Here is point nobody has seemed to explicity address.....but maybe I missed
something....


Seller says boat is in conditon A (lots of variables here) for price B....

Buyer says....hey if it actually IS in condition A, you've got a deal for price
B!

So, buyer brings in "expert" to look things over....

Expert says no friggin way this boat is in condition A, its a floating terd
(for whatever particular reason).....

Who pays for expert in the first place and then who pays for expert after buyer
smartly says no deal?

Now, if seller pays for expert in the first place, it could certainly be
conflict of interest....even if buyer is the person who choose the expert....

If buyer pays and chooses the expert in the first place...why should the buyer
shoulder the cost of the expert when its the seller who was most likely trying
to pull the wool over someones eyes?

just a thought and question....

take care

Blll

On 23 Aug 2004 02:51:32 GMT, (BllFs6) wrote:

If buyer pays and chooses the expert in the first place...why should the buyer
shoulder the cost of the expert when its the seller who was most likely trying
to pull the wool over someones eyes?

just a thought and question....

========================================

Typically the buyer does his own due diligence based on appearance,
representations and maybe a cold start prior to making the offer. The
survey process is where the experts verify condition to the buyer (at
his expense). Following the survey the buyer can either walk away
from the deal or renegotiate it. I have never paid for a survey that
did not pay for itself in a renogtiated price.

A good surveyor will frequently find issues that the present owner is
not even aware of.

I mostly agree. Buyer pays, with the understanding that seller will
reimburse if buyer buys. If it's a floating turd, buyer is hosed.


"BllFs6" wrote in message
...
Here is point nobody has seemed to explicity address.....but maybe I
missed
something....


Seller says boat is in conditon A (lots of variables here) for price B....

Buyer says....hey if it actually IS in condition A, you've got a deal for
price
B!

So, buyer brings in "expert" to look things over....

Expert says no friggin way this boat is in condition A, its a floating
terd
(for whatever particular reason).....

Who pays for expert in the first place and then who pays for expert after
buyer
smartly says no deal?

Now, if seller pays for expert in the first place, it could certainly be
conflict of interest....even if buyer is the person who choose the
expert....

If buyer pays and chooses the expert in the first place...why should the
buyer
shoulder the cost of the expert when its the seller who was most likely
trying
to pull the wool over someones eyes?

just a thought and question....

take care

Blll

On 23 Aug 2004 02:51:32 GMT, (BllFs6) wrote:

Here is point nobody has seemed to explicity address.....but maybe I missed
something....


Seller says boat is in conditon A (lots of variables here) for price B....

Buyer says....hey if it actually IS in condition A, you've got a deal for price
B!

So, buyer brings in "expert" to look things over....

Expert says no friggin way this boat is in condition A, its a floating terd
(for whatever particular reason).....

Who pays for expert in the first place and then who pays for expert after buyer
smartly says no deal?

Now, if seller pays for expert in the first place, it could certainly be
conflict of interest....even if buyer is the person who choose the expert....

If buyer pays and chooses the expert in the first place...why should the buyer
shoulder the cost of the expert when its the seller who was most likely trying
to pull the wool over someones eyes?

just a thought and question....

When you by a house, you pay for the inspector.

Same concept - you pay for the surveyor.

It's not hard to understand. It's for your own protection.

Later,

Tom
S. Woodstock, CT
-----------
"Angling may be said to be so
like the mathematics that it
can never be fully learnt..."

Izaak Walton "The Compleat Angler", 1653

On Mon, 23 Aug 2004 10:27:41 -0400, Harry Krause
wrote:


It should be obvious that "Jim's" goal here is to trash any and all
on-topic messages and responses, so he can fulfil his goal of making
rec.boats useless for any seeking information.

You are such a complete moron! You are the biggest contributor to
useless information here. You are virtually solely responsible for
making this group the mess of off-topic trash that it is. It is your
trash, lies, fake storie, and most of all...off-topic post we all have
to wade thru tomake use of this group.

What an idiot you are...

Sometime today I'm
putting the dickhead in my bozo bin, along with the other idiots whose
life consists of kissing George W. Bush's butt.

Great. You kill file all the folks who dont agree with you, and those
who post on-topic. Soon your list will be you, and the other four
lemmings who coose to follow your rude and inconsidrate ways.

Good ridence asshole...