of the CE plate for boats built since 1998. That should shake things up a bit.

 

 

  • Greenie 1
  • Horror 1
Posted

But @Alan de Enfield, those despairing FB posts are both from somebody who wants to sell via a broker who insists on RCD compliance, not privately or via a broker who doesn't.

 

Which is entirely his decision, but is not a legal requirement, is it?

 

As various brokers have said, it is perfectly legal to sell or buy a secondhand boat without these documents, even though the trade body (and some brokers) insist on it this is their decision not the law.

Posted

There's 2 aspects:

1) The loss in market value due to not having RCD documentation etc. This is obviously an opinion and a perception but that's what determines market value anyway.

2) The fact that a similar boat WITH RCD is likely to be better quality due to its builder being more diligent etc. This is moot too; but could be determined to be so with a detailed physical examination of the boat. Possibly even an entire PCA process done on the boat. If the non-documented one "passed" the PCA without any work or mods needing doing, it could have had an RCD anyway......

 

So long as you are aware and you can negotiate an appropriate reduction in price (or have an accurate valuation done etc) then there's nothing to be concerned about.

  • Greenie 1
Posted (edited)
11 minutes ago, Momac said:

How can a boat that was not legally first used become legal simply because  it had changed ownership. Even if the paperwork is lost there should be a CE plate and a HIN. If there is no HIN and no CE plate its almost certain the boat was never certified compliant. 

To me when people say there is no evidence I am taking that literally and I assume they are not meaning just some of the evidence is missing.

 

I think as part of any new insurance request the insurers should be asking for the HIN and a photo of the CE plate for boats built since 1998. That should shake things up a bit.

 

 

Your opinion is not my opinion,  my boat is never going to have any marks, it did not have them twenty five years ago how could it suddenly have them now?

It is not illegal. Insurance companies are not interested.

Edited by LadyG

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!

Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.

Sign In Now
  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    • No registered users viewing this page.
×
×
  • Create New...

Important Information

We have placed cookies on your device to help make this website better. You can adjust your cookie settings, otherwise we'll assume you're okay to continue.