Check Current BSC

[cuthound]

I'd ask her to either produce evidence of  valid BSC or to arrange for a new BSC as a condition of buying the boat. 

[ditchcrawler]

How old is the boat? A BSS is a 4 year cycle so should give an idea when it should be renewed

[Alan de Enfield]

5 minutes ago, ditchcrawler said:

How old is the boat? A BSS is a 4 year cycle so should give an idea when it should be renewed

 

A valid point and a good starting point - unless (like our boat) it spent the 1st  "x" years on waters that didn't require a BSS, or its age meant it was built in the days before the BSS was a requirement.

[cuthound]

1 hour ago, ditchcrawler said:

How old is the boat? A BSS is a 4 year cycle so should give an idea when it should be renewed

 

When I bought my boat the BSC still had almost two years to run, but the surveyor I chose was also a BSS examiner who included a BSS examination within his fees, so the current BSC on my 2007 boat expires next year.

Edited March 7, 2021 by cuthound
Clarification

[Mike Todd]

GDPR - there was quite a bit of popular support for the introduction of regulations that set limits on what can be done with 'personal' information. The trouble is that those calling for such protection forgot just how useful it can also be to have such access. Exceptions have to be legislated for - I don't know but I guess that vehicle licensing is different in so many ways that it is likely that the access that has been spoken about is a specific exemption.

 

What is 'personal' can sometimes be a bit of a grey area, after all the fact that a boat ism licensed is publicly available but not who has licensed it. (AFAIK)

 

Another example of people responding to an adverse experience by demanding that 'they' do something about it - hence more regulations. When those regulations become onerous or get in the way of what appears to be reasonable, demands to remove the regulation often forget why they were put there in the first place. I noticed earlier that Lord Frost wants to do sway wit the checking of imported food, juts because the new regime has created, allegedly, a food shortage. Since the checks were originally thought the be 'a good thing' I really would want to know what may be the likely consequence of removing them. The oft-used comment that we should trust businesses to do the right thing is a most dangerous route to follow as that is why the regulations were needed in the first place - too many rogue business taking short cuts - what appears to have led to Grenfell, for example.

 

In the case in point - you are not required to buy a boat without the necessary proof of BSS from the seller, it is up to you to decide what price you put on it. But you might need to ask why the seller seems to be rather coy about it. If I were keen to sell a boat I'd be more than happy to remove such an obstacle. We recently agreed to an indemnity insurance for a property we are selling to cover an obscure documentation issue and the risk was that without that the buyer's solicitor would have advised that they walk away from the deal. In this case the rsk is that the seller is hiding some rather expensive defect.

[Alan de Enfield]

14 minutes ago, Mike Todd said:

In the case in point - you are not required to buy a boat without the necessary proof of BSS from the seller, it is up to you to decide what price you put on it. But you might need to ask why the seller seems to be rather coy about it. If I were keen to sell a boat I'd be more than happy to remove such an obstacle. We recently agreed to an indemnity insurance for a property we are selling to cover an obscure documentation issue and the risk was that without that the buyer's solicitor would have advised that they walk away from the deal. In this case the rsk is that the seller is hiding some rather expensive defect.

 

 

You are correct, but I cannot imagine anything that is covered by the BSS (or is a BSS failure) that is particularly expensive. Pretty much all that is covered is gas pipes, electric cables and fuel, nothing there is particularly onerous if any of it were to need major replacement.

 

It could be understandable if the seller was witholding a previous survey where it showed the boat was on the verge of sinking.

[StephenA]

2 minutes ago, Alan de Enfield said:

 

 

You are correct, but I cannot imagine anything that is covered by the BSS (or is a BSS failure) that is particularly expensive. Pretty much all that is covered is gas pipes, electric cables and fuel, nothing there is particularly onerous if any of it were to need major replacement.

 

It could be understandable if the seller was witholding a previous survey where it showed the boat was on the verge of sinking.

 

Could have flagged up something like a failing CH system? We failed the BSS one year because the optimus kept cutting out - we had it capped off and got the BSS redone but getting an old Optimus system fixed can turn out to be quite expensive.

[Mike Todd]

3 hours ago, Alan de Enfield said:

 

 

You are correct, but I cannot imagine anything that is covered by the BSS (or is a BSS failure) that is particularly expensive. Pretty much all that is covered is gas pipes, electric cables and fuel, nothing there is particularly onerous if any of it were to need major replacement.

 

It could be understandable if the seller was witholding a previous survey where it showed the boat was on the verge of sinking.

Indeed although it would be quite expensive if someone discovered that inadequately sized wiring had been used and needed comprehensive replacement, for example.

Edited March 7, 2021 by Mike Todd

[ditchcrawler]

49 minutes ago, Mike Todd said:

Indeed although it would be quite expensive if someone discovered that inadequately sized wiring had been used and needed comprehensive replacement, for example.

I suppose it could all have shrunk since the last BSS inspection. I thought the only one specified was the battery cables

[Mike Todd]

16 hours ago, ditchcrawler said:

I suppose it could all have shrunk since the last BSS inspection. I thought the only one specified was the battery cables

But the buyer hasn't seen any previous inspection report . . . 

 

In any event, it is probably always best to get your own survey. That way you might stand a minimal chance of getting some recompense in the event of serious problems. (But don't count on it!)

[Richard10002]

On 07/03/2021 at 08:45, Sigard said:

Thanks  Alan de Enfield she has no interest in  logging on, she told me it has one, and if I asked her to log on she would think I’m calling her a liar!

Sounds like she protests too much and has something to hide. Like somebody else has said, you would wonder what it is, but definitely something.

 

Is she OK with you having a survey?

[Momac]

22 hours ago, Sigard said:

At this point I would like to add that on my previous boat I never had any insurance, but had no issues getting a licence every year.  

Not sure how you got away with that. The C&RT do random checks allegedly but have you  not  been asked  to provide the insurers name and the current policy number  when applying for  a license?

It would be unwise to not have third party cover as a minimum. People have lost their shirts  by being  uninsured over 3rd party claims.

Of course if you  have no shirt you may not be concerned.

 

 

 

[Sigard]

I did have insurance the first time I applied for license, but for the following 6 years didn’t have any. Unfortunately my experience with insurance company’s are they would have wormed there way out of there liability, if the need had arisen!

 

This is, an over 20 year old GRP boat, so the cost of a survey isn’t really justified. We back on to the canal so have mooring rights, that we have to pay for even if we don’t have a boat, the cost doesn’t change. So just thought might as well use the mooring, and just use this boat as a day boat.

There are no gas appliances on board but there is evidence that at one time it did have a gas cooker. Is that a pass or fail?

 

All I wanted was to find out if the boat has a current BSC and the fact I can’t seems daft.

[Alan de Enfield]

2 minutes ago, Sigard said:

There are no gas appliances on board but there is evidence that at one time it did have a gas cooker. Is that a pass or fail?

 

 

If the old gas pipes are safely (and correctly) capped off, and, there is no gas cylinder on board then it would pass the BSS.

Presumably you are going to have a BSS conducted otherwise you cannot licence it.

[Sigard]

I will have a BSS done yes. But it might have one already! Can’t find out until I apply for the licence.

[Mike Todd]

15 minutes ago, Sigard said:

I did have insurance the first time I applied for license, but for the following 6 years didn’t have any. Unfortunately my experience with insurance company’s are they would have wormed there way out of there liability, if the need had arisen!

 

This is, an over 20 year old GRP boat, so the cost of a survey isn’t really justified. We back on to the canal so have mooring rights, that we have to pay for even if we don’t have a boat, the cost doesn’t change. So just thought might as well use the mooring, and just use this boat as a day boat.

There are no gas appliances on board but there is evidence that at one time it did have a gas cooker. Is that a pass or fail?

 

All I wanted was to find out if the boat has a current BSC and the fact I can’t seems daft.

Just because you found a way of obtaining a licence without an insurance policy does not mean that you are not required to have one.  Legislation makes it lawful for the navigation authority to refuse to licence unless third party insurance is in place and remains so.

 

Third party insurance has nothing to do with the value of the boat - even a valueless boat can be involved in an incident that leads to a substantial claim. It is unfair on the injured person if you fail to be able to recompense them in the event that you are liable to do so. It is also illegal.

3 minutes ago, Sigard said:

I will have a BSS done yes. But it might have one already! Can’t find out until I apply for the licence.

Quite properly CaRT seek to abide by GDPR. I'd be pretty upset if I heard they they treated the law as lightly as you suggest. One day you might be on the other end.

[TheBiscuits]

21 minutes ago, Sigard said:

We back on to the canal so have mooring rights, that we have to pay for even if we don’t have a boat

 

That doesn't sound right.  The single household End of Garden mooring fee is charged to the boat, not the property.  The only charges to the landowner I know of are for other categories of mooring, all of which are multiple boat and commercial - club moorings, marinas, farmer's field moorings etc.

 

 

[Mike Hurley]

On 07/03/2021 at 09:45, Sigard said:

 she has no interest in  logging on, she told me it has one, and if I asked her to log on she would think I’m calling her a liar!

 

Maybe its not her boat? Does she have any other paperwork with her name on it, sounds a bit dodgy to me, why would you not log in and print/screenshot a copy rather than lose a sale.

[Alan de Enfield]

7 minutes ago, Mike Hurley said:

Maybe its not her boat? Does she have any other paperwork with her name on it, sounds a bit dodgy to me, why would you not log in and print/screenshot a copy rather than lose a sale.

 

The longer the thread goes on the more the whole thing becomes suspicious.

[haggis]

2 minutes ago, Alan de Enfield said:

 

The longer the thread goes on the more the whole thing becomes suspicious.

I am trying to understand it as well!! From what has been said, a boat was purchased over 6 years ago and was insured and licenced for 1 year. It has been said that it was not insured after that so was it licenced? Did it have a BSS ? (I thought you had to give insurance and BSS  to get a licence). It appears as if the boat was on an end of garden mooring but no mooring fee was paid apparently. The original poster now wants to buy another boat which is a 20 year old GRP and wants to see the last BSS report but owner of boat is reluctant to let him see it. 

It strikes me as odd that someone who doesn't insure his boat is bothered about a BSS report. 

Or maybe I have misunderstood the whole thing ? 

 

haggis

[David Mack]

57 minutes ago, Sigard said:

Unfortunately my experience with insurance company’s are they would have wormed there way out of there liability, if the need had arisen!

 

Maybe, but Third Party insurance is a legal requirement. And it isn't expensive from the likes of Basic Boat.

[Alan de Enfield]

1 hour ago, Sigard said:

Unfortunately my experience with insurance company’s are they would have wormed there way out of there liability, if the need had arisen!

 

 

In which case, you'd only be in exactly the same postion as you are with no insurance - having total responsibilty for the costs of boat removal and reparations for any damge to 3rd party property.

[cuthound]

44 minutes ago, TheBiscuits said:

 

That doesn't sound right.  The single household End of Garden mooring fee is charged to the boat, not the property.  The only charges to the landowner I know of are for other categories of mooring, all of which are multiple boat and commercial - club moorings, marinas, farmer's field moorings etc.

 

 

 

Exactly, I have an End of Garden mooring and didn't have to pay CRT a penny until I bought a boat and moored it there.

Edited March 8, 2021 by cuthound
Clarification

[Sigard]

It’s a private Basin, all property’s are allowed to moor a boat, as part of there freehold. But all households have to pay a nominal fee to CRT, even if you don’t have a boat, CRT have no liability to the basin, any repairs/maintenance are the responsibility of the homeowners, we call it a rent the water fee!