Jump to content

Who is liable for damage caused during a pre-purchase survey?


Featured Posts

Hi all - I’ve never contributed to a discussion here but I’ve always found this forum really informative. Apologies if the question below appears in another thread, but I couldn’t find it anywhere! Any help would be much appreciated!

 

We’re looking at buying a Springer stern cruiser, but are concerned about the quality of the steel. We’ve put in a deposit but want to have a survey before completing the buy. We’re concerned that if we lift it out of the water for a survey it won’t survive (ie it might be so thin already it gets damaged while taking it out).

 

so the question: if the boat is damaged while taking it out of the water, who is liable to pay? Us, the current owners, or the surveyors?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

8 minutes ago, WomanOnWater said:

so the question: if the boat is damaged while taking it out of the water, who is liable to pay? Us, the current owners, or the surveyors?

 

I'd say this is a subject for negotiation in advance between you and the owner. 

 

Otherwise the court case will be long and complicated!

 

 

P.S. The surveyor will be working to your instructions so any damage HE causes will be down to you. 

 

 

 

Edited by Mike the Boilerman
Missed a bit
Link to comment
Share on other sites

8 minutes ago, Jerra said:

My immediate feeling is if you think things are so bad why are you considering buying and have put down  a deposit.

Thqnks for the reply - we’ve done loads of research on Springers and to be honest all it’s done is confuse us more! Seems to be a lot of conflicting opinions on these builders. I don’t think it’s all that bad - my partner isn’t convinced.

 

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

10 minutes ago, Mike the Boilerman said:

 

I'd say this is a subject for negotiation in advance between you and the owner. 

 

Otherwise the court case will be long and complicated!

 

 

P.S. The surveyor will be working to your instructions so any damage HE causes will be down to you. 

 

 

 

Thanks Mike, that’s a good thing to bear in mind - I haven’t even thought about that. We’re going through a brokerage so I haven’t even spoken to the current owner.

 

I feel like there must be some standard practice for this??

19 minutes ago, George and Dragon said:

If the boat is that fragile surely the owners won't want to have it taken out of the water for a survey to be done

Thanks, that’s a good point! We’re going through a brokerage and they’ve recommended a survey (I guess it’s a duty of care thing, but still good advice).

 

The current owner can’t find the paperwork for the survey they had done (about 3 years ago)

Link to comment
Share on other sites

8 minutes ago, WomanOnWater said:

Thqnks for the reply - we’ve done loads of research on Springers and to be honest all it’s done is confuse us more! Seems to be a lot of conflicting opinions on these builders. I don’t think it’s all that bad - my partner isn’t convinced.

 

 

They are similar to the old Lada's and Skoda's, if they have been regularly lifted out, painted and maintained they are generally fine, if they have been used and not looked after they are 'death-traps'.

 

One thing to bear in mind is that the smaller Springers were built using 3.75mm steel, today, many insurers will not insure a boat with less then 4mm so you are on a loser to start with.

Rarely will you find two springers identical as they were built with second-hand salvaged steel - much of it from the big gas-holders seen in cities all over the country (maybe you are not of an age to remember them) so you may find one with a bit thicker steel.

 

Springers are now a little elderly and you will find that your insurers will definitely require a full Hull survey if the boat is over 20 / 25 / 30 years old depending on insurer. Most Springers obviously fall into this bracket.

 

Hopefully you'll be lucky and find the 1 in a 1000 'excellent' one.

Edited by Alan de Enfield
Link to comment
Share on other sites

I remember several that we lifted on strops where the pressure on the hull corners caused the steel to collapse.

If it is in your mind that it is so bad, why buy it? Spend your money on something later and better. Springers were cheap boats, very few have been loved and cared for in the last 29 years since they built the last ones. Quality was not the watchword when they were made. Later owners tend to have bought them because they were cheap and neglected them until now when inflated prices mean that they may be able to recover some of the outlay. Be very careful.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I do realise that this of absolutely no help to you but I really cannot understand why you have paid a deposit before getting a survey, especially on a springer. The chances are that the deposit is non returnable and you still have to pay for a survey. The fact that the present owner says they cannot find the paperwork for a survey they had done 3 years ago strikes me as supicious. I have all my survey reports for the two boats that I owned for seven years and I don't even own a boat now.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

10 hours ago, Alan de Enfield said:

One thing to bear in mind is that the smaller Springers were built using 3.75mm steel, today, many insurers will not insure a boat with less then 4mm so you are on a loser to start with.

 

My 35ft Springer is 6mm.

100_7235.JPG

Link to comment
Share on other sites

13 hours ago, Jerra said:

My immediate feeling is if you think things are so bad why are you considering buying and have put down  a deposit.

It's like the guy who was accused of smoking in bed and burnt the house down.

His defence being that no way would he ever smoke in bed, it was down right dangerous  ….. and anyway the bed was already on fire when he got in it!

  • Happy 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

When you have a survey done you pay someone else to either dry dock it, or lift it (or trailer it) out the water. I'd say they were liable if it were damaged during lifting out/drying. If the surveryor finds something obviously wrong during the survey (ie the boat is likely to not float again...) then he has a duty to tell the boatyard/person who would be re-floating it of this. If they don't do this they are liable. Of course, the problem is, if it sinks then needs to be refloated and re-lifted out the water (eg for repairs) you'd have a job proving who did (or didn't do) what.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Another thread that reproduces much of the Springer mythology.

 

If they are so bad, how come the survival rate for Springers seems to be rather better than that for many other types manufacuted in the same time frame that were much more expensive and upmarket, (e.g. Harborough Marine).

 

I thought the "scrapped gasometer steel" story had been debunked many times previously, so can anybody please provide a defintive source that it was actually ever true.

 

Only 1 in 1000 actually in very good order?  Come on there are lots of them that are really very good, still.  (OK, I'll concede there are also plenty of wrecks but that's true for any brand that was built 30 years ago, or more).

 

And why should a deposit be "non returnable"?  I would not sign up to that - the only time I bought paying a deposit, but expecting to survey, it was very clearly refundable if the survey was going to cause me to pull out of the purchase.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

9 minutes ago, alan_fincher said:

And why should a deposit be "non returnable"?  I would not sign up to that - the only time I bought paying a deposit, but expecting to survey, it was very clearly refundable if the survey was going to cause me to pull out of the purchase.

But you, Alan, are both wise and knowledgeable. The non-refund of the deposit is a very real trap for the inexperienced or unwary.

 

My concern here wouldn't be Springer related, but the fact that the OP already has doubts about the hull's ability to withstand haul out. Unless the boat is so desirable that it's  worth the risk just to find out whether the vessel is far better than you thought (or is so special that it's worth saving and you're just gauging the work you have ahead), why go further?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

6 minutes ago, Sea Dog said:

But you, Alan, are both wise and knowledgeable. The non-refund of the deposit is a very real trap for the inexperienced or unwary.

 

My concern here wouldn't be Springer related, but the fact that the OP already has doubts about the hull's ability to withstand haul out. Unless the boat is so desirable that it's  worth the risk just to find out whether the vessel is far better than you thought (or is so special that it's worth saving and you're just gauging the work you have ahead), why go further?

 

Something no-one has pointed out yet is the OP has just had the wind put up them by someone scaremongering, probably. A steel narrowboat disintegrating in the crane slings from corrosion is unheard of. It just never happens. Distortion of the hull at the sling pressure points on the chine as described by someone earlier is even very rare I'd say.

 

And on Alan's point about Springers rarely being scrapped, this applies to all steel narrow boats I reckon. They are ALWAYS repairable by someone, and worth more than the scrap value of the steel no matter how rusty. Can anyone here hand-on-heart say they know of a steel narrowboat ever being dismantled and cut up to recover the scrap steel, rather than repaired?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

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.