This is disturbing! (new Cutwater boat)

So Cutwater builds a boat with a hole at the water line for the control wires and cable for the two outboard motors hanging on the stern. There plan then is to have a bilge pump to pump out all that water coming in the hole, and maybe a backup pump in case that fails. They should also equip the boats with solar panels in case the batteries get low. What would also work would be a yellow strobe light mounted up high that goes off right before the batteries die, to alert those around, I'm about to sink. Another backup would be an inflatable skirt like what you see on a walker bay. So with the water coming in the hole for the motor controls and the bilge pumps don't work or the batteries die or the solar panels and the strobe light fails. I believe the inflatable skirt will work. Problem solved, I think I should work for Cutwater!

Signed
Rube Goldberg
Maybe Styrofoam
P.S. Cutwater please don't remove the hole I need a job.

twistedtree said:

Where are you seeing this? Not the schematic Delfin posted?

Click to expand...

The manual is here: http://www.tugnuts.com/download/file.php?id=680

The boat in question is the same as the 30, except that it has the 'AUTO CAPSIZE' features associated with the outboard installation, so I think this manual is the correct one.

Some of this seems like very basic common sense to me. Plenty of blame to dole out to all parties. If the owner was that inexperienced, he should have had a new boat survey done, he should have taken some basic maintenance training, and he should have had some insurance. Had he had any experience with boats, he probably would have walked away from it after a cursory inspection. The insurance rationalization is particularly puzzling: if he'd holed it on a rock was he expecting the warrantee to kick in?

His story is not unique - I've read lots of stories about people getting very well offshore and only then discovering extremely basic problems with the boat, the kind of thing any grade schooler with any more sense than God gave lettuce, would scratch their heads and say WTF? All with an hour or two inspection at the dock.

Not taking any blame away from Cutwater for building a bad boat, but this owner got an education, and an expensive one. He only needed to read a book or two, or a couple of magazines, or even a web forum, to have avoided this at zero cost. Caveat emptor.

firstbase said:

Dan, on Page 7 of the first Surveyors Report he did state that it was a Total Constructive Loss.

As someone else said, it may have sunk due to design flaws but something is missing in this story. 1,900 mile cruise with no insurance because everything is covered under warrantee? Maybe it's just me but he sounded sort of like a jerk from his first email to the dealer. Wonder what the dealer would have to say....

When he buys another boat I hope he spends more energy on worrying about the basics i.e. number and size of bilge pumps and less about the bar-b-que.

Click to expand...

You are correct, I did not read the entire survey. I skimmed it.
Well, I still would have bought insurance.... especially liability insurance.
Proving a design flaw will be difficult especially if the company has taken the boat.

I thought at least some form of basic insurance was compulsory for recreational boats?

For the most part no unless it is required by a lender for finance reasons or for marina/slip lease/rental. I believe some states require liability insurance only in order to register but not all. Not sure about Canada.

One of the many advantages of a large outboard as compared to a stern drive is no bellows. This eliminates several potential large water ingress locations. Fountain, Grady White, Intrepid and Trophy outboards that I am familiar with have the connections well above the water line and entering the hull via beefy purpose designed rubber grommets or similar. Maybe Cutwater/Ranger Tug needs to do a recall.

This entire story as told by one side is sad. Just wondering about the no insurance thing raises the specter of a Paul Harvey moment.

South of Heaven said:

I thought at least some form of basic insurance was compulsory for recreational boats?

Click to expand...

Not anywhere in the US that I'm aware of.

500,000 to repair, ok. So what does that mean to this boat, is it going to a landfill?
Or is that cost estimate only if skilled expensive labor and parts are pursued.

No fool would spend that sum I would think.




And then this idiocy, creating many years without a summer.
https://www.rt.com/news/444762-global-warming-dim-sun/

Why would anyone believe anything on RT.com? It’s just propaganda and fake news.......

twistedtree said:

Not anywhere in the US that I'm aware of.

Click to expand...

Hmm, interesting. Maybe I thought that because my marina requires every boat to have proof of insurance.

Anybody else wondering why the boat was found where it was? Why wasn't found next to the dock still tied up? If the dock lines broke, why not found in the middle of the lake? If the waves are hitting from astern, why found up wind? I feel something is not being said here, I am just not sure what is missing.

South of Heaven said:

Hmm, interesting. Maybe I thought that because my marina requires every boat to have proof of insurance.

Click to expand...

As does mine and two self owned, by friends, marinas we stay at.

I still wonder if a person foregoes insurance on a new boat if there are other basic boating requirements that have hit the ignore bin.

South of Heaven said:

Hmm, interesting. Maybe I thought that because my marina requires every boat to have proof of insurance.

Click to expand...

That's your marina's requirement, and a smart one on their part. Anyone financing a boat will require it too. But I'm not aware of any states that require it in the same way most require car liability insurance.


The buy took a big risk not having insurance, and he clearly lost that bet and will potentially eat the entire cost of the boat. But it was his bet to make.


But I think his insurance choice and the poor design and build quality of the boat are two different things. It doesn't excuse Cutwater in any way, in my view. The only impact of no insurance is that we will likely go after Cutwater aggressively, perhaps more aggressively than an insurance company who can write the whole thing off. He's got $400k of his own money on the line....

Marshmallow said:

Anybody else wondering why the boat was found where it was? Why wasn't found next to the dock still tied up? If the dock lines broke, why not found in the middle of the lake? If the waves are hitting from astern, why found up wind? I feel something is not being said here, I am just not sure what is missing.

Click to expand...

He said it was hung up on a deadhead.


That said, I agree there is surely another side to the story, and unfortunately we will probably never hear it until the litigation becomes public, if ever....

sunchaser said:

One of the many advantages of a large outboard as compared to a stern drive is no bellows. This eliminates several potential large water ingress locations. Fountain, Grady White, Intrepid and Trophy outboards that I am familiar with have the connections well above the water line and entering the hull via beefy purpose designed rubber grommets or similar. Maybe Cutwater/Ranger Tug needs to do a recall.

This entire story as told by one side is sad. Just wondering about the no insurance thing raises the specter of a Paul Harvey moment.

Click to expand...

My son's Grady has those grommets, but i believe they aren't designed to be much other than splash proof, and are located well up the transom. IMO, the issue here is the need for a large bit of extra flotation to accommodate the shift in weight from removing a diesel and adding outboards, coupled with a desire to make the large swim platform on top of that flotation not to have control cables crossing it, which means that get buried in a very dangerous location.

twistedtree said:

But I think his insurance choice and the poor design and build quality of the boat are two different things. It doesn't excuse Cutwater in any way, in my view. The only impact of no insurance is that we will likely go after Cutwater aggressively, perhaps more aggressively than an insurance company who can write the whole thing off. He's got $400k of his own money on the line....

Click to expand...

Absolutely correct. The man could be the world's biggest fool, and I'm not suggesting he is, but he could be and that doesn't change the fact that the builder produced a vessel that would sink if moored in a light chop.

Woodland Hills said:

Not onboard with the no insurance thing (what about liability?), but if the buyer was not an experienced boater, why wouldn’t they think it was ok to go to Alaska on a maiden voyage. Lots of people buy $500k motor homes and head off cross-country the next day, buy $80k trucks and set off on 1000mi trips. And why shouldn’t a $400k boat be just as reliable from the get-go?

Basically, the builder is selling a shoddy product and then doing their best not to take responsibility. The nationality of the selling dealer is completely irrelevant as is the builders and the buyers: the product, the boat, was not “fit for purpose “ and should never have been sold with such a fundamental defect.

Click to expand...

I agree with this.

A pieced together amateurish boat setup with a lousy dealer and a fool for a customer.

As to the lack of insurance, total insanity, and indefensible. However, a reminder to all to check your insurance policies. Be sure your policy does not have exclusions based on implied warranties and seaworthiness. If it does, it would not cover this event. If it has no exclusions, the insurer would pay and then go after the builder. This is a huge issue. New boat taken to see, delamination, sinking. Exclusion doesn't cover. No assumption of seaworthiness and fully covered. If you learn nothing more from this incident, than this one thing, it will be a worthwhile day and if you don't know about your policy, you need to learn now.

Boat clearly with major problems. That brings one more thing I will continue to preach. Don't accept new boat either without it passing a survey. This boat would never have passed one and while there would have been a legal battle, it would have been without ever taking delivery or, at worst, with a disputed and contested delivery and suit for all costs to bring the boat up to survey. See Kakawi vs. Marlow.

All the other issues in finishing the boat would seem to have nothing to do with this problem, just reflect upon the dealer and builder. As to handling of those, seems to me buyer likes emailing but when ignored wasn't driven enough to do anything about it. You refuse to send me photos and I'll show up unannounced at your doorstep to see what you're hiding. It was clear they were lying and hiding things.

As to all the post purchase changes, they're often problematic and I would want to check and trial the boat before making any.

Don't leave until satisfied. I would have never taken the boat away from the dealership. I believe in an extensive shake down cruise locally and until everything from it has been fixed don't head out on a trip far away.

Last, it's an expensive budget. Don't buy a boat at a boat show where time is limited. Don't buy a boat without thoroughly checking out the builder and talking to other owners of the same boat. Don't treat it like you're buying a wagon in Walmart or even like a car.

My post is aimed at helping others avoid such issues as too late to help this buyer.

B&B
Fantastic Post.

I almost posted last night about this.

The purchaser was foolish not getting insurance since as pointed out the insurance co. likely would have covered the boat and then gone after Cutwater.

Dealer shenanigans did not sink this boat.

Cutwater did with a poor , maybe incompetent build.



We met them at Port Renfrew. THey were excited and looking forward to the trip and taking the boat home. I agree they should not have taken delivery of the boat without a serious shakedown. I suspect, don't know, that they were new to any serious boating and had a lot to learn still. Too bad they had to learn the hard way.

Boat should have survived just fine if the bilge pumps worked.

Ski in NC said:

Boat should have survived just fine if the bilge pumps worked.

Click to expand...

And you just established the builder's and dealer's defense. Had you had electricity to the bilge pumps, none of this would have happened.

I’ve just been to the Cutwater website and as far as I can see there is no mention there of safety or seaworthiness. They go on about performance and hull design but say absolutely nothing about whether or not their products are designed to go to sea. If I was a cynic I might think their entire online presence was solely to limit their liability in cases like this. Perhaps their position is that their boats are essentially daysailers intended to be placed on a trailer at the end of the day..........

Woodland Hills said:

I’ve just been to the Cutwater website and as far as I can see there is no mention there of safety or seaworthiness. They go on about performance and hull design but say absolutely nothing about whether or not their products are designed to go to sea. If I was a cynic I might think their entire online presence was solely to limit their liability in cases like this. Perhaps their position is that their boats are essentially daysailers intended to be placed on a trailer at the end of the day..........

Click to expand...

I went to the TugNuts forum and saw many threads about general safety issues. No mention of incident in question. I'm guessing they are reading this thread gathering defense, avoiding comment to not prejudice same. The Internet can sometimes change the course of events, obscuring the basic facts for both sides.

Wonder whose jurisdiction will apply?

Woodland Hills said:

I’ve just been to the Cutwater website and as far as I can see there is no mention there of safety or seaworthiness. They go on about performance and hull design but say absolutely nothing about whether or not their products are designed to go to sea. If I was a cynic I might think their entire online presence was solely to limit their liability in cases like this. Perhaps their position is that their boats are essentially daysailers intended to be placed on a trailer at the end of the day..........

Click to expand...

In today's world with rich, inexperienced boaters.... I wouldn't let them row my dingy...and if I built boats I too would not mention what "seaworthiness" the boat was capable of, only it's flat water performance.

BandB said:

And you just established the builder's and dealer's defense. Had you had electricity to the bilge pumps, none of this would have happened.

Click to expand...

No bilge pump is designed to cope with swamping. ABYC is clear re. pumps purpose; dewatering rain and spray. They are not designed for damage control.

Builder has a Warranty to fall back on. IN the US, there would be an immediate tort filed on Implied Warranty for Merchantabilty and Implied Warranty for Fitness. Have no idea how Canadian law works.

Canada's typical boat warranty is hull and deck for defects and workmanship. If you can prove defect you get a new hull and deck. Canada's typical boat warranty explicitly excludes engines and "Any defect caused by the failure of the owner to provide reasonable care and maintenance;"

We can not form an opinion about bilge pumps as the surveyor did not test the operation and the schematics are too confusing. Probably not relevant as they aren't designed to prevent sinking.

Neither can we form an opinion about how the boat sank. The owner was asleep so would not be allowed to testify about the height of the waves or how the boat sank. The surveyor would not be allowed to offer his opinions in a US court as he doesn't appear to have any credentials or certifications that would qualify him as an expert witness.

We can form an opinion whether buyer exercised reasonable care when tying up to a dock without checking overnight wind forecast. Teslin Lake is in the So. Yukon, NW prevailing winds probably around 15mph.

Cutwater will probably offer buyer the cost of the defense to settle, enough to pay his atty and replace his electronics. Buyer can then move on.

Don't anchor stern to.

BandB said:

And you just established the builder's and dealer's defense. Had you had electricity to the bilge pumps, none of this would have happened.

Click to expand...

Except that the operator's manual says the bilge pumps will operate regardless of switching. The user will argue they relied on that, which was either false information, or the pumps were incorrectly wired. As noted above all of this is negated by the wiring diagram, but I doubt the argument the user should have traced through the wiring diagram rather than relying on the clear word of the manual will offer much relief for the builder.

SoWhat said:

The surveyor would not be allowed to offer his opinions in a US court as he doesn't appear to have any credentials or certifications that would qualify him as an expert witness.

Click to expand...

I'm just saying the builder and dealer might offer an opinion that the cause was no bilge pump operating. As to credentials as an expert witness, the surveyors could absolutely qualify. There's no degree or license required whether they're in the US or Canada. They'd have to testify as to their experience and expertise if requested.

Couple thoughts. The stupidity of not having insurance coverage is a given. But that being the case, and given the size of the loss, there will no doubt be litigation. Question at that point will be whether its a 1, design issue 2 assembly issue or 3 issue of improperly done modifications/changes/additions by the dealer.

Design defect cases are a booger. Essentially they become a battle of experts; you're marine architect/engineer/surveyors claiming its the fault of the builder, theirs saying its not..must be someone else's. An example would be something like, "was it a design defect to design a boat with below water penetrations without automatic bilge pumps not tied directly to the battery" Oddly enough, those cases can include stuff like
"failure to warn" In other words, if you produce a boat that does NOT have hard wired bilge pumps, maybe you get away with it if you have a big sign plastered in the salon that says "careful....don't leave the boat without switching on the bilge pumps dummy". Sounds silly, but why do you think there are all the "caution--wet floor" signs all over mcdonalds and walmart?

The defective assembly cases can be a bit easier if there was indeed, a defect. For example, if the design did call for pumps to be hard wired and the holes to be cut higher, that could be an assembly issue. In a sense, it doesn't matter, those both go back to Cutwater.

The third category could be something that the local dealer did in putting stuff together. Maybe questionable assembly of the access covers etc. In that case, its mostly on the dealer.

My guess, he sues both so you avoid an empty chair, with each side pointing at the other.

If he sues Cutwater, he may be better off suing in Washington State. Not sure about the standards applied in each country, but pretty clearly he has a choice. If the dealer was at the show here and he bought from them, Washington has jurisdiction over him.

All pretty interesting stuff, but as someone said, its me and my brothers who make the money off this one. Love to see how it comes out.

toni