Anyone seen this boat?

[johnjo]

Gordon Brown is a great person!

B*llox

[estwdjhn]

It is interesting that so many of you accept the word of a good chap as absolutely irrefutable. Gordon Brown is a great person who says lots of things, so was Mrs. Thatcher. Did you believe them all of the time? Or could they have made some mistakes in what they said?

 

 

They are both politicans, so they never tell the truth except by accident.

[Bones]

If you took the original posting to a newspaper or a magazine and asked them to print this in their small add section they would explain that they couldn't because it would leave them wide open for a libel case. The same risk exists the publishers of this forum. Since they don't get to vet everything PRIOR to it being published, it is unfair to post something like this.

 

 

 

It is interesting that so many of you accept the word of a good chap as absolutely irrefutable. Gordon Brown is a great person who says lots of things, so was Mrs. Thatcher. Did you believe them all of the time? Or could they have made some mistakes in what they said?

 

 

norty! Some of us just have open minds and accept this guy thinks he hasn't been paid and cant contact the people who owe him money and has asked for help in locating the cheque they left for him behind the milk bottles. It is also quite clear we dont need two sides of the story, and indeed not even one. I suppose it depends whether you look at the post negatively or positively which is more a state of mind than a reflection of the OP contents.

 

Festering on the wheres and wherefores only makes the thread look bad. Simply er 'no' or 'er I might whatsit worth' would surfice.

[Smelly]

I can see both sides of this. I know Tom's name although I've never done business with him so when he posted I was happy to suggest. On the other hand, when alleging criminal activity I asked the mods first (never got a straight answer though...)

 

I'd agree with other posts and would stand by the OP, and by the fact that we're here debating this, by letting it run we could actually ask ourselves how comfortable we are using the board for uses other than "my engine's broke... help".

 

The debate is imprtant, however the debt owing to someone with a credible standing and a corroborated report is nearly as important.

 

I don't think the, err, person who Tom's looking for is idignant unless he's lacking a bit of sense, surveys are "independent" and hence it's easy to perceive sseparate fees. If a broker would have offered me their survey report my mortgage company wouldn't have paid and if it was my money I'd've not paid either.

 

It'd be interesting to hear Jon's opinion.

[Dominic M]

Maggie - my heroine

 

 

That's your integrity up the spout then

And possibly yours as well

[WJM]

I have already introduced the (totally unproven) possibility that the client is furious with an genuinely unsatisfactory survey and has refused to pay and doesn't want to hear from the surveyor anymore. Who is the bad guy now? Some of you have him hung already for non-payment. Guilty till proven innocent.

[chris w]

And possibly yours as well

I've got your name in my little book mate

Edited January 7, 2009 by chris w

[Dominic M]

I've got your name in my little book mate

Oh, goody

[chris w]

I have already introduced the (totally unproven) possibility that the client is furious with an genuinely unsatisfactory survey and has refused to pay and doesn't want to hear from the surveyor anymore. Who is the bad guy now? Some of you have him hung already for non-payment. Guilty till proven innocent.

Twit.................if the boater has genuine grievances, he has a legal duty to come forward and express his reasons for not paying. He can't just do a proverbial bunk as you seem to advocate.

[Jason Wilson and Family]

Debt is a civil matter not a police matter. Fraud is a police matter.

 

It was just a comparison for the innocent until proven guilty crowd. An alleged axe-murderer can't refuse to go court on the grounds that he hasn't been convicted yet.

Edited January 7, 2009 by Jason Wilson and Family

[Bones]

I have already introduced the (totally unproven) possibility that the client is furious with an genuinely unsatisfactory survey and has refused to pay and doesn't want to hear from the surveyor anymore. Who is the bad guy now? Some of you have him hung already for non-payment. Guilty till proven innocent.

 

there is no bad guy,. not our place. The prey may be in that situation, but that isn't our problem. Nor is the other view. That explanation wasn't excluded either, just not written down, but we would be a sad bunch if we had to have everything written down for us!

 

ciao champions, I am off boating.

[Jason Wilson and Family]

If you took the original posting to a newspaper or a magazine and asked them to print this in their small add section they would explain that they couldn't because it would leave them wide open for a libel case. The same risk exists the publishers of this forum. Since they don't get to vet everything PRIOR to it being published, it is unfair to post something like this.

 

 

 

It is interesting that so many of you accept the word of a good chap as absolutely irrefutable. Gordon Brown is a great person who says lots of things, so was Mrs. Thatcher. Did you believe them all of the time? Or could they have made some mistakes in what they said?

 

The surveyor has not been paid for his services and cannot contact the boat in question... where is the libel there? What part of that sentence is not fact?

[chris w]

An axe-murderer can't refuse to go court on the grounds that he hasn't been convicted yet.

Well, it worked for me

[Columbo]

Oh Dear, Tomkeeling, what a very brave man you are posting such a request on here with the record they have for tearing every decent request apart.

[estwdjhn]

The surveyor has not been paid for his services and cannot contact the boat in question... where is the libel there? What part of that sentence is not fact?

I would think there is potential for a case for Defamation of Character. However in order to win the case, the owners of the boat in question would have to prove that 1) they were identified and 2) wrongly labeled as people who don't pay the bills.

 

If Tom is speaking the truth, and it does sound like he is, then the case would collapse on point two. However, with this sort of thing, it is the cost of the action, rather than who would win or lose that tends to cause posting to get withdrawn.

Edited January 7, 2009 by estwdjhn

[Bones]

Oh Dear, Tomkeeling, what a very brave man you are posting such a request on here with the record they have for tearing every decent request apart.

 

 

I am sure Tom will ignore the lot of us like any sensible person!

[Jason Wilson and Family]

Well, it worked for me

 

Me too but I'm an exceptional case.

[philipmarlowe]

I need to find a boat called "Narrow Escape" anyone know where it is please?

[Nightwatch]

Go on I'll fall for it.

 

Why?

 

 

Martyn

[Dutch]

I need to find a boat called "Narrow Escape" anyone know where it is please?

 

 

Bored are we??

[johnjo]

I have already introduced the (totally unproven) possibility that the client is furious with an genuinely unsatisfactory survey and has refused to pay and doesn't want to hear from the surveyor anymore. Who is the bad guy now? Some of you have him hung already for non-payment. Guilty till proven innocent.

 

Do I understand that you are advocating that if we receive a survey that states that the boat is not in good nick we should shoot the messenger or in this case the surveyor.

If you are, you're dimmer than I thought, or have I missed your point somehow.

Gloves on!

[carlt]

Oh Dear, Tomkeeling, what a very brave man you are posting such a request on here with the record they have for tearing every decent request apart.

What a load of cr*p.

 

Some excellent advice and help has been offered to a lot of people on this forum. If you can't see it why do you bother logging in?

 

Troll!

[Smelly]

I need to find a boat called "Narrow Escape" anyone know where it is please?

 

While we're at it, anyone seen "Holly" recently?

 

with this sort of thing, it is the cost of the action, rather than who would win or lose that tends to cause posting to get withdrawn.

 

And if they can't afford a survey in the first place...

[estwdjhn]

Do I understand that you are advocating that if we receive a survey that states that the boat is not in good nick we should shoot the messenger or in this case the surveyor.

If you are, you're dimmer than I thought, or have I missed your point somehow.

Gloves on!

 

There is a difference between a poor quality of survey report , and a survey that reports the boat to be in bad shape.

 

If I had a survey, and the results were the former, I would be inclined to complain. If that latter, then I might well be greatful for having not wasted a lot of money.

 

However, in this case, the argument is irrelivent. The owner hasn't yet recived the survey to complain about it. Unless Tom's manner of surveying involves hitting expensive fragile bits of it with a lump hammer or somthing, I can't see quite what the person commssioning the survey could have to complain about.

Edited January 7, 2009 by estwdjhn

[WJM]

"he has a legal duty to come forward and express his reasons for not paying. "

 

 

Perhaps he has already resolved the issue legally and the now OP just wants to go round and punch his lights out - total unfounded conjecture I know, but you dont know any better than I do!