Lousy Boat Builders

[gaggle]

if you mean why would i not recommend them,i dont think i am allowed to say on the forum.

but surely if they are not recommended by someone who has used them that is saying enough.

i could say a lot of the forum about them and indeed some from the forum have contacted me and i have give them my experience in full.

[anthony]

Hello everybody been a long time since ive been online and glad to be back.

Just to let everyone know, I will be putting up a website soon where you can name and shame.

Im in the market for buying a sailaway now Ive got myself sorted and looking at Liverpool boats.

However IM looking at buying one from a brokers stock rather than directly from the builder themselves.

Plus it works out cheaper some how!

I very nearly bought a boat from Lee's as he was local.

Gosh thank God I didnt.

[Guest]

Hello everybody been a long time since ive been online and glad to be back.

Just to let everyone know, I will be putting up a website soon where you can name and shame.

Im in the market for buying a sailaway now Ive got myself sorted and looking at Liverpool boats.

However IM looking at buying one from a brokers stock rather than directly from the builder themselves.

Plus it works out cheaper some how!I very nearly bought a boat from Lee's as he was local.

Gosh thank God I didnt.

That's what we did, and yes we saved a few bob.

[Billypownall]

Hello everybody been a long time since ive been online and glad to be back.

Just to let everyone know, I will be putting up a website soon where you can name and shame.

Im in the market for buying a sailaway now Ive got myself sorted and looking at Liverpool boats.

However IM looking at buying one from a brokers stock rather than directly from the builder themselves.

Plus it works out cheaper some how!

I very nearly bought a boat from Lee's as he was local.

Gosh thank God I didnt.

Look forward to your website. I shall have a few things to say!!

[iteldoo4me]

I suppose for many of you who know of the dilemmas I had with my boat this year,and its outcome by taking the builders to court,I just had to say that for my part in all of the time it took to get sorted out,which it did,and is now a decent boat,that I got the last laugh,and Hixon Boats (I can state the name as the administrators of this site have a copy of the court hearing I won)can no longer advertise with the major boat mags.It may seem an importance to name and shame,and I agree,but for obvious legal reasons,sites such as this could not risk the posibility of being sued for liable.So if your unhappy with a boat builder,and they dont do rectification work,then sue em'.Then you can splatter their name all over the world,and never fear being done for slander.

Edited September 3, 2006 by iteldoo4me

[Noah]

Look forward to your website. I shall have a few things to say!!

A name and shame list, about time! I know if I were about to invest many tens of thousands with a builder I would want to know about the bad (as well as good) experiences of previous customers so that I might make a more informed choice on where to spend my hard-earned cash. Am I being naïve, but isn’t that what a discussion forum such as this is meant for, or have we become terrified of invoking legal action from the guilty? During my three years as a (second-hand) boat owner I have met several owners of new boats who have been mercilessly ripped-off by incompetent and unscrupulous builders and have, as a result, given up all hopes of living aboard. This is despite having successfully sued. I guess they are just too disheartened and disillusioned now. Now I know well that truly bad customers exist but I think that most of us can recognise when someone is pursuing a personal vendetta.

 

Totally BTW, have Border Boats gone bust? I noticed that their website suggests that they have ceased trading http://www.borderboats.co.uk/

 

Noah (in unusually militant mood, must be an alcohol deficiency)

[John Orentas]

A name and shame list, about time! I know if I were about to invest many tens of thousands with a builder I would want to know about the bad (as well as good) experiences of previous customers so that I might make a more informed choice on where to spend my hard-earned cash. Am I being naïve, but isn’t that what a discussion forum such as this is meant for, or have we become terrified of invoking legal action from the guilty? During my three years as a (second-hand) boat owner I have met several owners of new boats who have been mercilessly ripped-off by incompetent and unscrupulous builders and have, as a result, given up all hopes of living aboard. This is despite having successfully sued. I guess they are just too disheartened and disillusioned now. Now I know well that truly bad customers exist but I think that most of us can recognise when someone is pursuing a personal vendetta.

 

Come on guys this is one case and probably the only case were you are asked to obey a firm rule, this is a cost free site and surely it is reasonable to ask that the owners wishes must be respected in this case. I understand there is a bit more to it than you may imagine.

[davidandheather]

I thought this was going to be a useful thread about good and bad boat builders, but it's been turned into an exact replica of the "I am not a bank" thread. Now that's clearly something William feels strongly about, but the arguments on both sides have been extensively aired in the other thread.

 

I'd be much more interested in reading people's experiences about having a boat built, either in general terms or with names where possible.

 

Adam

 

PS: William, not all workers get paid in arrears. My salary comes in the middle of the month, two weeks in arrears, two in advance.

well i did try

David

[anthony]

The wonderfull thing about the internet is freedom of speech John.

Where the ordinary can have their say and share infomation. I would ask any forum owner to show proof of being sued by having a website where someone has posted a comment resulting in the site owner being sued.

Total wish wash it does not happen.

One reason why there is so much censorship on this site is because a Police Officer runs the site.

I fully understand hence why I will be offering an alternative to those who want it.

I for one met the guy from Lee's Narrow Boats and was sung a glorious sales pitch about his boats and his business.

If I would of had the money I would of thrown it at him all day but luckily I was skint.

Lets not protect criminals by not sharing infomation about our bad experiences.

Thanks.

Edited September 4, 2006 by anthony

[fuzzyduck]

http://www.sean.co.uk/a/webdesign/disaster.../disaster4.shtm

 

references a case where demon settled out of court for a post on usenet

 

telegraph on the mumsnet libel case

 

http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/main.jhtml...8/08/nmum08.xml note the lawyers didn't say "muah ha ha ha ha we're a forum, she can't touch us."

 

some background to the whole thing neatly tieing the 2 cases above together. http://technology.guardian.co.uk/news/stor...1862104,00.html

 

good luck with the name and shame site, but be careful. One of the best ways in the UK to get a website about you taken down, is to alledge defamation. speak to a Lawyer before you start.

Edited September 4, 2006 by fuzzyduck

[Christine]

Interesting reading Fuzzy - thanks for that. I have long wondered why it has been a problem to 'name and shame'

 

Chrissie

[anthony]

Interesting Fuzzy but not very cut and dry.

I dont think a bankrupt boat builder is going to want and stand up in court though do you?

For me it makes the cause for freedom of speech more exciting really.

Finding an underground way of getting the infomation out there via an electronic news letter may be an alternative to a forum.

Plus that way there is little or no proof of where it has originated from.

Cheers.

[Gary Peacock]

Totally BTW, have Border Boats gone bust? I noticed that their website suggests that they have ceased trading http://www.borderboats.co.uk/

 

Yes quite a while ago now.

[William Martin]

Name and shame is near impossible to achieve effectively.

 

Even the best builder will always have one or two disgruntled customers, whether it was a build that actually went wrong or the customer was impossible to deal with. Modern british culture (tabloid culture) is such that the unhappy are loudly vocal while the satisfied keep quiet. One big rant could be all it takes to unfairly put people off a perfectly good builder.

 

Additionally building good boats is not the mark of a good business, a well managed jerry-builder can be successfully in business forever, while a commercially hopeless master craftsman could keel over taking your money and dreams with him!

 

While the idea is worthy, a name and shame forum piece wont achieve its intended goal of providing buying advice - a more scientific and comprehensive approach is needed, such as a survey revealing that for example 75% of ABuilder Ltd customers were happy and would buy from them again.

[Incentive]

Hi

I'm sure that none of us would like to post anything that would damage this forum, we get a huge amount from the benefits that it does provide, even if we may wish for further benefits. Some of these postings would be well placed in the suggestions section.

 

I believe that we should find a way to express our experiences of all aspects of boating, and that that should reasonably include the consumer experience- which, sadly, sometimes can feel like quite a dominant aspect of boating given the issues of buying a boat, moorings fees, fuel, etc etc .

 

The site could consider a disclaimer. If I have something to say about a business, I would be happy to defend that if challenged in law, or, if not, then I would keep my opinion to myself.

 

Consumer information is what keeps markets honest and competitive. E-bay is an illustration of a market where there is almost complete consumer knowledge. Who doesnt check a seller's feedback before parting with their money?

 

Someone honestly describing their experience of a boat builder, or marina, or fitter etc, would not be deformation, slander or actionable. Someone dishonestly doing so would be open to a legal consequence, and so they should be.

 

We are looking to buy a new car. I have spent a lot of time on Whatcar site, reading the feedback from other consumers of their experiences of both specific models and of the car companies themselves. I have not heard of any of these postings resulting in legal action.

 

I wish it could be done for the Canal world, as it is for almost every other domestic market, from fridges to motor cars, but if this forum wishes not to be the place where that happens, then fair enough.

[alan_fincher]

Just to let everyone know, I will be putting up a website soon where you can name and shame.

 

I very nearly bought a boat from Lee's as he was local.

Gosh thank God I didnt.

 

The website you suggest might be good at identifying companies with dodgy workmanship, or poor customer service, (if you can stay away from legal difficulties with those companies).

 

I can't see how any web-site can help in the case of companies that are trading and freely taking tens of thousands of individual people's money one day, then go bottom up with large debts the next.

 

It's very hard to see how any web-site can protect someone from the next Lees or Heron ?

 

In particular, most people who have actually bought a Heron boat before the collapse seem highly satisfied with their purchase. Wouldn't a web-site that named people's good and bad experiences have directed someone TOWARDS Heron, rather than away from them ?

[William Martin]

reinforcing my point alan - thanks

 

there are two things you need from a builder;

 

1) the technical ability to do the job

 

2) the commercial ability to do the job

 

A forum/survey could help with the first. The only cure for the second is...(you have heard it before!) Stop giving them your money before they do the job!!!! You wouldnt buy anything else that way!!!!

[Mick and Pauline]

reinforcing my point Alan - thanks

 

there are two things you need from a builder;

 

1) the technical ability to do the job

 

2) the commercial ability to do the job

 

A forum/survey could help with the first. The only cure for the second is...(you have heard it before!) Stop giving them your money before they do the job!!!! You would buy anything else that way!!!!

 

Hi,

 

I have been reading this thread for sometime and I think we have now come close to the problem of identifying a unsafe builder. Some of you will be aware, our boat was caught up in the Heron mess and Point One is correct. Our Heron boat is a very good designed boat and looks really great now it's painted and afloat. So technically a good, well built boat.

 

Now Point Two is where we came unstuck, firstly the company not known to us was in cash flow difficulties due to high overheads and they were not paying their suppliers therefore parts for our boat were not be delivered.

 

All this would have been OK if we had not broken the No1 Cardinal Rule and paid my stage payment BEFORE the stage payment work BEGAN. Big mistake that we and the rest of the exHeron guys are now paying for.

 

So our advice is go to a good builder of well designed boats BUT do not part with any cash until that staged payment work IS FINISHED.

 

Mick & Pauline.

Nb Ebinka.

Stainforth & Keadby Canal.

[William Martin]

Mick & Pauline,

 

Very interesting to hear from someone at the sharp end of this problem. I am delighted you did manage to retrieve your asset from the remains of the company - but I am sure even you will agree that sheer luck played a big part in that - you could just as easily have been wandering around the yard with the liquidator and finding nothing - no matter how many interim inspections you had done. Nice one that it worked out for you though.

 

 

 

 

btw - no business ever went bust because of "high overheads" - you go bust by failing to match your income with your expenditure - it is a simple process sadly ignored by so many.

[Mick and Pauline]

Mick & Pauline,

 

Very interesting to hear from someone at the sharp end of this problem. I am delighted you did manage to retrieve your asset from the remains of the company - but I am sure even you will agree that sheer luck played a big part in that - you could just as easily have been wandering around the yard with the liquidator and finding nothing - no matter how many interim inspections you had done. Nice one that it worked out for you though.

BTW - no business ever went bust because of "high overheads" - you go bust by failing to match your income with your expenditure - it is a simple process sadly ignored by so many.

 

Hi William,

 

The process of obtaining the boat was a worrying time, the administrator's had their lawyers check our contracts (Copies of the BMF) before they would release the boats from the Heron yard. We had our lawyer check it too and he said the boat was legally ours because some of the staged payments had already been made. They, the administrator's, did have to agree eventually that the boats were ours and then gives us four days to remove them from the yard because the landlord wanted to relet the premises, this is now where Gary is resiting the Ledgard business. So it was not luck, it was down to the copy of the BMF contract that was watertight (sorry).

 

The boat items that where onsite at Heron's at the time of the collapse, we could take if we had proof of ownership ie an invoice or our name or the boat name on the goods. We did though have to sign an agreement to say if the supplier challenged the ownership due to Heron's not paying them for the item then we may be required to return the items to the suppliers.

 

What I meant by "high overheads" was that Heron's had three business units to pay rent for and just as an example of their size of operation, Gary is moving their work into just one unit I believe. On top of this they had to cover staff wages, material price rises etc and still be competitive in price. In the end there was not enough boats being built at the correct price to cover the cost of the size of the operation.

 

Mick & Pauline.

Nb Ebinka.

[William Martin]

"So it was not luck"

 

It was 'luck' that A> you could actually find a boat and that B> you could prove legal title to it. In so many similar circumstances things do not go so well.

 

 

 

I know nothing about this particular company but it would appear that they failed to actively match their overheads to their level of sales. The terrible injustice in all of this is that you allowed them to use your cash to prop up their failing cash-flow. If your cash had not been forthcoming they would have failed before your build started and not during it - saving you so much heart ache.

 

My much repeated point - people must realise that stage payments on a resalable asset is madness. Boats should be bought like cars, you put down a deposit and you pay when you get it.

 

----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

 

"We did though have to sign an agreement to say if the supplier challenged the ownership due to Heron's not paying them for the item then we may be required to return the items to the suppliers"

 

That is not what I would call watertight - although you will probably get away with it, it is possible a third party could make a charge over your boat and sieze it.

Edited September 5, 2006 by William Martin

[Gary Peacock]

This might be of interest it's a segment of the Heron Boats Limited report to creditors given by the MD John Hunt, now in no way do I condone his actions but what he says is true of a lot of builders in the present market climate.

 

 

Background

 

The Company was incorporated on 5th June 2000 and commenced trading shortly thereafter with John Hunt being appointed managing director.

 

The company was formed to build and fit out steel narrowboats for sale in the middle market sector in terms of price and quality.

 

During the first three and a half years of trading the company benefited from a full order book as a result of good quality building, keen prices backed by a good customer service.

 

Due to a competitive market during the first three and a half years profits were modest.

 

During the spring of 2005, the company's order book began to decrease and the director took a decision to build boats on a speculative basis to fill the gaps in the build schedule.

 

This course of action was deemed to be the most sensible at the time with a view to counteracting the increasing amount of "off the peg" boat companies that had emerged.

 

The new speculative basis was successful in terms of filling the gaps, but profit was affected by the interest payments on the working capital required to build the boats.

 

Throughout 2005 it also became apparent that competition was emerging from imported boats from Eastern Europe, Morocco and China who had acquired a significant proportion of the middle market the company had previously relied on for work.

 

The company was also affected by large increases in steel prices and although customers bore some of this , a significant amount ate into company's profits.

 

In order to avoid the potential loss of highly skilled staff, the Company undertook various trade contracts to ensure continuity of work. The contracts were not very profitable; however they did ensure the Company's solvency in the hope of new orders in the spring buying period.

 

The Company however suffered a significant blow when two customers withdrew their orders in close proximity and with no notice period. Left a gap in the building schedule that despite efforts could not be filled.

 

It became clear that without the income from the two contracts, reductions in overheads would be required. However, following discussions with the Company's employment law advisers it became clear that the company was unable to afford the redundancy payments that would have been payable together with the wages for the size of the workforce at this time.

 

It was at this point in February 2006 that the director sought advice from the Company's accountants with a view to insolvency options and also a sale of the3 business. A potential purchaser emerged ,however interest was insufficient and the director concluded that it would not be financially viable to continue to trade.

The rest is history!

 

Now maybe or maybe not there might have been more to the Company's failure, but from an industry outlook of it all the Directors statement seemed to be based around what many builders too experienced in 2004/5.

Edited September 5, 2006 by Gary Peacock

[William Martin]

Interesting!

 

The market moved under them and they failed to reposition themselves - import themselves, go after the high end of the market, diversify completely...

 

In business standing still is actually going backwards!

[anthony]

I have to disagree with you William.

Why?

People are not science they are individuals with emotions and gut feeling.

How many times have you bought a car from such a body because they come highly recommended?

How about a boat builder making their business safe by having their bank certify they are safe to pay large deposits to?

A financial reference if you like.

If we can read other peoples bad experiences good and bad then we can ask questions and make our own minds up based apon that when speaking face to face with a builder.

How many nonsensical so called scentific polls of statistics are out they that are useless?

Erm shall we start with the national crime rate for one?

When things are done properly and all avenues are explored I think we can get good information by going down both routes and combining them.

I think my idea is a good one but like any new idea it needs development.

Thanks.

[anthony]

Just to add a survey could only be based on positive and negative customer experiences.

So it is actually no different from a name and shame discussion site.

Thanks.