Can arbitration on P&S correct a hidden boat problem?

[Portage_Bay]

That was 45 yrs ago. I don't remember the details of the purchase contract. I don't recall signing anything with the surveyor who was the one I sued (sp?).

I think the process of purchasing a boat in those days was a lot less formal. I was much younger, more ignorant and put too much trust in the broker and surveyor.

Contracts seem to get longer with more clauses holding everyone harmless each year. I doubt I would be successful today.

[SteveK]

Surveyors are following the suggestions of ABYC. Is there a suggestion on how to find a painted over rust spot on a fuel tank. If you go ahead make sure ABYC is also a named participant.

[guy with a boat]

Originally Posted by mvweebles

How did you get past the sweeping indemnity clause at the heading of all survey documents, the one that says they will do their best but no guarantees?

Peter

“His undoing in court was his lack of honesty, not his incompetence or the undisclosed condition of the boat.”

A clause that says “no guarantees” doesn’t excuse intentional misrepresentation of his work or findings, which sounds like it might have been the issue.

[Portage_Bay]

Originally Posted by guy with a boat

“His undoing in court was his lack of honesty, not his incompetence or the undisclosed condition of the boat.”



A clause that says “no guarantees” doesn’t excuse intentional misrepresentation of his work or findings, which sounds like it might have been the issue.

That is what happened and he lied about it in court. I'm reasonably sure the broker was part of the problem but no way to prove that. As I said earlier I was much younger and far too trusting.

[sunchaser]

Over the years TF has provided a valuable to service for those who ask "I'm thinking of buying an XX boat. What are the issues to look out for?"

It is a given that on older boats there are brand specific issues that become common watch points. Count the fuel tanks on a GB as one of these areas to spend some time on and bring to the surveyor's attention.

Better yet, do as Portage suggests and do you own serious due diligence and if in doubt as to your skills bring a smart friend along. I've helped friends and relatives on vessels up to 125' in size on pre-survey guidance basis. And I've had others help me as I became too emotionally attached to a prospective purchase.

As noted by others, "where is as is" and "seller makes no representations" language is common place in the used boat market. Has anyone ever seen "full disclosure" language in a boat sale contract?

[Bmarler]

Post #5 was made by an actual lawyer. Makes sense to me. If the buyer accepted the survey it doesn’t seem like there’s much that can be done. Legal fees can easily eclipse the cost of a proper tank repair or replacement.
Disappointing? Sure.
Really though, if I developed a leak in the top of a tank I’d try a patch and see if I could eke some more time out of it. A well done patch could last for many years.

It is too bad the seller went this way though, seems unnecessary really. Especially if the tank wasn’t leaking. Then it becomes a good faith effort to prevent a leak from starting.

[omoore]

I can tell you from experience that collecting is difficult. Litigation is a very slow and expensive process. Een if you win a judgement you still have to collect. My advice is fix the problem and enjoy the boat!

[Circumnavigator]

Several problems here. First, the P&S almost certainly says that the Buyer may not reply on anything the Seller says and the Buyer represents that he has not done so. That's hard to overcome.


Second, the Seller can easily claim that he thought he fixed the problem. That may or may not be true. In order to pursue a claim for fraud, the Buyer will have to prove that the Seller knew that the tank was bad. The Buyer has no way to prove what the Seller thought.


Although the deal has a Florida arbitration clause, in order to actually get the Seller, the Buyer will have to bring suit in Michigan. It might be worth going there and using the Small Claims Court if the claim is under the Michigan SCC limit which Google says is $6,500.


Jim

[PNK]

I have been involved in several arbitration cases, although not with a boat, and my experience is that it can be expensive, and risky, because even if you “win” you may not be happy with the result, or the arbitrator may decide on a compromise that neither side is happy with.
If i were the OP it might make sense to get a written opinion from a qualified surveyor as to the tanks conditions, and an estimate for the cost of repair, or replacement.
You could try sending those to the seller with a request that he split the cost with you. He is not likely to agree, but it would be pretty simple and quick to do, as opposed to arbitration.
As several others have already posted, this may be a case of moving on, and not letting it sour you on enjoying your new boat. Best of luck,
Peter