Surveyor mistakes and legal advice

[Alan de Enfield]

 

 

The OP says the boat was docked after 10 months because of the leaks!

 

OK - I misunderstood.

I thought it meant that when it was docked it leaked water from between the old plate and the new overwelded plate - not that the boat leaked and was sinking.

 

"The welder is now ignoring my emails and calls - I have sent him photos and videos of the water pouring out of his plates!"

Edited September 17, 2015 by Alan de Enfield

[MtB]

 

OK - I misunderstood.

I thought it meant that when it was docked it leaked water from between the old plate and the new overwelded plate - not that the boat leaked and was sinking.

 

"The welder is now ignoring my emails and calls - I have sent him photos and videos of the water pouring out of his plates!"

 

 

I think it was both.

 

I based my undertstanding that the boat was docked because it was still taking on water after the overplating on this sentence in the OP:

 

"Just under year after buying my boat, I have had to have it out the water again due to a leak."

[bassplayer]

Maybe the positive from all of this is that with a thickness of 2-3mm it isn't going to leak.

Some Springers were made (from new) with 3mm base plates.

 

It wont leak until it gets to 0mm - It will last for years.

 

 

I think the Springers were made using very high quality steel (gas container quality). That's probably why so many are still around despite how thin the hulls are.

[Alan de Enfield]

I think the Springers were made using very high quality steel (gas container quality). That's probably why so many are still around despite how thin the hulls are.

 

Springers were manufactured from anything that Sam could pick up from scrapyards, 'end of lines' etc etc. Hence the variability in plate thicknesses between boats.

[MtB]

I think the Springers were made using very high quality steel (gas container quality). That's probably why so many are still around despite how thin the hulls are.

 

I think this is an urban myth.

 

Mr Springer would have used the cheapest steel he could lay his hands upon and I very much doubt he'd have relied on random gas holder demolitions as a primary and reliable source of steel for his boatbuilding business.

[bassplayer]

 

I think this is an urban myth.

 

Mr Springer would have used the cheapest steel he could lay his hands upon and I very much doubt he'd have relied on random gas holder demolitions as a primary and reliable source of steel for his boatbuilding business.

Maybe, there isn't a lot on the web to back it up.

 

Either way the quality of the steel is as important as the original thickness (as is the abuse the hull gets over it's life).

[MtB]

Maybe, there isn't a lot on the web to back it up.

 

Either way the quality of the steel is as important as the original thickness (as is the abuse the hull gets over it's life).

 

 

"Quality" is a somewhat misleading term. A better term is "grade". All steel is made to exacting specifications, but the grades vary in specification, as does the price.

[bassplayer]

 

 

"Quality" is a somewhat misleading term. A better term is "grade". All steel is made to exacting specifications, but the grades vary in specification, as does the price.

Not sure how 'quality' is misleading?

[gazza]

Not sure how 'quality' is misleading?

Because pickled plate ready for fabricating is more expensive than mill fresh hot rolled covered in scale.

 

The better builders use pickled plate, the cheaper ones may leave the shell to rust so the scale falls off, the bottom if the pile builders will slap some black straight onto the scale.

 

That is but one tiny example for you.

[John V]

Not sure how 'quality' is misleading?

 

Also steel is an alloy and as such different materials are added to achieve a certain performance for a particular job. The steel might be of very high quality but totally unsuitable for narrowboats.

 

eta the wheelhouse on my barge was built with "whatever I could lay my hands on cheap"....the result was many hairline cracks at welds and (some more like the Grand Canyon) it was only after having it analysed and the welding methods modified was it any good.

Fortunately for a wheelhouse it was fine but for a hull it would have been a disaster (The steel was of VERY high quality and excellent for stopping bullets as per its design)

Edited September 17, 2015 by John V

[bassplayer]

Because pickled plate ready for fabricating is more expensive than mill fresh hot rolled covered in scale.

 

The better builders use pickled plate, the cheaper ones may leave the shell to rust so the scale falls off, the bottom if the pile builders will slap some black straight onto the scale.

 

That is but one tiny example for you.

Interesting stuff. Wouldn't the scale help protect the steel if left on? Maybe the black doesn't adhere so well though..

[gazza]

Interesting stuff. Wouldn't the scale help protect the steel if left on? Maybe the black doesn't adhere so well though..

No, scale should not be on the plate in the first place, all welds should have the scale removed both sides of the steel - I bet there are plenty who don't bother with both sides, especially the base plate - it costs time and money to do it.

 

 

As you say, blacking doesn't stick to it properly, and when the scale does come off the blacking goes with it.

Edited September 17, 2015 by gazza

[Raz]

Well setting aside the obvious lesson "don't buy a boat that needs overplating, because overplating never makes it good as new or anything like", I'd say the only way to quantify your loss is to sell the boat to a trader (e.g. Whilton Marina).

 

This crystalises your loss. Your loss is the difference between what you paid and what you received (plus the money you spent on the surveys and work, arguably).

In my own circumstances, where over 5 years of an alleged negligent maintenance regime carried out by my choice of marina led to the actual sinking of my 9 year old hull while still in their care, and then being found to be pitted to the extent that overplaying was required I obviously assumed I had suffered a significant loss as a result. The difficulty I found, working with my legal team was how to prove I had suffered a loss at court.

 

I wanted to sell the boat to a trader as you suggest so this would quantify my loss measured against the prospective sale value of my boat in a good condition, provided by three independent brokers, against what three independent trade offers for the boat in its current condition would be. In my own mind this would provide the easiest solution - a boat of that brand of that age in good condition, over what I had to do now to realise it's value as it was no longer in retail condition and could only be sold to the trade.

 

I also had the complication of the additional damage caused by the sinking, which was covered by insurance, but in the opinion of my surveyor would not be repaired to a satisfactory standard within their settlement.

 

Unfortunately the legals working on my behalf insisted that a court would not accept this evidence of loss, and went on to insist that in their opinion the only proof of loss acceptable to court would be if I offered the boat for sale, repaired and plated, at what would have been its full value in good condition. After a reasonable time, whatever that might be, the price should be reduced until a sale was secured. Then, if there was a significant depreciation in value over what I might have expected, returned during an actual sales transaction, then this, and only this would provide the required satisfactory evidence of loss to go to court with.

 

Interestingly, I pointed out to solicitors that I didn't want to be responsible for offering a boat that had been damaged in this way to a possible unsuspecting buyer at brokerage, without telling the buyer the circumstances. Their reply to me was that brokerage was a private sales agreement between seller and buyer, and as such I had no obligation to tell anybody, unless a specific question was asked. All I had to do, according to solicitors was try and obtain the best price from a sale, and I should not volunteer any information to a buyer other than answering their questions honestly. This was not acceptable to me.

 

This whole scenario was to me an unsatisfactory state of affairs, so I went ahead and sold my boat as is to the trader with the best offer, and in the process lost £18,000 or so on what was estimated to be the boat's value if it had been in good condition. This was against my solicitor's advice.

 

As the services of the solicitor were being provided by legal expenses cover I had attached to another insurance policy, they then went on to withdraw, as they considered my action would now mean the possibility of success of my loss claim would fall below their required 51% chance criteria.

 

Taking court action after being "wronged" in such a way is by no means easy, straightforward, or inexpensive and anything alleged has to have the evidence, assessed by those who "know" to be good sound evidence to go to court attached to the allegation. In the end I decided I had done all I could without entering into even more months of deliberation on top of the year I had already spent, and it was easier to just let it go.

[DutchBargeFrancisca]

Ouch Raz, that sounds awful. Sorry to hear your story.

 

Regardless of what I manage to negotiate with either the surveyor or welder1, welder 2 has already ground out and rewarded welder1's overplating, so that's good and solid. He'll also be putting a new baseplate on the bad section, and a small bit of plate on the swim where there is another thin spot. She'll then be good to to and we'll get a couple of layers or epoxy on her.

 

No chance of me selling her, I’ve put so much into making her how I want her and she will be solid one welder2 is done with her, although I'm sure worth less than I believed before. I'm really just interested in recovering what funds I can from both the professionals who I believe have failed to offer me the service they should have.

 

In the case of the surveyor, I agree its less clear, but he is at least prepared to come for a second look to work out how thin spots were missed. Welder1 is hiding from me, so I'll have to work out how to deal with him. Reputation is everything on the canal, so if I don’t get a response soon, I expect I’ll be asking him how he feels about videos and photos of his shoddy welding ending up on several local boating groups. I hoped it wouldn’t come to that, but he doesn’t seem prepared to talk this through reasonably…

 

If he’s not going to give me any money anyway, I have no qualms about warning other unsuspecting people that he isn’t up to the job.

wow...don't know how my words ended up so big there!

[MtB]

Welder1 is hiding from me, so I'll have to work out how to deal with him. Reputation is everything on the canal, so if I don’t get a response soon, I expect I’ll be asking him how he feels about videos and photos of his shoddy welding ending up on several local boating groups. I hoped it wouldn’t come to that, but he doesn’t seem prepared to talk this through reasonably…

 

If he’s not going to give me any money anyway, I have no qualms about warning other unsuspecting people that he isn’t up to the job.

 

 

Have you figured out what you want from him, exactly, and told him?

 

He may be hiding as he thinks you want £thousands in compensation. You, on the other hand, might only want the money back you paid him. If that.

 

I don;lt think you have much of a case to demand any more than a refund of his original bill. Hopefully you obtained a receipt at the time. If it was a ;cash job' you might have an uphill struggle to prove to a court he ever had any part in the story, should it get that far.

[patty-ann]

If he’s not going to give me any money anyway, I have no qualms about warning other unsuspecting people that he isn’t up to the job.

Be very careful of accusing anyone of anything..your choice to post pictures..but I would leave others to draw their own conclusions..I would stick to facts..eg this is the welding that cost ££, list known defects..send to him maybe copies before you post. Let him see the evidence and request reimbursement based on fact. Give him another chance.

[MtB]

If he’s not going to give me any money anyway, I have no qualms about warning other unsuspecting people that he isn’t up to the job.

Be very careful of accusing anyone of anything..your choice to post pictures..but I would leave others to draw their own conclusions..I would stick to facts..eg this is the welding that cost ££, list known defects..send to him maybe copies before you post. Let him see the evidence and request reimbursement based on fact. Give him another chance.

 

 

Very wise.

 

In addition, when a gisgruntled customer posts stuff on the net trying to damage the business of a tradesman, most people being reasonable see that they are getting only one side of the story.

 

In fact the poster having a whinge tends to come across as faintly deranged unless they are brutally honest and post only verifiable facts, as Patty Ann says.