Jump to content

Contract terms - is this normal


Nick D

Featured Posts

10 minutes ago, WotEver said:

All salty boats manufactured or imported on or after November 1, 1972 must bear a HIN/CIN/WIN. Inland boats might well not have unless they've been built to the RCD spec. 

I don't recall seeing one on ours. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

4 hours ago, Tony Brooks said:

They do but I think that if someone with sufficient funds took they to court that may well be judged an unfair contract term and be struck out.  Not that it helps the OP in any way, more a comment on the ethics of the likes of brokers.

There is no way on earth that contract clause would be judged as unfair.  

Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 hour ago, lulu fish said:

There is no way on earth that contract clause would be judged as unfair.  

I would suggest that a broker is passing himself off as an EXPERT (legal word) in selling boats for their owners and as such has a duty of care not only to the owner but also to the buyer. I would suggest that you can not negate that duty of care by  using such clauses. However as its never beed challenged and is unlikely to be there is little point in arguing about it. In my book brokers are the same as estate agents and MPs - in it for all they can get out of it and sod anyone else.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 hour ago, WotEver said:

All salty boats manufactured or imported on or after November 1, 1972 must bear a HIN/CIN/WIN. Inland boats might well not have unless they've been built to the RCD spec. 

Hmmm.............  my salty boat was made in Scotland at Robertson's of Sandbank, between 1973 and 1976, there was nothing on the hull, but it/she had a Registration number, on a wooden plaque. nothing on the hull,.

This pre-dated SSR

Link to comment
Share on other sites

25 minutes ago, Tony Brooks said:

I would suggest that a broker is passing himself off as an EXPERT (legal word) in selling boats for their owners and as such has a duty of care not only to the owner but also to the buyer. I would suggest that you can not negate that duty of care by  using such clauses. However as its never beed challenged and is unlikely to be there is little point in arguing about it. In my book brokers are the same as estate agents and MPs - in it for all they can get out of it and sod anyone else.

Yes, brokers, and MP's  are in business to make money to feed their family and provide a roof over their heads, as we all  have to do,.

I am clearer on Scottish Law than English, but all I have to ask, is "is this vessel fit for purpose?" If they dont say "yes", I walk away.

It is all academic as none of us can afford to take anyone to Court.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

24 minutes ago, LadyG said:

I am clearer on Scottish Law than English, but all I have to ask, is "is this vessel fit for purpose?" If they dont say "yes", I walk away.

In which case I suggest that you limit your search to boats being sold in areas under Scottish legal jurisdiction.

Remember - a broker is just that - they broker a deal between the owner (seller) and a buyer.

The broker has no legal obligation to confirm 'this vessel is fit for purpose' unless they own it - at which point it becomes a 'sale in the course of conducting a business' and subject to the Trade Descriptions Act (and subsequent) legislation.

A broker listing (selling) a boat on behalf of a private individual will have (somewhere in the contract) that the boat ' is not being sold in the course of a business' and is therefore exempt from any 'guarantee', fit for purpose, not of merchantable quality, or any other legislation.

In a private seller to private buyer deal (which is what most Brokers 'sales' are) you have absolutely no 'legal come back' and Caveat Emptor comes into play

Buying via a broker offers no more safety or security than buying from your local newspaper, Gumtree, ebay, or guy in a pub car-park.

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

2 hours ago, WotEver said:

No number on hull or elsewherel, I can assure you.

.. and in Scotland , in theory, private sales do not allow for anyone, private or other wise to lie. I dont see why this should be different in England, if i buy a car described as blue, and it is red, do I just shrug my shoulders?

Edited by LadyG
Link to comment
Share on other sites

38 minutes ago, LadyG said:

Hmmm.............  my salty boat was made in Scotland at Robertson's of Sandbank, between 1973 and 1976, there was nothing on the hull, but it/she had a Registration number, on a wooden plaque. nothing on the hull,.

This pre-dated SSR

 

Part III  Small Ships Register (SSR) was introduced in 1983.

From 1983 to 1991 the SSR was managed by the RYA, from 1991 to 1996 by the DVLA at Swansea and since 1996 by the Registrar General at Cardiff.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

6 minutes ago, croftie said:

 

Part III  Small Ships Register (SSR) was introduced in 1983.

From 1983 to 1991 the SSR was managed by the RYA, from 1991 to 1996 by the DVLA at Swansea and since 1996 by the Registrar General at Cardiff.

But Part 1 Ships Register dates back the 16th Century :

Part I is the traditional Register of British Ships, which originated in the sixteenth century.  By the end of the nineteenth century each of the 110 significant ports in the UK had its own register.  By 1986 the administration of the register was drawn into 17 regional centres and by 1994 the entire operation was centralised at the office of the Registrar General of Shipping in Cardiff.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 hour ago, Tony Brooks said:

I would suggest that a broker is passing himself off as an EXPERT (legal word) in selling boats for their owners and as such has a duty of care not only to the owner but also to the buyer. I would suggest that you can not negate that duty of care by  using such clauses. However as its never beed challenged and is unlikely to be there is little point in arguing about it. In my book brokers are the same as estate agents and MPs - in it for all they can get out of it and sod anyone else.

That contract has been challenged an awful lot. It has always been found to be watertight. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

14 minutes ago, croftie said:

 

Part III  Small Ships Register (SSR) was introduced in 1983.

From 1983 to 1991 the SSR was managed by the RYA, from 1991 to 1996 by the DVLA at Swansea and since 1996 by the Registrar General at Cardiff.

pre SSR ie, when proper boats were registered with Lloyds of London.

I started professional sailing on a registered yacht, [Kittiwake 11 {2}] which was built in 1930 and registered at Lloyds

 of London,. My own yacht was also Lloyds Registered, [blue book],  nothing to do with SSR. 

Google might be correct,  but irrelevant.

Edited by LadyG
Link to comment
Share on other sites

2 minutes ago, LadyG said:

pre SSR ie, when proper boat were reistered with Lloyds of London.

I started professional sailing on a registered yacht, [Kittiwake 11 {2}] which was built in 1930 and registered at Lloyds

 of London,  my own yacht was also Lloyds Registered, [blue book],  nothing to do with SSR. 

I was replying to your post

"Hmmm.............  my salty boat was made in Scotland at Robertson's of Sandbank, between 1973 and 1976, there was nothing on the hull, but it/she had a Registration number, on a wooden plaque. nothing on the hull,.

This pre-dated SSR"

NOW you are referring to a 1930's boat which obviously pre dates Part III

Link to comment
Share on other sites

6 minutes ago, croftie said:

I was replying to your post

"Hmmm.............  my salty boat was made in Scotland at Robertson's of Sandbank, between 1973 and 1976, there was nothing on the hull, but it/she had a Registration number, on a wooden plaque. nothing on the hull,.

This pre-dated SSR"

NOW you are referring to a 1930's boat which obviously pre dates Part III

Both pre date SSR, which was introduced in 1983

Link to comment
Share on other sites

4 hours ago, Tony Brooks said:

I would suggest that a broker is passing himself off as an EXPERT (legal word) in selling boats for their owners and as such has a duty of care not only to the owner but also to the buyer. I would suggest that you can not negate that duty of care by  using such clauses. However as its never beed challenged and is unlikely to be there is little point in arguing about it. In my book brokers are the same as estate agents and MPs - in it for all they can get out of it and sod anyone else.

A rather damning statement; putting all brokers in the same 'boat'.

One call just as easily say "all marine engineers are con-men trying to bluff their way through some bodge or dodgy advice."

I have spent a part of my life as a broker, and believe me, both myself and the marina I was at went to considerable trouble to establish ownership and right of disposal when taking on a boat.  In a couple of cases this put us to considerable effort (and cost).

Please don't lump all boat brokers in the same boat, and in return I won't say that all marine engineers are a bunch of crooks (although I have come across one or two who I would cheerfully include in that category).

  • Greenie 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Totally agree. Some estate agents are utter crooks, others pleasingly ethical. Many somewhere in the middle. Just my experience with dozens if not hundreds of them over the decades. It's naive in my opinion to condemn all of them together, purely due to the occupation they choose. 

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

5 hours ago, Mike the Boilerman said:

Totally agree. Some estate agents are utter crooks, others pleasingly ethical. Many somewhere in the middle. Just my experience with dozens if not hundreds of them over the decades. It's naive in my opinion to condemn all of them together, purely due to the occupation they choose. 

Next you'll be telling us that solicitors are a bunch of altruistic, kind-hearted socialists ;)

Link to comment
Share on other sites

OK I put my hands up and apologise for making a general statement but  am not apologising for making a statement that certain jobs seem to attract more than their fair share of shysters who seem to posses questionable ethics - WotEver has found another one!

Link to comment
Share on other sites

14 hours ago, dor said:

I have spent a part of my life as a broker, and believe me, both myself and the marina I was at went to considerable trouble to establish ownership and right of disposal when taking on a boat.  In a couple of cases this put us to considerable effort (and cost).

There are indeed some Brokers who go 'above and beyond' what is expected of them - I would like to cite an example.

When we agreed to purchase the 'Big-Cat' in Croatia the broker requested that we had a survey, I said we had inspected the boat and were happy, he then INSISTED we had a survey, to which we again declined, he then suggested that he was not prepared to sell the boat and risk his reputation unless a survey was undertaken. We had agreed the price with the seller, and (obviously) the seller was happy for us just to 'take it', and suggested the broker accept and just 'take the money'

The Broker then said no-way and he would arrange sea-trials and a survey at his cost (presumably out of his commission).

There was nowhere in Croatia that could lift her out so he arranged a crew to sail her over to a yard in Italy who had a hoist large enough.

Long story short - survey done, no problems identified, boat back to Croatia, we paid for it and collected it.

She is a big girl !!!

 

 

Tfsvh0U8bPGbuIQGc_q1M-mjny6TABRpYDZd8wQdkG4.jpg

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.