This is disturbing! (new Cutwater boat)

SoWhat said:

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.

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.

Click to expand...

A better suggestion is to not buy a Cutwater with outboards. I’m pretty sure that my Hatteras will not sink if I have bow and stern anchors deployed and the wind or tide changes......

Although I AM currently tied to a face dock with the stern to the waves and wakes. Is there any chance we will fill with seawater and capsize while we are sleeping? Maybe we should stay in a hotel tonight?

Surveyors and licensed captains are used as expert witnesses all the time.... I have been asked on multiple occasions in law suits and criminal cases.

SoWhat said:

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.

Don't anchor stern to.

Click to expand...

Perhaps read the survey report.

1. An open deck aluminum boat was tied to the same dock and actually tied stern to, but had no water in it. So, what a 14' Lund can handle, a 30' Cutwater cannot without sinking.

2. No swamping occurred. The place the water entered the sponson was the only place it could have - through a bilge pump outlet under the transom. Any minor wave would be compressed under the transom and put pressure on that outlet. According to the surveyor (both of them), the "flapper valve" intended to prevent ingress of water was inadequate.

3. The idea that you shouldn't tie up stern to without exposing a vessel to sinking is an argument that the vessel is hopelessly badly designed.

Delfin said:

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.

Click to expand...

I'm just saying Ski pointed our a defense they may use. Not saying it's a valid argument or any are.

Likely a lot of lawyers going to get involved and very little accomplished. First arguments, which could take many months or even years would be the venues and the parties. That's before arguing about the facts. Don't get me wrong, I think the boat is poorly designed and built and that likely lead to the sinking but I think the buyer's very much lacking in knowledge and judgment.

I've known of very legitimate and clearcut suits against builders and they've taken years.

BandB said:

I'm just saying Ski pointed our a defense they may use. Not saying it's a valid argument or any are.

Likely a lot of lawyers going to get involved and very little accomplished. First arguments, which could take many months or even years would be the venues and the parties. That's before arguing about the facts. Don't get me wrong, I think the boat is poorly designed and built and that likely lead to the sinking but I think the buyer's very much lacking in knowledge and judgment.

I've known of very legitimate and clearcut suits against builders and they've taken years.

Click to expand...

I think what might simplify this one for the plaintiff is that this design defect is so problematic that Cutwater will need to make changes to the design to prevent every one of these they sell sinking, and by that action, prove their own liability. Doesn't matter if that change in making the bilge pump bigger, improving the flapper valve or sealing the conduit penetrations - any change will be proof of defect.

Or, if the defect is that the bilge pump was improperly wired, at least based on the assurance of the operator's manual, liability should be pretty clear. Though I agree, no set of facts necessarily means quick justice if the defendant chooses to fight to the bitter end. I just wonder whether the cost of making this owner whole isn't going to be seen to be a lot less by Cutwater than the damage to reputation.

SoWhat said:

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;"

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...

Having been involved in hundreds of insurance claims, warranty claims and dozens of court proceedings in Canada and 16 or 17 cross border cases, I can assure you that neither of these statements is correct.

First off, great discussion on this " incident ".


I'm thinking that the owner of the boat may of lost several hundred thousand dollars over this... but had the boat dumped its fuel tanks, oil in the motors, other "hazardous" contents on board the loss suffered by the owner could have tripled in cost.



I have owned plenty of boats that I chose to accept the risk of loss of the vessel.. but have never remotely considered not carrying liability to cover me for damage to other boats, spills, fire that effects other boats etc.
Luckily they learned their lesson on a "small" boat before they moved up in boat size.
HOLLYWOOD

psneeld said:

Surveyors and licensed captains are used as expert witnesses all the time.... I have been asked on multiple occasions in law suits and criminal cases.

Click to expand...

Agree, but...

Alec Spiller, Marine Surveyor
Spiller Marine Services

or

Port Credit Marine Surveys
Wallace Gouk
Society of Accredited Marine Surveyors, Seal #757
ABYC® Standards Certified, #10952
ABYC® Certified Corrosion Analyst
Transport Canada Licensed Master
Transport Canada Tonnage Measurer
BoatUS® Approved Marine Surveyor

It is completely up to judge as to who is an expert witness. I expect the defense would vigorously contest Spillers qualifications while running up the plaintiffs bill. (Spiller is actually a cargo surveyor)

boatpoker said:

Having been involved in hundreds of insurance claims, warranty claims and dozens of court proceedings in Canada and 16 or 17 cross border cases, I can assure you that neither of these statements is correct.

Click to expand...

"The limited warranties set forth above do not cover:

1) Engines, outdrives, air conditioners, and trim tabs;
2) Any boat that has been repaired or altered by persons other than MONTEREY BOATS or an authorized MONTEREY BOATS dealer or representative or modified in any way so as to affect its use and operation;
3) Any boat used for racing or for rental or commercial purposes or that has been subject to misuse, neglect, accident or structural modification;
4) Normal wear, tear, deterioration (including rust) of hardware, vinyl coverings, vinyl and fabric upholstery, plastic, stainless steel, other metal, wood, and trim tape;
5) Any defect caused by the failure of the owner to provide reasonable care and maintenance;"
ETC

https://www.montereyboats.com/MONTEREY-BOATS-2017-WARRANTY-POLICY-DOMESTIC---CANADA-6-20.html

The statement is correct even though you may disagree with it. You may be able to pierce the warranty but at what cost? This will be settled by first court appearance

SoWhat said:

"The limited warranties set forth above do not cover:

1) Engines, outdrives, air conditioners, and trim tabs;
2) Any boat that has been repaired or altered by persons other than MONTEREY BOATS or an authorized MONTEREY BOATS dealer or representative or modified in any way so as to affect its use and operation;
3) Any boat used for racing or for rental or commercial purposes or that has been subject to misuse, neglect, accident or structural modification;
4) Normal wear, tear, deterioration (including rust) of hardware, vinyl coverings, vinyl and fabric upholstery, plastic, stainless steel, other metal, wood, and trim tape;
5) Any defect caused by the failure of the owner to provide reasonable care and maintenance;"
ETC

https://www.montereyboats.com/MONTEREY-BOATS-2017-WARRANTY-POLICY-DOMESTIC---CANADA-6-20.html

The statement is correct even though you may disagree with it. You may be able to pierce the warranty but at what cost? This will be settled by first court appearance

Click to expand...

One cut'n'paste from one manufacturer does not make it "typical". Even then, in Canadian courts, most often merchantability will over ride any such wide ranging statements. I think to be "typical" it would have to involve hundreds of the 2,200 registered manufacturers who sell into Canada.

Based upon my own experience, when my Nordavn46 fell off the jacks due to one employee, after 3 years, I settled with a loss, to me, of almost 100K.... then there was the attorney fees. So, I would have been better off taking their first offer and moved on.
One word of advice, tell the yard to put in a new jack before removing the old jack. IF the worker had first put in a new jack before removing the old jack, it would have prevented my Norhavn falling off the jacks. The fall pushed the port stabilizer into the owner's stateroom. Result, constructive loss.

When I contacted my insurance company before entering into litigation, they pointed out, I did not have coverage while in the yard. Ask your insurance company specifically, do you have coverage while in the yard. I assumed I did and I was wrong.

True that the bilge pumps could not handle a swamping. But the control conduits in the photos would offer a limited amount of flooding due to an aft sea. The bulkhead penetrations were not sealed, but not wide open either. So my take on it (?? just from photos) is that there would be some water ingress, but the pumps could likely handle it. If they were operable.

The swamping came once there was enough bilge water to put the conduit penetrations completely under water, again with the pumps off.

Also possible the pumps failed.

I always thought that Ranger Tugs and the new models based on the Cutwater design were good boats. Ignoring the issue of the outboards and the wire runs at the stern for the moment which may be particular to that model boat, the other issues mentioned by the 302 owner before the sinking (drains not connected, lots of water leaks, etc.) gives me great pause in considering buying one of their boats. If they cannot take the care to ensure that all the drains are connected (which is pretty basic stuff), then what else are they missing?

My wife is quite enamored of the Ranger 23, but now, who knows.

My take aways from reading the entire story.

1. choose a dealer wisely, selecting a dealer or broker merits the same homework as buying any other system on a boat.

2. insure or not according to your own risk tolerance and financial situation.

3. Fluid Motion Llc has some explaining to do on the design.

Hi. I rarely (almost never) post but I do follow interesting threads.
I don't own a boat, but I do own a trailer, a little one used mainly for garden rubbish and old Amazon boxes, so naturally I was interested in the condition of the buyers brand new trailer, particularly the wheel bearings. I was wondering who's fault it would be if the buyer, unaware of wheel bearing problems, had loaded his boat, hooked up his truck and taken off on a long trip, with the inevitable consequences. Should he have checked the wheel bearings as responsible boaters do or just assume that everything would be fine on a new trailer.

I purchased a similar sized new boat in 2017 from a large manufacturer with a Bravo III outdrive, with a single Sahara 1100 bilge pump. Our boat had a transom shield assembly leak from day one in the water. My first tip that something was awfully wrong is the bilge pump went off while I was at the dock reading the owner's manual, and it hadn't rained in three days. For several months while we tried to figure this out (and through Hurricane Irma), the House Battery and the bilge pump kept her afloat - it is set up to run with Battery switch off. Finally, surveyor found transom shield issues and we fixed it. Constant running of the bilge for 16 months killed the House battery, replaced it last month. We could easily have sunk at dock had either the bilge pump or battery failed earlier. We were lucky.

Cutwater apparently knows they have a problem. I forwarded the blog & this thread to a buddy with a 302 outboard powered Cutwater. His was already on the way back to the builder to have the problems corrected.


Agree with all on the negligence of the owner not carrying insurance. But Cutwater didn't build these boats as well as they should have.

Portage_Bay said:

Cutwater apparently knows they have a problem. I forwarded the blog & this thread to a buddy with a 302 outboard powered Cutwater. His was already on the way back to the builder to have the problems corrected.


Agree with all on the negligence of the owner not carrying insurance. But Cutwater didn't build these boats as well as they should have.

Click to expand...

Is the "problem" the same on your friend's 302 or yet to be determined? Wonder if other non 302 OB models will prove similar.

I'm thinking it's the same problems. In response to my sending the links to the blog and this thread. His words:

".... Cutwater is currently picking my boat up and bringing it back to the factory for mods. Definitely a problem....."

Portage_Bay said:

I'm thinking it's the same problems. In response to my sending the links to the blog and this thread. His words:

".... Cutwater is currently picking my boat up and bringing it back to the factory for mods. Definitely a problem....."

Click to expand...

So, essentially a recall of all of that model.

It would be even more convincing if the surveyors had actually tested the bilge pumps and found a flaw or misrepresentation....
I'm just wondering if the rear one worked at all and how long it took to run the battery down. How long it would take to sink/capsize with water coming in..

I'd think Cutwaters defense would be "Well there are X number of these boats that didn't sink"....

Solly said:

It would be even more convincing if the surveyors had actually tested the bilge pumps and found a flaw or misrepresentation....
I'm just wondering if the rear one worked at all and how long it took to run the battery down. How long it would take to sink/capsize with water coming in..

I'd think Cutwaters defense would be "Well there are X number of these boats that didn't sink"....

Click to expand...

Knew someone who purchased a brand new home, directly from the builder. He moves in and the air conditioning isn't working. The AC guy comes out and quickly explains he hadn't hooked it up as he was waiting for the plumber to finish under the house first. Turns out the plumber hadn't finished and drains were not connected to the sewage system, all waste just running underneath. Fortunately, only 3 or 4 flushes of a toilet at that point and a little sink water.

I think if one was able to talk to all purchasers and get the whole truth, the evidence would be quite strong at this point. Their recall indicates an issue of some type. Problem is no one will volunteer information as all the other owners want their boats fixed properly at no cost to them, so they're not about to start disparaging the builder.

"I think if one was able to talk to all purchasers and get the whole truth, the evidence would be quite strong at this point. Their recall indicates an issue of some type. Problem is no one will volunteer information as all the other owners want their boats fixed properly at no cost to them, so they're not about to start disparaging the builder.[/QUOTE]

Respectfully disagree.
There is no evidence at this point. Only what the blogger says. An independent survey might be considered evidence. Misinformation or misleading information in the owners manual might be considered evidence. Is there an official recall ? Proof ??

And with the Internet most anybody can say most anything and have no fear of repercussions. Who wants to admit they bought a lemon.....

Reading the blog was there ever any doubt this would end badly ?
True spending $400,000 on a new boat "should" get you a good seaworthy boat. But who knows. None of us have a perfect boat for all conditions. Doesn't exist. Did the owner check on it diligently ? I believe the boat could take on water but over what time frame ?? Poor design, sure probably. It certainly could have been better.

I'm not knocking anybody, just it's hard to make any sound judgments based on an Internet post. Let alone legal ones...
Now if it was my boat I'd post the truth, whole truth, and nothing but the truth !!

You always insure the vehicle/vessel. Always. That way your fault, their fault, nobody's fault, you get some coverage.

WOW my 2 cents worth.

First of all wow what a situation.
I went to USMMA Kings Point Merchant Marine academy and Maine maritime academy and Im a captain and a marine surveyor but most importantly I had the transom of a boat I was running for a friend fail 54 miles offshore and had a vessel that was lost.

The first thing that sets off a red flag is the fact that the vessel has no insurance. everywhere I go I have to provide insurance info. Infact when I purchased a boat from the dealer I was required to show proof of insurance and yes I paid cash no financing intact it is a state law to have liability insurance. I dont care if its a car boat trailer I make sure be fore its in my name its insured. I am not going to comment on the quality of the build of the boat as I don't have a lot of experience with this manufacturer.

I would like to see the other side of the story and not some copy and pasted emails from one side of the story. I would like to see what was sent aka screenshots showing the un edited emails sent by both parties. He says that he wasn't responded too but later on says he received emails back and forth about the grill. Reading his emails to the dealer ect. I can understand why they weren't given more attention he was very demanding and pushy. If this was the true email and he and been a little nicer he would likely would have got a response.
I also find it hard to believe they never responded and went fishing. He probably got wind u and rude and they didn't want to deal with him. There is more to the emails than he's telling us. worry more about the important issues not the BBQ grill

once again we are only seeing one side of the story but any boat car or other item that is produced by humans has an opportunity for mistakes especially if the build is being rushed for an owner. some of the little things on the sea trial that went wrong are simple issues that would have been caught if dealer had longer to test all systems. are for window leaks and gaskets I have fought that on every boat and rv I have ever owned. considering how complex new systems are getting there wasn't that many problems.

As for them admitting there was a problem no they got the vessel back before it made the long trip 180 hours worth to alaska saving them money. It appears they dealer tried to fix any issue that was pointed out.

the trailer is a whole other story I know for a fact there is no way possible the dealer could pass that off as a new trailer I am going to leave it at that since we don't know the other side of the story.

to take off on an 1000mile 180hour plus trip on a brand new boat with no real shakedown and use of any type to get comfortable with whats what is crazy.

in your 22 day trip thats if you ran 8 hours a day everyday witch we all know is impossible due to weather. there were no water intrusion issues and you yourself said you were in some pretty rough stuff.

Im not gonna rehash all the comments on the pumps but i believe if there had been a problem i think they would have known sooner and agree if they had been wired correctly they should have been running. the boat was supposed to be equipped with a solar charing system as by the looks of thing is didn't see a shore power cable in the picture.

the Vessel when found capsized away from the dock I feel like something or someone had something to do with this. I have seen plenty of boats sink tied to the dock and it would have stayed tied to the dock. I have my doubts about some of the supposed extensive corrosion being that is was fresh water and if drained out and stayed down with penetration old the electrical would have been ok. I saw a guy take a 100ft motoryacht that was sunk in saltwater clean up connections and pickle engines and its fine today.

Lots of Canadians come to the us to buy things in cash as it is much cheaper. I wouldn't thing that a Canadian dealer would be allowed at an us show if there was a us dealer there.

I agree that outboard bracket was not well designed but i have my doubts as to the actually reason it sank I had those flaps on my through hulls had to take one off because it worked too good.

this was not a good situation for either party but I keep coming back to the owner and not the mfj.

True spending $400,000 on a new boat "should" get you a good seaworthy boat. But who knows.

Folks that purchase a boat , esp a new boat, without having it surveyed before payment and delivery are "pound foolish".

Any brand , any builder.

I too am curious how the boat became detached from the pier. Seen a lot of boats sunk at the dock and they remain tied. Unless using clothesline.

tiltrider1 said:

I am only seeing one side of this story... I think there is a lot more to the story then we are hearing.

Click to expand...

This ^^^^^^^


A lot seems to be missing here. I would not condemn Cutwater based on just this. If this is a part of a much larger pattern, then I haven't heard about it.

denverd0n said:

This ^^^^^^^


A lot seems to be missing here. I would not condemn Cutwater based on just this. If this is a part of a much larger pattern, then I haven't heard about it.

Click to expand...

Comments I made about Cutwater and a problem were not based on this report but on the others that show there is some pattern of this model needing to come back for some work. That may all just be them being exceptionally cautious or may indicate a serious issue. Regardless, I treat it much like I would an auto recall for the moment. My vehicle gets recalled, there's a problem. Until knowing more, I can't say whether it's a minor issue or a life and death issue.

BandB said:

Comments I made about Cutwater and a problem were not based on this report but on the others that show there is some pattern of this model needing to come back for some work. That may all just be them being exceptionally cautious or may indicate a serious issue. Regardless, I treat it much like I would an auto recall for the moment. My vehicle gets recalled, there's a problem. Until knowing more, I can't say whether it's a minor issue or a life and death issue.

Click to expand...

Since there is no federal process whereby boats are "recalled" like autos, or at least none that I am aware of, my guess is that you will see a quiet fix applied to all Cutwaters of this model. And again, we can all agree that the buyer was a doofus and the dealer a lousy one, but if any mariner even mildly knowledgeable about boating looked at the arrangement Cutwater developed to increase floatation so they could produce an outboard model, they would have rejected it as inherently unseaworthy. Would you bet your boat on a $25 bilge pump that absolutely had to work in normally encountered conditions at a dock to keep the vessel afloat?