What would you do?

[Jklotz]

I closed on a boat 4 days ago. At the survey, the engine surveyor found a small fuel leak coming from the engine and recommended it be fixed. 2 or 3 drops during sea trial. Owner said he got down there and tightened a few bolts, ran the engine and did not see any more fuel leaking. I assumed it was fixed and we closed. 3 days ago, we did a shakedown cruise with a training captain, which consisted of an overnight cruise, 6 hours up and 6 back. Upon engine room checks, we noticed fuel was still leaking. Total leak for the 2 day cruise was about a tablespoon of diesel. Training captain recommended I have a mechanic take a look so I did. He was already on the docks for another job, so it was no big deal for him. He works on Cummins engines regularly. His conclusion: I have a leaking seal in a high pressure fuel pump. Didn't take him long, he knew exactly what he was looking at. He said not to run the boat until it is repaired because fuel is probably leaking into the oil. His estimate, ballpark figures, is around $5k, although if I use Cummins, who has a service office here, it would probably be double. Engine is from 2022 and is a Cummins QSB 6.7 with 1500 hours on it.

I don't think the owner was trying to pull something over on me. He's been great, very helpful in many different ways and, at this point, would consider him a friend. I think he underestimated the problem. Judging by the cleanliness of the engine room the previous owners maintenance logs, which were through, I think this is a new problem. The builder, who brokered the deal on behalf of the seller, has been very responsive. They are contacting Cummins to see if any warranty still applies and are actively working on a solution. Heck, my broker, who feels bad about it, has even offered to kick in a few bucks to get it fixed. I don't think there is anybody to point a finger at, except maybe Cummins, who should be providing high pressure fuel pumps that last more than 1500 hours (IMHO) for an engine like this.

I expect to hear from the builder in the next few days, so I can't do much now, but in an instance like this, what would you do? Problem found in survey, reported fixed prior to closing, closed based on this info, and now this. If the builder comes back and says "sorry, out of warranty", would you push it?

 

[tiz]

Id see if previous owner would split the repair cost. Cant hurt to ask. Why it's a 5-10k repair is beyond me but sounds like you have had an experienced person check it.

 

[Jklotz]

Id see if previous owner would split the repair cost. Cant hurt to ask. Why it's a 5-10k repair is beyond me but sounds like you have had an experienced person check it.

Pump needs to be removed and rebuilt then replaced. It's difficult to get to and requires a lot of parts be removed in order to access.

 

[luna]

The first thing I would do is run the engine for about 15 minutes to get things mixed up correctly and then pull an oil sample properly and have it tested for fuel, coolant, wear metals, the whole enchilada.
I would then get a 2nd opinion on the repair required from the guy who did the engine survey. I hope you hired a Cummins dealer to do the survey.
The next step is up to you and likely depends a lot on the personalities of those involved.

 

[Jklotz]

The first thing I would do is run the engine for about 15 minutes to get things mixed up correctly and then pull an oil sample properly and have it tested for fuel, coolant, wear metals, the whole enchilada.
I would then get a 2nd opinion on the repair required from the guy who did the engine survey. I hope you hired a Cummins dealer to do the survey.
The next step is up to you and likely depends a lot on the personalities of those involved.

We did oil samples at survey. They came back clean.

 

[SteveK]

We did oil samples at survey. They came back clean.

If that is the case and there was no fuel in the oil why does this external minor fuel leak require a service of the fuel pump?

Maybe another oil sample should be taken to see if that 12 hours runtime put fuel into the oil.

 

[mvweebles]

Oh boy & sorry to hear this. Was there a mechanical survey as part of the purchase inspections? If so, what did he note?

The Due Diligence period ended upon acceptance of the vessel. Barring any warranties or fraud, the repairs are on you. But your question is "What would you do?"

I'll reframe the situation a bit. Suppose you'd had a mechanical survey that said the injection pump needed a $5k repair and the seller reduced the price by $5k to accomodate. Later you discovered a fitting needed tightening costing you nothing. Would you refund to the seller the $5k credit?

Personally, if I were the seller, I'd feel awful and split it with you. But my obligation is $0.

Good luck and enjoy the boat.

Peter

 

[Comodave]

I would agree with Peter. Unfortunately it is on you now. Easy for me to say but you should have verified the repair.

 

[SIBERNUT]

There's a big difference in an internal and external leak. If your analysis shows no fuel in oil, id inform the seller, put a diaper on the leak & run another analysis at 10-12 hrs. Darn few engines NEVER leak a drop , and id balance cost vs necessity.

 

[psneeld]

My cut is how fair was the purchase price?

I never buy a boat where I can't afford to replace the engine at some pointy, even if it's the first day. A $5000 repair for an otherwise low hour, near perfect engine should be considered a good deal.

I somewhat agree about the oil sample. If the oil is free from fuel, as often the case, the mechanic was incorrect and was about to make a nice job profit possibly.

If there is significant fuel dilution and the pump needs replacing/repair.... then get on with it if you like the boat. Only if you felt like you paid top dollar would I even ask the PO for assistance. I would let him know since you seem to be friends and see what he says.

If I were the seller I would have the exact same feelings. If the boat was a good deal, it was a good deal and things break. If the boat was top dollar, and if he doesn't offer to split, then shame on him. If you think he was lying about the leak being minor and fixed, I would avoid him like the plague as you probably won't get money anyhow.

 

[Jklotz]

Thanks guys. Y'all pretty much confirmed what I thought would be the case. Just to clarify, I did hire a mechanical surveyor. He is the one who found the leak. He also pulled an oil sample, which came back clean. Mechanic said leak will get worse over time and will get into the fuel, if not today, maybe tomorrow. Mechanic is plenty busy, well respected in these parts and didn't seem all that thrilled to take on a new job. So I don't think he was trying to snowball a gringo.

To complicate matters further, the marina I'm in for the next month won't let workers without workers comp on the dock, which means I'll have to book a 2nd slip at a nearby marina to have the work done or hire a larger company to do the work.


Bummer. My hope now is that the builder comes back with some good news.

 

[mvweebles]

Bummer. My hope now is that the builder comes back with some good news.

Can you provide insight into the warranty situation? How old is the boat, the engine, etc.? What are the warranty limits?

Some builders foster extraordinary relationships with their vendors who really go the extra mile even for used boats (PAE/Nordhavn do a very good job). Other builders wash their hands of all componentry and leave it to the owner to go direct to the OEM (Willard took this approach when they last built trawlers circa 2000 which was very frustrating for the buyers at the time).

Good luck with the repair.

Peter

 

[Jklotz]

Can you provide insight into the warranty situation? How old is the boat, the engine, etc.? What are the warranty limits?

Some builders foster extraordinary relationships with their vendors who really go the extra mile even for used boats (PAE/Nordhavn do a very good job). Other builders wash their hands of all componentry and leave it to the owner to go direct to the OEM (Willard took this approach when they last built trawlers circa 2000 which was very frustrating for the buyers at the time).

Good luck with the repair.

Peter

Boat is a 2022, assume engine is the same. 1500 hours. Should hear from builder today or tomorrow, will let you know. Sounds like they are going to bat for me. Question is will Cummins do the same.

 

[jleonard]

Many times, fuel leaks can be stopped by FIRST loosening the connection slightly while the engine is running so any debris can flush out, THEN tightening the connection.
I would try that first before anything else.
Might want to put a rag over the connection when loosening so fuel doesn't go all over (or onto you).

 

[Shrew]

Here is my take on this.....and I mean no ill will or offense in this.

-> you hired a surveyor
-> Surveyor found and reported the leak
-> You reported the leak to owner
-> Owner chose to fix the leak
-> Owner reported that the leak was fixed
-> [assumption based on your words] It doesn't sound like anyone verified the fix
-> You closed on the vessel
-> You later discovered the leak persisted

At this point, you surrendered your right to go back on anyone involved in the deal. The broker would NEVER owe you money for repairs on the vessel. The surveyor identified the leak, though it doesn't sound like you asked the surveyor to verify the fix. You then closed satisfied that the owner had remediated the problem identified in the survey.

Your best case scenario is Cummins accepting this as a warrantee claim. Expect to pay for this out of pocket.

 

[mvweebles]

Here is my take on this.....and I mean no ill will or offense in this.

-> you hired a surveyor
-> Surveyor found and reported the leak
-> You reported the leak to owner
-> Owner chose to fix the leak
-> Owner reported that the leak was fixed
-> [assumption based on your words] It doesn't sound like anyone verified the fix
-> You closed on the vessel
-> You later discovered the leak persisted

At this point, you surrendered your right to go back on anyone involved in the deal. The broker would NEVER owe you money for repairs on the vessel. The surveyor identified the leak, though it doesn't sound like you asked the surveyor to verify the fix. You then closed satisfied that the owner had remediated the problem identified in the survey.

Your best case scenario is Cummins accepting this as a warrantee claim. Expect to pay for this out of pocket.

This is a good summary and I might change my mind a bit.

Maybe the buyer/OP has a legit claim for a bit more than generosity from seller? Not like the survey missed it (the common issue in threads like this). Survey was done, buyer presumably conditioned his offer on satisfactory resolution of the list of faults. Seller chose to repair this himself and said the leak was fixed. It wasn't. The buyer relied on this representation which proved untrue. Maybe the buyer/OP is entitled to something more than just suck-it-up?

Thoughts?

Peter

 

[ksanders]

This is a good summary and I might change my mind a bit.

Maybe the buyer/OP has a legit claim for a bit more than generosity from seller? Not like the survey missed it (the common issue in threads like this). Survey was done, buyer presumably conditioned his offer on satisfactory resolution of the list of faults. Seller chose to repair this himself and said the leak was fixed. It wasn't. The buyer relied on this representation which proved untrue. Maybe the buyer/OP is entitled to something more than just suck-it-up?

Thoughts?

Peter

When the buyer closed he by doing so acknolodged that any pre-purchase issues were resolved to his satisfication.

 

[Diep]

Argh, what a bummer.

The reality is that as others have said you are on your own. The reality with these situations is that EVEN IF you have some kind of claim against the seller (which I don't think you do), you will never realistically get a dime out of them that they aren't willing to part with.

The good news is that you also were in a deal with what sounds like fair-minded and well-meaning parties all around. Try not to let this sour that experience.

Good and decent folks are stepping up all around to help (welcome to boating). If Cummins can do something for you under warranty or good will (like a free/reduced part, etc.) then great. If you end up having to pay the repair, fix it and get on with boating until the next one (welcome to boating).

If I was the seller I would feel bad and probably offer to split the cost of the fix.
If I was you I would be prepared to pay all but take the seller up on it if they offer. In this case I probably would decline the generous offer from the broker. Stuff happens and unless they were really mixed up in the middle of this issue I'd feel bad collecting on them.

 

[Shrew]

When the buyer closed he by doing so acknolodged that any pre-purchase issues were resolved to his satisfication.

This ^^^ is ultimately what I'm getting at. I am also NOT a lawyer.

When you close, you have acknowledged that all contingencies in the P&S have been satisfied. The contingency was "Upon satisfactory Survey and Sea Trial". After closing, you can't come back with "I have an unsatisfactory issue from the survey/sea trial".

 

[mvweebles]

After closing, you can't come back with "I have an unsatisfactory issue from the survey/sea trial".

The buyer is not trying to claw back something that was missed on a survey, the typical scenario. In this case, the buyer found the issue and presented it as something that needed to be fixed prior to acceptance. The seller chose to undertake repairs himself and represented it as fixed.

Does the seller bear no responsibility for claiming the issue was fixed and it was not? This isn't something that broke again a month later - clearly it wasn't fixed in the first place (boat closed 4-days before)

Peter

 

[SeaDogAK]

The buyer is not trying to claw back something that was missed on a survey, the typical scenario. In this case, the buyer found the issue and presented it as something that needed to be fixed prior to acceptance. The seller chose to undertake repairs himself and represented it as fixed.

Does the seller bear no responsibility for claiming the issue was fixed and it was not? This isn't something that broke again a month later - clearly it wasn't fixed in the first place (boat closed 4-days before)

Peter

Depends. If the seller falsely claimed he fixed it when, in reality he did absolutely nothing, then he could be liable.

It, instead, the seller made a good faith effort to fix it, ran the engine for a period of time and detected no leak, then I’d say he’s not liable even if his fix was ultimately unsuccessful.

 

[psneeld]

The buyer is not trying to claw back something that was missed on a survey, the typical scenario. In this case, the buyer found the issue and presented it as something that needed to be fixed prior to acceptance. The seller chose to undertake repairs himself and represented it as fixed.

Does the seller bear no responsibility for claiming the issue was fixed and it was not? This isn't something that broke again a month later - clearly it wasn't fixed in the first place (boat closed 4-days before)

Peter

None, no warranty implied.

My work has been verified by quite a few bosses to be superior and have been chosen to check others field work, even following up after certified mechanics/techs.

But I will admit I have done countless projects that seemingly fixed a problem only to have it resurface pretty quickly.

Just weeks ago, we had a well drilled and in the final briefing the foreman explained what went on and prepared to leave.

I saw a drop of water on the new connection and wiped it off.... a new drop appeared. I told the foreman and he turned red. He said that never happens. So they cut off all the fittings to get a new section in and stayed until the fix was verified. Thanking me profusely for catching it so they didn't have to come back days later.

Even long term pros think a job is completed only to find out.... not so fast.... more to the story.

I am still uncertain where the leak actually was and why a simple fitting tightening didn't solve the issue. If it is a pump manufacturing issue, then Cummins should step up. If not, what exactly is the problem? Pump replace/rebuild? That seems a stretch for a drip.

 

[DDW]

I'd say "welcome to boat ownership". This won't be the last $5000 yard bill you receive, might as well get used to it early.

The Cummins high pressure pump isn't just a standard fuel injection pump, these things run at something like 20,000 psi and are known to be somewhat problematic. If not very recent it could be the CP4 pump, just ask any Ford or Dodge diesel owner about it. But I would question the repair estimate: these pumps are <$2500 brand new, figure something like 5-6 hours labor to replace. Not impossible to do yourself even. Unless there is a lot of other unknown stuff found, $5000 should be a high side estimate.

 

[mvweebles]

I'm not saying this should go to court, but if it did, I'd much rather be in the buyers shoes than the sellers. The seller represented the repair was completed. Clearly that was not true. Nothing untoward here - it was a tiny leak that took a dozen hours of engine runtime to verify.

The OP has been pretty straightforward in his posts and has said the seller has been likewise. I'm sure they'll work out something. But I do think this is a unique example where the buyer may have legal recourse. Unless the buyer said "tighten a fitting" (versus fix a leak), he has a right to depend on the sellers representation it has been repaired.

Peter

 

[Diep]

Almost certainly the sales agreement included an as-is/no warranties/all hidden faults, etc. clause. When you sign the acceptance you lose the opportunity to further challenge the condition. I think the only legal claim you could have is if the seller a made a false claim about the repair. In this case the seller can pretty easily say they made a good faith effort at the repair and that they observed no further leakage. There is no way there is a case here.

Even if there was a case, you would end up money behind to force the issue legally if the seller was intransigent. So legally there is nothing here.

The only way the buyer gets anything in this case is the good will of the parties involved. It sounds like there is plenty on offer and approaching it from that angle keeps the good taste of the experience alive.

I believe that in the end only a few people actually enjoy fighting, even though it feels good to everyone at the start. I don't think OP has a mind to fight anyone over this and it doesn't sound like he even needs to. Even though it will cost some money, when it is a little ways back in the rear view I hope this is still part of a happy ending for OP.

 

[mvweebles]

None, no warranty implied.

I disagree. This is a very unique circumstance where a sale was conditional upon a repair that was undertaken by the seller. It's reasonable to expect that had the full repair been known (assuming it is a $5k repair), the buyer would have asked for a $5k credit. The seller took it upon himself to diagnose it as a simple leak which proved inadequate. The sellers representation - in writing (email at least) was the leak was repaired.

Like I said in my last post, if this were to be decided before a judge, my strong hunch is the buyer would prevail (quickly).

Hope it doesn't go that route.

Peter

 

[SteveK]

AS IS clause kicks in when all subjects are removed.
I just looked at my purchase contract and it clearly says "as is where is"
When all subjects/conditions are removed as being satisfied right beside the Purchasers signature it says Full removal of subjects-Accepted As-Is.

I again suggest an immediate oil test be done for fuel. If any is found after the 12 hour already run then you could have a claim for fraud if the oil was changed prior to previous testing. JMO and I did stay at a holiday inn express

 

[psneeld]

I disagree. This is a very unique circumstance where a sale was conditional upon a repair that was undertaken by the seller. It's reasonable to expect that had the full repair been known (assuming it is a $5k repair), the buyer would have asked for a $5k credit. The seller took it upon himself to diagnose it as a simple leak which proved inadequate. The sellers representation - in writing (email at least) was the leak was repaired.

Like I said in my last post, if this were to be decided before a judge, my strong hunch is the buyer would prevail (quickly).

Hope it doesn't go that route.

Peter

I say just the opposite and would be glad to be called as an expert witness by the seller.

It may cost more than just the repair if done even in small claims court as plaintiff starts the process with fees and such.
This statement to me is more than a bit damning from the OP ..... "Owner said he got down there and tightened a few bolts, ran the engine and did not see any more fuel leaking. I assumed it was fixed and we closed." Seemed like both parties were satisfied at that point.

It took a 12 hr cruise to produce a tablespoon of fuel. A pro mechanic might let it run for 15-30 minutes after tightening fitting(s) looking for drops/a leak. There may not have been any drops at all, because it might only happen under load or high op temp which isn't a necessary step if a fitting was tightened and no further leaks were present after a dockside run.

The only way the buyer would collect is if he could prove the previous owner never did anything and or lied about the apparent fix. True in a civil case it doesn't need to be beyond a shadow of doubt, but the reasonable man theory often applies and if the buyer was concerned the owner wasn't straight or a good enough mechanic to fix the issue, why close without further conversation/actions?

If I knew more I might go another way on this. If I knew of the problem being this large and I got paid at least what I wanted for the boat, I would offer to split the repair.

 

[Diep]

It is so easy to "go legal" when talking about this stuff but its all a bunch of watching law and order in an internet forum.

Just to steer back to the topic at hand. OP asked "What would you do." Whichever side is right on the merits, is anybody here going to say "If I'm OP I'm taking this to court"?

Even if I had an OPEN AND SHUT case, one isolated item worth $5k... I might pay a lawyer to write a demand letter. At that point I would try to put it out of mind forever and be pleasantly surprised someday if someone mails a check. Filing a claim in court, much less pursuing it is either going to cost a lot of time or a lot of money or probably both.

If a conversation followed by a demand letter doesn't yield any fruit I would let $5k go. You will consume all of that and more pursuing a case with any vigor. If you have a really clean case you're probably dealing with an A-hole. The kind that will pay $20k to a lawyer to keep from paying you $5k. Or at least delay it and ensure that you lose money getting it too.

We're talking about $5k not $50k or $500k. The mental energy having these kind of fights stalking your days takes a real toll. The occasional folks seem to spend their lives embroiled in this stuff and to me it seems it must be miserable.

I don't say this as a guy to whom $5k is nothing. But like I said earlier, just get it fixed and move on. The value of putting it in the rear view and getting on with life and boating is pretty high.

 

[Jklotz]

Come on guys, I'm not going to hire a lawyer. This will not go to court. Hell, I'd spend double on a layer than I would just having it fixed. Not to mention I'm just not a lawyer up kind of guy. That's not how I want to spend my retirement.