Propane Bottle Location Requirements

[sunchaser]

Somesailor said:
"Too many people think they will be paying for the survey and getting a price reduction based on survey findings. I am very clear up front that that is not what a survey is for, and I would not be playing those games."

So what you are saying is WHERE IS AS IS. Sorry, but few if any buy a quality boat portrayed as "bristol" that way. If you represent all systems are in good working order and they are not, it is up to you ot fix it or reduce the price accordingly. If dry rot found in core on fly bridge sides, you were not aware of, same deal fix it or price drops. ETC Your stance is BUYER BEWARE and won't attract too many buyers

 

[JD]

Somesailor said:
"Too many people think they will be paying for the survey and getting a price reduction based on survey findings. I am very clear up front that that is not what a survey is for, and I would not be playing those games."

So what you are saying is WHERE IS AS IS. Sorry, but few if any buy a quality boat portrayed as "bristol" that way. If you represent all systems are in good working order and they are not, it is up to you ot fix it or reduce the price accordingly. If dry rot found in core on fly bridge sides, you were not aware of, same deal fix it or price drops. ETC Your stance is BUYER BEWARE and won't attract too many buyers

Exactly. And where is it that you find all of these cash buyers. Because any loan company wants a survey and we are back to square one when the survey comes from Mr. Overzealous.

Oh I know where the cash buyers are. In FL they are paying 50% of the real value. Now I get it.

 

[SomeSailor]

Sorry, but few if any buy a quality boat portrayed as "bristol" that way.

By the very definition of your sale, you're advertised as being in "bristol condition." You then are guaranteeing all of those systems and their operation and better be ready for that. You'd have to define "bristol" to me well before I made an offer on your boat for sure.

On mine, all of my boat's systems are in good working order or were described as such BEFORE a survey. I wouldn't waste your time (and $$$) chasing a survey if I knew something and had not disclosed it. I walked each system with the potential buyers and explained things as we came across them.

So yes, they are AS IS - WHERE IS. No surprises found. I know many who think a survey is an excuse to negotiate further. Every boat I have bought and sold went just fine and were on the market no more than weeks. Survey and haul-out are at the expense of the buyer, I eat the cost of sea trials (after a deposit is made).

 

[SomeSailor]

Exactly. And where is it that you find all of these cash buyers.

Mine have all been cash sales.

You guys talk about 'over-zealous" surveyors. But what sort of examples are they pointing out that you believe were outside their scope?

Is pointing out ABYC requirements out of line? Are they not allowed to? Newer boats are built to more stringent safety requirements. What's the problem with recognizing that? They are welcome to go buy a more modern boat if they wish.

To me, an in-depth understanding of ABYC standards and their application to various types of vessels is a huge plus. ABYC and SAMS are both great organizations and I think too many folks with shoddy boats want to blame them for lost sales.

 

[RickB]

You guys talk about 'over-zealous" surveyors. But what sort of examples are they pointing out that you believe were outside their scope?

How many more do you need than offered up in this thread?

 

[psneeld]

Surveys ARE MOST CERTAINLY a tool to negotiate price...in fact if you don't want a survey...a lender will want a valuation survey and the insurance company will want a surveyor to re-survey if you want to change the agreed upon value.

To not want to deal with a buyer expressing that sentiment is fine....I wouldn't want to deal with a seller that wouldn't.

 

[SomeSailor]

To not want to deal with a buyer expressing that sentiment is fine....I wouldn't want to deal with a seller that wouldn't.

Again... to each his own. I've just watched people who look at a boat, make an offer and get as far as a survey and think "I'll knock $20K off for this, $5K off for that... and I want this replaced and that repaired before we release payment"

I'd say... "have a great time looking for your next boat"

Just as some of you are complaining about ABYC requirements. The requirements and standards are not the problem. These are old boats. They were not built with those in mind.

If you are looking at a 2008 Grand Banks or Ocean Alexander... it'd better damned sure be aligned with those requirements. It was built to them, and anything that is outside those is unacceptable. If you're looking at a 1980 trawler... you'd better understand that they were built with much less stringent tolerances and requirements. They didn't exist back then and I would LAUGH at the first prospective buyer who expected me to step up to those. BUT... they still exist, and are good recommendations.

The propane locker is a good example. Mine are in the flybridge helm. They are vented, but there are penetrations that needed to be sealed inside that vented into the saloon below. Also, the vent is directly above the door on the port side. If left open, you could discharge leaking propane into the cabin. Both easy fixes and good recommendations. I have since installed a propane leak detector up there as well. It complements the one in the bilge well.

 

[Tom.B]

If you are looking at a 2008 Grand Banks or Ocean Alexander... it'd better damned sure be aligned with those requirements. It was built to them, and anything that is outside those is unacceptable.

Only if it is rolling off the lot as new, and a 2008 model year is a used boat. Therefore, the previous owner could have done whatever they wanted to the systems in the first four or five years.

 

[RickB]

Just as some of you are complaining about ABYC requirements.

Requirements? What requirements? Who is requiring whom to do what?

If a sea trial uncovers a problem that can be cured by money it is between the seller and the buyer to decide how to effect a cure. Nothing more, nothing less. If you take that personally then maybe boat sales are something you should avoid.

The as is, take it or leave it type of deal generally implies a much lower sales price so the buyer will accept the known or suspected deficiencies. If you present the boat as having working components and it doesn't then don't blame the buyer for asking for a price reduction. He didn't misrepresent the boat, you did, intentionally or otherwise it really doesn't matter.

 

[SomeSailor]

Only if it is rolling off the lot as new, and a 2008 model year is a used boat. Therefore, the previous owner could have done whatever they wanted to the systems in the first four or five years.

It certainly could, but I'd expect the owner to keep the boat within the requirements it was built under. I would not expect a boat of an 80's vintage to meet 2008 standards.

Anything he's done below those manufacturer's requirements have now lowered the value of the boat.

 

[SomeSailor]

Requirements? What requirements? Who is requiring whom to do what?

Re-read my post above. (or not)

Each manufacturer self certifies their own boats to meet USCG standards. The NMMA then verifies that each boat model meets both USCG and ABYC standards and requirements.

If you take that personally then maybe boat sales are something you should avoid.

Nothing personal about it. Don't make it that way.

You can hang on semantics, but the ABYC is the leader in establishing best practices, standards and requirements for boat manufacturers. Each individual can try to maintain their vessel within those standards, and expect that a surveyor understands those and bases his recommendations and appraisals on them.

 

[RickB]

NMMA now ... more marketing horse apples, nothing more, nothing less.

Certification - Benefits of Certification

The boat has to meet certain, and very few USCG requirements. Everything else is fluff and marketing.

Those who attempt to convince the boating public that they have just bought the equivalent of a certificated aircraft and must conform to a set of standards in order to maintain the legal authority to operate it have an agenda of their own and that agenda may or may not include a benevolent motive to improve marine safety.

 

[SomeSailor]

I can see we're not going to agree on this.

You obviously have a problem with any standards of design being placed on boats. Good luck with that.

 

[psneeld]

I'd certainly want $150 or so bucks off a boat if it still had wing nuts on the batteries...geeezzz....what other safety items are glossed over on that vessel..surveyor's recommendation or not!!!!...

....certainly not to today's standards!!!!

 

[Keith]

My very first surveyor split his recommendations into three categories, which made total sense. I've never seen another do it this way. I can't remember the exact terminology, but it was something like this:

1. Items which affect the safety and operability of the vessel.
2. Items which are recommended to fix/change/upgrade.
3. Items which would be nice to do.

The insurance company was only concerned with #1.

Was he unique or have surveyors just quit doing this? I've had some crazy recommendations on more recent surveys like "No compass deviation card sighted, recommend making one". He didn't even ask.

 

[RickB]

I can see we're not going to agree on this.

You obviously have a problem with any standards of design being placed on boats. Good luck with that.

Far from it, I make my living ensuring that yachts meet class and flag requirements. That means I know the difference between legitimate national and international standards of construction, repair, and operation of vessels and their systems and the drivel spat out by marketing departments and toy boat surveyors. It also means I am really good at spotting horsepucky when I see it thrown around.

 

[BruceK]

IMO a major problem with surveyors is self protection from litigation/claims. Thus the surveyor`s liability exclusions set out in the report may take up more space than the report itself. I suspect those exclusions are foisted on the surveyor by his liability insurer.
Then the surveyor takes it a step further by picking faults and referring to standards, compulsory or not, to ensure he raises any possible defect or departure from "standards" so he omits nothing he might otherwise be liable for. He is protected, and he is not paying for the work he says needs doing.I would say that is his motivation, rather than inventing work to send to his mates.
My limited experience is specialist marine insurers will look at and discuss survey issues in the course of effecting cover. I`m equally sure non expert insurers might stick to the letter of the survey. You are better off with a specialist insurer who knows bow from stern.
A further thought on surveyors, if the surveyor is ok with it, always be present for the survey and you will learn more about your boat; if he is not ok with it, consider changing surveyors

 

[SomeSailor]

I'd certainly want $150 or so bucks off a boat if it still had wing nuts on the batteries...geeezzz....what other safety items are glossed over on that vessel..surveyor's recommendation or not!!!!...

....certainly not to today's standards!!!!

Yep. I was getting the boat at about half market value as it was. I could care less if it was bailing wire holding them down.

I was quite impressed by the way the survey was written and the thoroughness in it's descriptions. All recommendations were based on ABYC guidelines and none were inflated or exaggerated.

 

[SomeSailor]

It also means I am really good at spotting horsepucky when I see it thrown around.

Check your shoes.

 

[psneeld]

Yep. I was getting the boat at about half market value as it was. I could care less if it was bailing wire holding them down.

I was quite impressed by the way the survey was written and the thoroughness in it's descriptions. All recommendations were based on ABYC guidelines and none were inflated or exaggerated.

Right over your head.....

 

[JD]

How many more do you need than offered up in this thread?

My thought is that it's something in the rain that is causing it.

 

[Art]

IMO a major problem with surveyors is self protection from litigation/claims. Thus the surveyor`s liability exclusions set out in the report may take up more space than the report itself. I suspect those exclusions are foisted on the surveyor by his liability insurer.
Then the surveyor takes it a step further by picking faults and referring to standards, compulsory or not, to ensure he raises any possible defect or departure from "standards" so he omits nothing he might otherwise be liable for. He is protected, and he is not paying for the work he says needs doing.I would say that is his motivation, rather than inventing work to send to his mates.
My limited experience is specialist marine insurers will look at and discuss survey issues in the course of effecting cover. I`m equally sure non expert insurers might stick to the letter of the survey. You are better off with a specialist insurer who knows bow from stern.
A further thought on surveyors, if the surveyor is ok with it, always be present for the survey and you will learn more about your boat; if he is not ok with it, consider changing surveyors

OMG... Brice: With all due respect to you suggestion for "kindly" handling what I put in bold above. I recommend that if ANY person working in ANY way on your boat or other possission is not OK with you being present, especially a surveyor, adjustor, or other property-value-judge, that that person be immediately replaced with some one that is OK with you being present and asking any question you please. Their service was hired by you and they or their company is working for you. IMHO

 

[BruceK]

OMG... Brice: With all due respect to you suggestion for "kindly" handling what I put in bold above. I recommend that if ANY person working in ANY way on your boat or other possission is not OK with you being present, especially a surveyor, adjustor, or other property-value-judge, that that person be immediately replaced with some one that is OK with you being present and asking any question you please. Their service was hired by you and they or their company is working for you. IMHO

Fair comment Art, I was being gentle; what I really wanted to convey was you learn more at the inspection than you ever learn reading the report. I have only used pre purchase surveyors happy to have you at the inspection, one practically insists on it, but I understand there are some who are not so happy.

 

[Marin]

My very first surveyor split his recommendations into three categories, which made total sense. I've never seen another do it this way. I can't remember the exact terminology, but it was something like this:

1. Items which affect the safety and operability of the vessel.
2. Items which are recommended to fix/change/upgrade.
3. Items which would be nice to do.

The insurance company was only concerned with #1.

This is exactly what the surveyor we hired to do the hull survey on our boat did, and in fact his survey report sheet was divided up in this way. We still have a copy of this survey on the boat.

I will add that my wife, I, our broker, and our friend in the marine diesel/generator manufacturing industry (Northern Lights/Lugger) whose expenses we paid to go with us to California to check out the boat were present all through both the engine and hull surveys and what Bruce says is right on the money. My wife and I leaned a hell of a lot from both surveyors.

 

[SomeSailor]

I guess the feeling about surveyors who use ABYC requirements fall into two schools of thought here.

Either you;

A: Hate them and think they should not mention anything that fails to meet those standards.

B: You believe in the ABYC standards and want the surveyor to grade the boat against those requirements.

Maybe when you meet your surveyor, you could ask that he not mention anything that does not meet ABYC, NMEA, NEMA, NMMA, UL or SAMS requirements... only USCG violations. Think of all the paper you could save.

I enjoyed my survey. There were a few small things I had not noticed, and I learned as we explored around. The owner of the boat was deceased, so there was no one familiar with the boat. It was money well spent, and I appreciated the logic behind the ABYC requirements and work towards getting aligned to those.

 

[Keith]

Not everyone falls into those two categories. Shades of gray, not black and white. Realistic and practical vs. strict enforcement.

 

[SomeSailor]

When I hire someone to perform a non advocate review like a boat survey, I want to know what they'll be using to make their comments.

I work in aerospace engineering and 90% of problems we encounter can be tracked back to lack of clear requirements. When I say "requirements" I'm not talking about legal boundaries. I'm talking about best practices in design engineering and safety. A surveyor who understands the requirements that were in place at the time of manufacture can make objective comments about things that might be outside of my knowledge.

For example: Teak decking. Not many ABYC recommendations there, but he was able to observe caulking that would need to be re-sealed.

Wiring colors. Obviously a concern as much of my wiring is before any codes had been put in place. I have AC wiring running to terminations right alongside my DC terminations. Not safe at all, and something I will fix. Totally OK when this boat was built.

The list goes on, but the requirements in 1980 weren't as clear... or as well thought out as they are now. Red and Yellow DC wiring makes GREAT sense. As I replace wiring, I stick to these new requirements, but that doesn't mean an entire boat needs to be re-wired.

 

[RickB]

I guess the feeling about surveyors who use ABYC requirements fall into two schools of thought here.

Your repetitive use of the word "requirement" following the abbreviation ABYC is what destroys your argument and is a great example of how "surveyors" mislead boat owners and cost them a great deal of unnecessary time, money, and angst. It also indicates that you don't know what you are talking about. Why you continue to use that word shows you are intentionally trying to mislead the readers on this site. Why you do that is something only you can answer.

There are no ABYC "requirements" for pleasure vessels and only a very very few ABYC recommended standards have been adapted "by reference" by the CG to apply to small boats in commercial use.

Why anyone would in effect beg for private industry or government regulation of their hobby is beyond me. If you are so afraid of boating that you need an outside bunch to tell you if you are "safe" or not then find another hobby. Stamp collecting might be a good alternative.

There is a place in the boating world for surveyors, unfortunately most of the ones who go around whacking toy boats with little plastic hammers don't know sheeeite about the stuff they are looking at and think that tossing out a bunch of nonsense about "requirements" will make them sound like they do. Anyone who uses ABYC and requirements in the same sentence is a fraud and a fool or has some other agenda that is not related to the owner's best interest.

If you want to be regulated, or feel an overpowering need to be inspected and approved, get a bigger boat, one with a class certificate issued by an IACS member organization and apply for a USCG certificate of inspection. If your boat is flagged outside the USA, apply to your national maritime authority for commercial registration and jump through their hoops. They will be delighted to regulate you till you choke.

Personally, I kind of like that fact that the alphabet soup of maritime regulators exist. Between the IMO, IACS, and Flag State regs and regulators I make a very good living traveling the world to spend time on really big yachts in really nice places making sure that the owner isn't nailed because some operational or statutory item is out of place or a technical matter is improperly attended or documented.

What I don't have time for is amateurs pretending they are arbiters of non-existent rules in order to gain control over hobbyists. That is something about boating that I will never understand.

 

[SomeSailor]

You seem to take most things to a personal level so quickly.

Are you saying I am a fool? If so... would you be so inclined if we were standing on the dock talking about this with me?

As far as the word "requirement", I use this in my profession every day, I fully understand it's meaning.

REQUIREMENTS in an engineering sense, are the very basis for STANDARDS. Here are the ABYC REQUIREMENTS in order to be COMPLIANT to an industry adopted STANDARD. I do not use the word REQUIREMENT to imply MANDATORY. These STANDARDS are completely VOLUNTARY, but are recognized by an industry, the Coast Guard and MOST boaters as the best recommended practices available to date.

A-1 (ANS) — Marine Liquified Petroleum Gas (LPG) Systems

Here's a link to the 1993 revision of this document:

https://law.resource.org/pub/us/cfr/ibr/001/abyc.A-01.1993.pdf

Disclaimer: A inadequate grasp of the English language, or a difficulty accepting industry guidance may preclude gaining insight from any of the above.

 

[RickB]

As far as the word "requirement", I use this in my profession every day, I fully understand it's meaning.

Apparently not.

Here are the ABYC REQUIREMENTS in order to be COMPLIANT to an industry adopted STANDARD.

ABYC does not hold regulatory authority over the recreational boating industry. That private group does not have authority to enforce compliance with its suggested means or methods. Any surveyor who claims otherwise is a fraud.

If you are having difficulties with the language and its application to the maritime world, perhaps if I put it in an aeronautical context for you:

A privately owned and operated recreational vessel could be described in the same manner as an ultralight aircraft. It falls under the overall regulation of the national aviation authority but only to the extent that all flying machines are subject to certain legal restraints. How that ultralight is constructed and maintained is the responsibility of the owner or operator. There might be an ultralight builder's association that has developed and published a set of best practices but that group has no more legal authority over the owner operator than the ABYC does over the readers of this thread.

Many of us who play with recreational boats do so to find relief from the structure that defines most day to day activities. Maybe some find the structure and discipline required to navigate to some self-defined and possibly higher standard a form of relaxation. As the olds saying goes; whatever floats your boat.

Some are obviously pleased to think that they are performing some important and potentially hazardous task and are bouyed by the thought that they are playing in the same pond as the captain of a giant ship or the stars of a Discovery Channel episode. Whichever role you assume is none of my business and I certainly don't take it personally no matter what you choose to do or how you do it.

I do take offense though at those who cycle through this and other sites and claim that holding some "number" or paid-up membership in some club justifies misinforming readers that they must follow certain "requirements" in order to safely pursue their recreational activities. Those who come along and claim that their personal approach to conformity is the best approach or is the only legitimate approach are the worst because they don't know the difference between law and practice.