Why You Should Always use a Surveyor when buying a boat! The New Alaskan Sea-Duction

Well good and bad day for the new boat. Both inspectors showed up on time and went to work. These two guys have been in the business for a very long time. The hull inspection went well and only minor things were found. The engine inspector also could not find anything wrong other than a loose motor mount. Engines were ran up and both inspectors smiled. Both stated the engine and generator were in "like new condition. We took the boat out and ran both engines maxed out and got a reading of 2750. Max is 2800. The engine guy was busy taking measurements and checking for leaks. Everything checked out and we headed back to the marina.

We said goodbye to the engine guy and he stated the engines were in good working order. Then the boat was hauled out. The owner and I saw the same thing at the same time. The props were bent and the zincs on the port shaft were jammed up against the cutlass bearing. The Stbd trim tab was broke off at the cylinders. The owner was not happy as this yard had installed the zincs last March.

The owner was worried I would back out. I told him so long as this stuff is fixed, then the deal is still on. The yard will replace the zinc’s and port cutlass, any charges associated with putting the boat on the hard. The owner will fix the props, stbd cutlass and trim tab. I am hoping we will still be able to leave on the 21st. The fuel guy is coming out tomorrow to modify and clean the fuel tanks. So in the end everything has worked out. Looks like we will be the new owners.
See Blog for pics

That's assuming the surveyor is really all that good and knows more than you do..which in many cases is doubtful.

A second par of eyes and experience is good....but too many times their "suggestions" cause issues with the insurance companies for no good reason and they miss a LOT for what they charge,

Surveyors are a necessary evil for some and for as many horror stories I;ve heard about the profession...seems like an internal shakeup is due...I'd rather pay double for the average survey if I though it would do me some good and had some input to what goes to the totally uninformed insurance world.

I have heard the stories too. That is why i did some research b efore hiring these guys. Both have a solid reputation and are highly recommended.

psneeld said:

That's assuming the surveyor is really all that good and knows more than you do..which in many cases is doubtful.

A second par of eyes and experience is good....but too many times their "suggestions" cause issues with the insurance companies for no good reason and they miss a LOT for what they charge,

Surveyors are a necessary evil for some and for as many horror stories I;ve heard about the profession...seems like an internal shakeup is due...I'd rather pay double for the average survey if I though it would do me some good and had some input to what goes to the totally uninformed insurance world.

Click to expand...

I could not agree more ! If the insurance companies stopped accepting surve reports rfom the huge numbers of idiots in the business things would be different. I once surveyed a Salmon charter boat on Lake Ontario. It was so bad that my summery said "This boat will explode" A few days later that boat was on the water with insurance and a family onboard. Do you think the ins.co. actually read the survey ?

I sometimes think they Insurers) are just making too much money to care.

The boat looks great, Tom. Very nice layout. I hope she serves you well.

No matter what, there will always be something wrong with a boat.

Nice boat.....glad you caught those items though.....coulda been big trouble, maybe even on your maiden voyage.

markpierce said:

No matter what, there will always be something wrong with a boat.

Click to expand...

If there was a prize for the best quote of the year, I'd give it to you right now for that one

Small world

I spent a year working in that yard as a independent contractor. Great people. I know your mechanical surveyor and he is the best in Northern Ca. If your hull surveyors name is Steve McNear than you have the best buyers surveyors in the Delta. Good Luck on your trip home.

Alaskan Sea-Duction said:

Engines were ran up and both inspectors smiled. Both stated the engine and generator were in "like new condition. We took the boat out and ran both engines maxed out and got a reading of 2750. Max is 2800. The engine guy was busy taking measurements and checking for leaks. Everything checked out and we headed back to the marina.

Then the boat was hauled out. The owner and I saw the same thing at the same time. The props were bent and the zincs on the port shaft were jammed up against the cutlass bearing. The Stbd trim tab was broke off at the cylinders.

So in the end everything has worked out. Looks like we will be the new owners.

Click to expand...

ASD - I'm happy for you that all worked out in the end. And, glad you found the 25 yr old diesel fuel in tanks before final payment.

Just wonderen... With bent props, didn't you feel a hull trembling "Rumble in da Jungle" when you reached WOT during sea trial?

>No matter what, there will always be something wrong with a boat.<

Folks that purchase NEW boats should have this etched into their glasses ,

NEW boats probably need a survey more than most used boats.

How true FF. Remember Blannie on PMM, an airline pilot based in Hong Kong, who bought a factory new Clipper 40, which would have sunk at its moorings on its first time into the water if he had not been so excited he slept on it that first night. He was woken in the night by a high bilge alarm I think. Because he took delivery in the China direct from the factory, the distributor had not had a chance to give it the once over, (read survey), and there was an insecure underwater fitting - something to do with the aircon I think...

There are good surveyors and there are bad surveyors (probably the same as in any other industry). Anyone who just blindly picks one is gambling. Gambling their boat, possibly their life. A personal reference is a must. And not along the lines of "Yeah, Joe is a really nice guy. He won't give you any problems." I prefer "Sam is the most nit-picky obsessive SOB that I ever saw! He had to look at everything in excruciating detail!"

The trick is to read some previous surveys if you can...even if they are just sample pages...the trouble with references is the person giving the reference...what seems thorough to them may still be a glossing over of important issues because they themselves don't know what's important or not.

My favorite surveyor story is still my "great" , "highly recommended", "nitpicky" surveyor that wrote of a major safety issue on my last boat. My compass had a 1/2 inch air bubble in it. It in NO WAY affected the performance of the compass and the compass was a much better compass than often found on similar class vessels.

So of course the insurance company "insisted" that it was a safety item and it had to be fixed prior to moving my boat. My navigational limits were the confines of the Chesapeake and Delaware bays...but that compass better be fixed...even though major electrical and ac salt waters plumbing issues that the surveyor missed almost caused fires and flooding over the next couple of years.

Again...my point isn't as much of a slam on surveyors as it is on the insurance industry...plus as sellers we don't like surveyors dismantling or destructively testing and as buyers, we hate paying all that money for a survey to walk away from boats that are close.....

The system seems a little out of whack to me and the more experienced I become...the worse it gets...especially when trying to talk to an insurance company.

I just changes to a liveaboard policy and it went up 25%...yet the boat is way safey, better maintained, watched closely every day...etc...etc. Yet I can see their point because some liveaboards are a bigger risk...some aren't. They make NO effort to find out which group you fall into and their fallback is using a surveyor which as I've posted often glosses over the hidden "dangers" because of how business is done.

Insurance actuaries work in unusual sets of mathematical rules and have GREAT lee way to "assume" circumstances that “might” arise. As well as to place financial burden on whomever they please, in whatever region they desire, in order for their company to recoup payouts to others that occurred elsewhere.

Society of Actuaries: http://www.soa.org/

Actuary: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Actuaries

Couple years ago my SAFECO boat ins suddenly doubled from $550 + to $1100 +. No change in policy and no claim ever made. When I asked my broker to determine why she simply could not and would only say that SAFECO as well as other ins cos had elevated policy costs across the board in my region.

I contacted other ins cos and found their costs for same policy coverage had become similar – pretty much across the board. I then spent much time calling into SAFECO HQ to find the real reason why my region’s pleasure boat ins costs had suddenly doubled?? Eventually, and after persistently climbing to higher exec levels in SACECC HQ I got in touch on phone with a SAFECO VP. Following is what was said:

Me: Hi, I am CEO of my corporation and after much time on phone to reach an exec at your level I would like you to tell me why my pleasure boat ins costs suddenly doubled for no apparent reason?? I dock and use my boat in SF area.

Her: Have you increased your coverage or filed any claims?

Me: No, never. My insurance coverage has been the same for years with no claim.

Her: There has been an adjustment in that region.

Me: Why?

Her: I’m not sure; let me get back to you.

Me: (in an elevated, stern tone of voice) No, I’m sorry but that won’t work. I’ve spent hours trying to learn why SAFECO has doubled my boat ins costs and I am confident that you know the reason. Please tell me now, or, upon end of this conversation I will immediately switch coverage to another co.

Her: (in basically a whisper) OK, but, please do not repeat that I told you this: SAFECO actuary dept raised rates across regions to help pay for claims filed after last year’s huge Atlantic coast storms.

Me: Thank you and good bye.

Basically I (we) pay for others losses. I understand that to a point... in that on a broad scale the burden of insurance risk needs to be shared... but to double ins costs across a region that is 3,000 plus miles from where the losses/claims happened, that has no likelihood of any calamity so severe, and in one fell swoop, seems a bit over the top! I’d like to see their books on P & L now that a couple years have passed since the storms. My ins costs have remained doubled and I doubt they will be lowered any time soon!

Back to surveyors:

A very nice fellow on TF – Peter, “Marine Insurance Guru & tuna fishing addict!” (Avatar: Pau-Hana) was nice enough to provide me with an ins quote that is somewhat lower than others. The caveat for all ins cos is that I need to get a new survey accomplished. So... seeing as I am 100 miles from boat, haul out is not necessary at this time, as well as other schedule interrupters... I’ve currently decided to simply pay SAFECO ins till I haul. Then I will likely spend $$$ for a new survey and reinsure through Peter. That said, in addition to survey costs, it might be that I will need to spend additional capital for some boat items that the surveyor feels need attention and that the ins co wants completed before policy is issued. I know our Tolly boat like the back of my hand and I make sure that all her portions stay in perfectly good, workable condition. But, similar to what psneeld mentioned – I too have small bubble at top of my lower helm’s compass... and... seeing as it works fine and I virtually always pilot from the bridge I really don’t want that type item from the survey to end up costing me unnecessary expen$$$es.

Happy Boating Daze! - Art

Art said:

ASD - I'm happy for you that all worked out in the end. And, glad you found the 25 yr old diesel fuel in tanks before final payment.

Just wonderen... With bent props, didn't you feel a hull trembling "Rumble in da Jungle" when you reached WOT during sea trial?

Click to expand...

That was the funny thing, no vibration. They were not bent that bad, but bad enough we could only get 2750rpms instead of 2800.

Concerning the lack of vibration with bent propeller blade(s), I would imediately say there should have been vibration. However, earlier this year a friend of mine wanted me to help with his boat. He was trying to sell the boat, but during the survey some damage was found which included a couple bent prop blades on the starboard prop.

My friend is not very good handling his boat, so I took the helm to get the boat to the lift so he could have repairs made after losing the sale. Much to my surprise there was no vibration. I must admit we did not get over mid range on RPMs because it was a short trip to the lift, but still there was no vibration.

Once the boat was lifted, and to my surprise, there were the bent blades. I guess the bends in the blades were offsetting or something. Until I experienced it myself, it was impossible. Boats are sometimes a little weird.

Art said, "Basically I (we) pay for others losses. I understand that to a point... in that on a broad scale the burden of insurance risk needs to be shared... but to double ins costs across a region that is 3,000 plus miles from where the losses/claims happened, that has no likelihood of any calamity so severe, and in one fell swoop, seems a bit over the top! I’d like to see their books on P & L now that a couple years have passed since the storms. My ins costs have remained doubled and I doubt they will be lowered any time soon! said, "

Insurance works on the law of big numbers. Actuaries compute the chances of losses and recommend rates to cover those losses. Insurance companies can only operate at a loss for a short period of time.

That being said I sit on the board of an insurance company that deals with mostly workers compensation insurance. Our underwriters consider loss ratios, overall history, and experience modification rates. Then they recommend whether a policy should be issued. Sometimes the underwriters are over ruled by the board, but not often. Actuaries are weird. I am convinced that they have a Ouija board back there that they consult. We usually set rates by a loss cost multiplier. The most weird thing they compute is IBNR. Claims incurred but not reported. Totally an off the wall number.

Sure, to some extent we will all be paying for storms in other areas. Spreading the cost is the only way that insurance is at all affordable.

You did not notice vibration ?!?

Wish this Post had come 6 mo. ago before I spent a couple of Boat Bucks on a diver and a new Prop to solve my Vibration problem. Everyone I spoke to thought it most likely the Prop!

Yeah, it looked a bit ugly from the Haul-Out 2.5 years ago, but after the shop cleaned it up, not so bad. Still, I opt'd for a new one since it did have some dings, corrosion, slight bend, old and ugly.... and was already off.

Almost no change in Vibration. Going all over the engine mounts and shaft log / stuffing box tightening nuts seemed to help much more.
Pretty much convinced that she needs alignment at next haul; as soon as that is practical.

Don, I agree with you. Why should west-coast boaters subsidize east coasters?

markpierce said:

Don, I agree with you. Why should west-coast boaters subsidize east coasters?

Click to expand...

I was really hoping you would our addiction (boating addiction)

markpierce said:

Don, I agree with you. Why should west-coast boaters subsidize east coasters?

Click to expand...

Just part of the deal. Why should East Coast homeowners pay for some of the cost of California wild fires? Just part of sharing the cost. There are local rate variations, but if none were shared Hurricane Sandy damage in the northeast would leave those folks out. There can be catastrophic loss anywhere.

I would love to compare my Florida marine rate to your California rate. Same goes for Florida homeowners insurance.

Moonstruck said:

...I would love to compare my Florida marine rate to your California rate. Same goes for Florida homeowners insurance.

Click to expand...

I can't quite compare FL and CA but when we went through the Canal, excluding the rider for the transit, our premiums increased 20% since we were now in the Caribbean. (It was a good thing the water was clear).

When we were in Alaska and the PNW, our premiums were 42% less than what we are currently paying in Florida which is ~1.77% of our hull value. We could get that number lower if we wanted to be north of Brunswick, GA between June I and November 1.

Larry M said:

I can't quite compare FL and CA but when we went through the Canal, excluding the rider for the transit, our premiums increased 20% since we were now in the Caribbean. (It was a good thing the water was clear).

When we were in Alaska and the PNW, our premiums were 42% less than what we are currently paying in Florida which is ~1.77% of our hull value. We could get that number lower if we wanted to be north of Brunswick, GA between June I and November 1.

Click to expand...

Actuaries to the rescue (just kidding)!

Don's mention of Ouija board in Actuarys’ tool box is partially correct (see post # 19).

Their main tool is called tall %age premium "fluff"... spread broadly over all regions; including those affected by specific calamity and those not. Basically, and in good effort to make sure the ins co they represent stays solvent, the base loss potential is calced and then a tall % override (“fluff”) on premium costs is broadly applied. The rub I have with ins premium costs is that in “spreading the risk” across this nation it seems that the cost increases should more closely represent the problems that have happened or are anticipated in specific geographic areas... due to... weather, climate, fire, earthquake and otherwise.

Points on fact:

- Rural areas in heavily wooded areas should not have their homeowner fire ins subsidized by home owners where no forest exists
- Auto owners in very rural areas should not have their auto ins subsidize drivers in heavy population highway areas
- Boaters in SF Delta (i.e. me and many others) should not be required to subsidize hurricane losses on east coast

All in all what I’m implying here is simply that thems (all of us) who live in regions where specific calamities have occurred or may be likely to occur should bear the brunt of ins cost needs regarding coverage provided in their area. Then, people who live in any specific area will simply need to budget as needed... but, those in other areas need not budget to subsidize other geographic regions’ disaster premiums.

I have got to say that my surveyor saved me close to $10,000 by the time it was all said and done. The PO had tanks inspected probably due to a fuel issue but added some hardware to the side of the gas tanks. In the process the cleaning company caused more damage than resolved. The tanks have to be removed with both motors and replaced. Bill on that one is going to be $8k. The PO knocked $10k off the top to complete the sale. I wouldn't have known that these were a violation of Federal law as they look like they were done well. Now I know why ports/openings shouldn't be and aren't allowed in the side of any gas tank. (Diesel that's another story, as I have a diesel tank I am thinking of installing a sight tube on for the heater.) Other small things here and there all adding up to about $700 +/- to fix, plus some delamination/core/fiberglass work needed.(two small areas on a 30 + year old boat). Best $600 I ever spent!

Art said:

[/FONT][/COLOR]
All in all what I’m implying here is simply that thems (all of us) who live in regions where specific calamities have occurred or may be likely to occur should bear the brunt of ins cost needs regarding coverage provided in their area. Then, people who live in any specific area will simply need to budget as needed... but, those in other areas need not budget to subsidize other geographic regions’ disaster premiums.

Click to expand...

I live in a seismic two earthquake zone. I don't know what it is in your area, but suspect it is higher risk. Psunami possibility here is low. The point is that there are hazards in all areas. As Windsong can verify, we had a tornado in our area. I cannot remember the last year that we had a tornado---and I can remember a lot of years.

Moonstruck said:

Spreading the cost is the only way that insurance is at all affordable.

Click to expand...

Yup. That is the way it works.

I shouldn't have to pay for all the boaters that are clueless...no matter what zone they are in...

Which is my point about insurance...other than some broad stoke conclusions about experience and use... and no recent claims (whether your fault or not)...you pay the same as everyone...because it's how insurance companies make money...the bigger the pool they include you in...the less risk per type of incident.

psneeld said:

I shouldn't have to pay for all the boaters that are clueless...no matter what zone they are in...

Which is my point about insurance...other than some broad stoke conclusions about experience and use... and no recent claims (whether your fault or not)...you pay the same as everyone...because it's how insurance companies make money...the bigger the pool they include you in...the less risk per type of incident.

Click to expand...

One of the reasons for increasing premiums is the crappy returns today on invested money. When investment income was good, insurance companies could make it by breaking even on claims and overhead. That is not the case today. Their investments are suffering just as yours. In today's litigious society running naked is not a good option. Someone has to cover that. How would you like to have about $300,000.00 riding on your teenager next door bumper. There's a lot of risk out there both financial and otherwise.