| Page 1 of 2 | 1 | 2 |
|
|
To sea trial/haul or not
A sea trial, hauling, survey and re-launch is scheduled for Wednesday on the
Navigator "weather permitting". I haven't been down to the marina for a week due to two snowstorms up here. I suspect the back basin (which is brackish water) is iced over, although probably just on the surface. I am not sure about the inner harbor, although it has frozen enough to walk on in past winters. Forecast is for rain/snow on Wednesday although it may just be showers. I am leaning towards canceling the event and, assuming the buyer is still interested in the boat closer to spring, doing it then. He wants to leave the boat at it's current slip at my marina for the remainder of the winter anyway. I've been debating this in my head all morning. Obviously both brokers involved want to forge ahead, influenced by commissions. The buyer doesn't want to move the boat until spring anyway and, if the sale is consummated, the closing won't be until the first week of January at the earliest. Since I've never used the boat as an ice breaker I don't know the risks involved. Frankly I don't have any experience of, or have even heard of doing sea trials and surveys in the middle of winter, especially if it's snowing/raining/icy. It dawned on me that if something happens due to weather or ice, the risk is totally on us. The buyer can say, "Gee, that's too bad", and head for home. Anybody do this before? Eisboch |
To sea trial/haul or not
Eisboch wrote:
A sea trial, hauling, survey and re-launch is scheduled for Wednesday on the Navigator "weather permitting". I haven't been down to the marina for a week due to two snowstorms up here. I suspect the back basin (which is brackish water) is iced over, although probably just on the surface. I am not sure about the inner harbor, although it has frozen enough to walk on in past winters. Forecast is for rain/snow on Wednesday although it may just be showers. I am leaning towards canceling the event and, assuming the buyer is still interested in the boat closer to spring, doing it then. He wants to leave the boat at it's current slip at my marina for the remainder of the winter anyway. I've been debating this in my head all morning. Obviously both brokers involved want to forge ahead, influenced by commissions. The buyer doesn't want to move the boat until spring anyway and, if the sale is consummated, the closing won't be until the first week of January at the earliest. Since I've never used the boat as an ice breaker I don't know the risks involved. Frankly I don't have any experience of, or have even heard of doing sea trials and surveys in the middle of winter, especially if it's snowing/raining/icy. It dawned on me that if something happens due to weather or ice, the risk is totally on us. The buyer can say, "Gee, that's too bad", and head for home. Anybody do this before? Eisboch I wouldn't risk it. If something bad happens in winter on the water in your neck of the woods, you're dead. Can you structure a contingency sale, with the buyer's only option for backing out some horror turning up in the survey? In sales, if you don't strike while the iron is hot, you are likely to lose the sale because the buyer finds something else he likes or loses interest altogether. The problem is, with the economy tanking, and it is, if you lose this buyer, you may not find another for a long, long time. |
To sea trial/haul or not
Since I've never used the boat as an ice breaker I don't know the risks involved. Ice is hard, probably quite a bit harder than the sides of your hull. They make icebreakers out of VERY thick STEEL for a reason. I can't imagine it would take much more than a thin bit of ice to present real problems for the typical recreational boat hull. The problem being angle of impact. The sharp edge of a 1/2" chunk of ice hit at speed transfers a heckuva lot of force at a very small point of impact. Then there's insurance, your policy quite likely will have coverage problems. Made worse if you get into enough trouble that someone got injured. To say nothing of the 'die a quick death' risk due to the frigid water. That leaves their estate to sue yours, extending the mistake well past your own lifetime. It dawned on me that if something happens due to weather or ice, the risk is totally on us. The buyer can say, "Gee, that's too bad", and head for home. Yep. If the water is completely clear, and you're SURE your insurance is active and in-force for being under way, then it'd be like any other day out. Just make sure the dinghy's on board and working. |
To sea trial/haul or not
"HK" wrote in message . .. Eisboch wrote: A sea trial, hauling, survey and re-launch is scheduled for Wednesday on the Navigator "weather permitting". I wouldn't risk it. If something bad happens in winter on the water in your neck of the woods, you're dead. Can you structure a contingency sale, with the buyer's only option for backing out some horror turning up in the survey? In sales, if you don't strike while the iron is hot, you are likely to lose the sale because the buyer finds something else he likes or loses interest altogether. The problem is, with the economy tanking, and it is, if you lose this buyer, you may not find another for a long, long time. Well, that's another issue. I am probably not motivated enough to sell it anyway and certainly not enough to take unnecessary risks (if there are any) just to accomplish the sale. They've asked me to run the boat which is fine, but if I do, it has to be by my rules. When I sold the Egg Harbor the buyer was a little miffed because I would not allow him to dock it at the slip when we returned from the sea trial after seeing how he handled it while underway and away from other boats. Maybe I think too much about this stuff, but the last thing I want to do is to take the boat out in the middle of winter, exercising my level of caution, while having the brokers and buyer wanting to do more. I am thinking I'll cancel it. If he's interested in the spring, fine. If not, so be it. But, I'll mulch on this a bit more. Eisboch |
To sea trial/haul or not
"Bill Kearney" wkearney-99@hot-mail-com wrote in message t... If the water is completely clear, and you're SURE your insurance is active and in-force for being under way, then it'd be like any other day out. Just make sure the dinghy's on board and working. That's a good point. My insurance defaults to an "off season storage" policy at the end of October, unless I change it. It allows for "wet storage" (in a slip) as long as bubblers are used, which they are. The bubblers only keep the area around the hull from freezing hard. The basin channels however, do freeze. Eisboch |
To sea trial/haul or not
Eisboch wrote:
"HK" wrote in message . .. Eisboch wrote: A sea trial, hauling, survey and re-launch is scheduled for Wednesday on the Navigator "weather permitting". I wouldn't risk it. If something bad happens in winter on the water in your neck of the woods, you're dead. Can you structure a contingency sale, with the buyer's only option for backing out some horror turning up in the survey? In sales, if you don't strike while the iron is hot, you are likely to lose the sale because the buyer finds something else he likes or loses interest altogether. The problem is, with the economy tanking, and it is, if you lose this buyer, you may not find another for a long, long time. Well, that's another issue. I am probably not motivated enough to sell it anyway and certainly not enough to take unnecessary risks (if there are any) just to accomplish the sale. They've asked me to run the boat which is fine, but if I do, it has to be by my rules. When I sold the Egg Harbor the buyer was a little miffed because I would not allow him to dock it at the slip when we returned from the sea trial after seeing how he handled it while underway and away from other boats. Maybe I think too much about this stuff, but the last thing I want to do is to take the boat out in the middle of winter, exercising my level of caution, while having the brokers and buyer wanting to do more. I am thinking I'll cancel it. If he's interested in the spring, fine. If not, so be it. But, I'll mulch on this a bit more. Eisboch Too many horrific consequences are possible in connection with winter boating in your latitude. |
To sea trial/haul or not
On Dec 17, 9:46 am, "Eisboch" wrote:
"Bill Kearney" wkearney-99@hot-mail-com wrote in message t... If the water is completely clear, and you're SURE your insurance is active and in-force for being under way, then it'd be like any other day out. Just make sure the dinghy's on board and working. That's a good point. My insurance defaults to an "off season storage" policy at the end of October, unless I change it. It allows for "wet storage" (in a slip) as long as bubblers are used, which they are. The bubblers only keep the area around the hull from freezing hard. The basin channels however, do freeze. Eisboch Rule one. Don't get dead. Just not worth it. |
To sea trial/haul or not
"Eisboch" wrote in message ... "HK" wrote in message . .. Eisboch wrote: A sea trial, hauling, survey and re-launch is scheduled for Wednesday on the Navigator "weather permitting". I wouldn't risk it. If something bad happens in winter on the water in your neck of the woods, you're dead. Can you structure a contingency sale, with the buyer's only option for backing out some horror turning up in the survey? In sales, if you don't strike while the iron is hot, you are likely to lose the sale because the buyer finds something else he likes or loses interest altogether. The problem is, with the economy tanking, and it is, if you lose this buyer, you may not find another for a long, long time. Well, that's another issue. I am probably not motivated enough to sell it anyway and certainly not enough to take unnecessary risks (if there are any) just to accomplish the sale. They've asked me to run the boat which is fine, but if I do, it has to be by my rules. When I sold the Egg Harbor the buyer was a little miffed because I would not allow him to dock it at the slip when we returned from the sea trial after seeing how he handled it while underway and away from other boats. Maybe I think too much about this stuff, but the last thing I want to do is to take the boat out in the middle of winter, exercising my level of caution, while having the brokers and buyer wanting to do more. I am thinking I'll cancel it. If he's interested in the spring, fine. If not, so be it. But, I'll mulch on this a bit more. Eisboch I'd certainly play it safe if you're not desperate to sell. If he thinks about it the buyer should agree. The downside of losing the interest that the purchase money could earn would be easily offset by any damage to your boat. |
To sea trial/haul or not
On Mon, 17 Dec 2007 09:24:00 -0500, "Eisboch" wrote:
Since I've never used the boat as an ice breaker I don't know the risks involved. Frankly I don't have any experience of, or have even heard of doing sea trials and surveys in the middle of winter, especially if it's snowing/raining/icy. There are a lot of risks, not the least of which is losing the sale. What is frequently done in a winter sale is to set up an escrow account which you fund. The escrow is to cover any repair issues which could not be discovered during the winter, and is held by a 3rd party - sometimes a broker, sometimes an attorney. The agreement must carefully spell out exactly what is covered, which in this case it would be sea trial issues - engines, running gear, etc. The agreement should also spell out how disputes are settled, typically arbitration. Don't take the boat out in ice. I've done it (accidently) and even thin skim ice will gouge your bottom paint and gel coat around the water line. We all know what thick ice can do. Your insurance coverage, or lack thereof, is a big issue also. If the buyer insists on a winter sea trial, have him purchase special one time coverage through your insurance company, payable to you. Personally I would do whatever it takes to get the deal done as long as the risks are covered. |
To sea trial/haul or not
(Bill*Kearney)wrote
Since I've never used the boat as an ice breaker I don't know the risks involved. Ice is hard, probably quite a bit harder than the sides of your hull. They make icebreakers out of VERY thick STEEL for a reason. I can't imagine it would take much more than a thin bit of ice to present real problems for the typical recreational boat hull. The problem being angle of impact. The sharp edge of a 1/2" chunk of ice hit at speed transfers a heckuva lot of force at a very small point of impact. Then there's insurance, your policy quite likely will have coverage problems. Made worse if you get into enough trouble that someone got injured. To say nothing of the 'die a quick death' risk due to the frigid water. That leaves their estate to sue yours, extending the mistake well past your own lifetime. It dawned on me that if something happens due to weather or ice, the risk is totally on us. The buyer can say, "Gee, that's too bad", and head for home. Yep. If the water is completely clear, and you're SURE your insurance is active and in-force for being under way, then it'd be like any other day out. Just make sure the dinghy's on board and working. I'd also like to add that even the thinnest ice, also known as "Skim Ice" or "Razor Ice" can be extremely hazardous to FG and wood hulls alike. I've seen fairly deep slice marks down the waterline in running boats thru this type of ice, especially at slow speeds. UD |
To sea trial/haul or not
On Mon, 17 Dec 2007 09:24:00 -0500, "Eisboch" wrote:
Email on the way. |
To sea trial/haul or not
On Dec 17, 6:24�am, "Eisboch" wrote:
A sea trial, hauling, survey and re-launch is scheduled for Wednesday on the Navigator "weather permitting". I haven't been down to the marina for a week due to two snowstorms up here.. I suspect the back basin (which is brackish water) is iced over, although probably just on the surface. �I am not sure about the inner harbor, although it has frozen enough to walk on in past winters. Forecast is for rain/snow on Wednesday although it may just be showers. I am leaning towards canceling the event and, assuming the buyer is still interested in the boat closer to spring, doing it then. �He wants to leave the boat at it's current slip at my marina for the remainder of the winter anyway. I've been debating this in my head all morning. �Obviously both brokers involved want to forge ahead, influenced by commissions. �The buyer doesn't want to move the boat until spring anyway and, if the sale is consummated, the closing won't be until the first week of January at the earliest. Since I've never used the boat as an ice breaker I don't know the risks involved. �Frankly I don't have any experience of, or have even heard of doing sea trials and surveys in the middle of winter, especially if it's snowing/raining/icy. It dawned on me that if something happens due to weather or ice, the risk is totally on us. �The buyer can say, "Gee, that's too bad", �and head for home. Anybody do this before? Eisboch If you're looking for an excuse to kill the deal, "We're too iced over for a sea trial and haulout" is about as effective as you could hope to find. If the area seaward of your slip is ice free *and* you want to continue with the sale you should do the sea trial. Accepting a refundable deposit to "hold the boat until we can complete the sale in the spring" simply gives the buyer a yardstick by which he can measure other offers as he continues to shop, as is normally the case. Maybe he or she "just wants to be sure that's the best deal out there", but the shopping will usually continue, deposit or not. Your boat is tied up on a strong "maybe", and all the buyer need do to get his deposit back in full is pronounce the eventual sea trial or survey results "unsatisfactory". The buyer doesn't even need a good or valid reason, as "satisfaction" is a subjective value. If a haul out is impossible due to weather conditions, you might suggest that your buyer hire a diver to inspect the underside of the boat. The diver can take photos of struts, props, rudders, and check for slop in the cutless bearing. The diver can take close up photos of random sections of the hull to allow the surveyor to render an opinion regarding the presence or nature of any blistering. A diver isn't a substitute for hauling and tapping the hull, but if the rest of the vessel passes survey wtih flying colors an eager buyer might accept a photo-survey performed by a diver rather than wait until the spring thaw to complete the deal. |
To sea trial/haul or not
"Chuck Gould" wrote in message ... If you're looking for an excuse to kill the deal, "We're too iced over for a sea trial and haulout" is about as effective as you could hope to find. If the area seaward of your slip is ice free *and* you want to continue with the sale you should do the sea trial. Accepting a refundable deposit to "hold the boat until we can complete the sale in the spring" simply gives the buyer a yardstick by which he can measure other offers as he continues to shop, as is normally the case. Maybe he or she "just wants to be sure that's the best deal out there", but the shopping will usually continue, deposit or not. Your boat is tied up on a strong "maybe", and all the buyer need do to get his deposit back in full is pronounce the eventual sea trial or survey results "unsatisfactory". The buyer doesn't even need a good or valid reason, as "satisfaction" is a subjective value. If a haul out is impossible due to weather conditions, you might suggest that your buyer hire a diver to inspect the underside of the boat. The diver can take photos of struts, props, rudders, and check for slop in the cutless bearing. The diver can take close up photos of random sections of the hull to allow the surveyor to render an opinion regarding the presence or nature of any blistering. A diver isn't a substitute for hauling and tapping the hull, but if the rest of the vessel passes survey wtih flying colors an eager buyer might accept a photo-survey performed by a diver rather than wait until the spring thaw to complete the deal. ------------------------------------- It looks like we've resolved the issues. A concern of mine (besides ice) was doing an aggressive sea trial in Buzzard's Bay in the winter, especially since the Navigator has not been fully exercised in a while. I wanted to do this with a local mechanic who I respect just to make sure everything worked and to fix anything that didn't before we sold the boat. I think a proper sea trial is essential to both the buyer and seller. I had some major maintenance work and fuel system additions done last August, but never got around to running the bananas out of the boat. Too preoccupied with Mrs.E.'s GB last summer. The buyer and his broker have agreed to move forward, with the understanding that the extent and duration of the sea trial will be at my sole discretion. One issue that I was unaware of until today is that the buyer will have a certified Volvo tech present as part of the survey team, so I feel a little better. Apparently ice is not an issue yet. A film develops in the back slip area overnight, but it is more like slush and won't pose any problem. So, as it stands right now, a full survey, including hauling, and a sea trial, the extent of which is up to me, is on for Wednesday. Eisboch |
To sea trial/haul or not
On Mon, 17 Dec 2007 14:10:09 -0500, "Eisboch" wrote:
"Chuck Gould" wrote in message ... If you're looking for an excuse to kill the deal, "We're too iced over for a sea trial and haulout" is about as effective as you could hope to find. If the area seaward of your slip is ice free *and* you want to continue with the sale you should do the sea trial. Accepting a refundable deposit to "hold the boat until we can complete the sale in the spring" simply gives the buyer a yardstick by which he can measure other offers as he continues to shop, as is normally the case. Maybe he or she "just wants to be sure that's the best deal out there", but the shopping will usually continue, deposit or not. Your boat is tied up on a strong "maybe", and all the buyer need do to get his deposit back in full is pronounce the eventual sea trial or survey results "unsatisfactory". The buyer doesn't even need a good or valid reason, as "satisfaction" is a subjective value. If a haul out is impossible due to weather conditions, you might suggest that your buyer hire a diver to inspect the underside of the boat. The diver can take photos of struts, props, rudders, and check for slop in the cutless bearing. The diver can take close up photos of random sections of the hull to allow the surveyor to render an opinion regarding the presence or nature of any blistering. A diver isn't a substitute for hauling and tapping the hull, but if the rest of the vessel passes survey wtih flying colors an eager buyer might accept a photo-survey performed by a diver rather than wait until the spring thaw to complete the deal. ------------------------------------- It looks like we've resolved the issues. A concern of mine (besides ice) was doing an aggressive sea trial in Buzzard's Bay in the winter, especially since the Navigator has not been fully exercised in a while. I wanted to do this with a local mechanic who I respect just to make sure everything worked and to fix anything that didn't before we sold the boat. I think a proper sea trial is essential to both the buyer and seller. I had some major maintenance work and fuel system additions done last August, but never got around to running the bananas out of the boat. Too preoccupied with Mrs.E.'s GB last summer. The buyer and his broker have agreed to move forward, with the understanding that the extent and duration of the sea trial will be at my sole discretion. One issue that I was unaware of until today is that the buyer will have a certified Volvo tech present as part of the survey team, so I feel a little better. Apparently ice is not an issue yet. A film develops in the back slip area overnight, but it is more like slush and won't pose any problem. So, as it stands right now, a full survey, including hauling, and a sea trial, the extent of which is up to me, is on for Wednesday. Eisboch Best of luck with it! -- John H |
To sea trial/haul or not
On Mon, 17 Dec 2007 14:10:09 -0500, "Eisboch" wrote:
Apparently ice is not an issue yet. A film develops in the back slip area overnight, but it is more like slush and won't pose any problem. So, as it stands right now, a full survey, including hauling, and a sea trial, the extent of which is up to me, is on for Wednesday. What about insurance coverage? If your policy specifies winter layup, I think you'd be at risk without some sort of one time exception rider. |
To sea trial/haul or not
"Wayne.B" wrote in message ... On Mon, 17 Dec 2007 14:10:09 -0500, "Eisboch" wrote: Apparently ice is not an issue yet. A film develops in the back slip area overnight, but it is more like slush and won't pose any problem. So, as it stands right now, a full survey, including hauling, and a sea trial, the extent of which is up to me, is on for Wednesday. What about insurance coverage? If your policy specifies winter layup, I think you'd be at risk without some sort of one time exception rider. Just finished fixing that with the agent. My navigational insurance has been extended to Dec 31, then reverts back to winter lay-up. 100 bucks. Gee. If the deal falls through, I might be able to head south after all. Eisboch |
To sea trial/haul or not
On Mon, 17 Dec 2007 15:16:25 -0500, "Eisboch" wrote:
"Wayne.B" wrote in message .. . On Mon, 17 Dec 2007 14:10:09 -0500, "Eisboch" wrote: Apparently ice is not an issue yet. A film develops in the back slip area overnight, but it is more like slush and won't pose any problem. So, as it stands right now, a full survey, including hauling, and a sea trial, the extent of which is up to me, is on for Wednesday. What about insurance coverage? If your policy specifies winter layup, I think you'd be at risk without some sort of one time exception rider. Just finished fixing that with the agent. My navigational insurance has been extended to Dec 31, then reverts back to winter lay-up. 100 bucks. Gee. If the deal falls through, I might be able to head south after all. Eisboch I like it. Can't lose. --Vic |
To sea trial/haul or not
On Mon, 17 Dec 2007 15:16:25 -0500, "Eisboch" wrote:
"Wayne.B" wrote in message .. . On Mon, 17 Dec 2007 14:10:09 -0500, "Eisboch" wrote: Apparently ice is not an issue yet. A film develops in the back slip area overnight, but it is more like slush and won't pose any problem. So, as it stands right now, a full survey, including hauling, and a sea trial, the extent of which is up to me, is on for Wednesday. What about insurance coverage? If your policy specifies winter layup, I think you'd be at risk without some sort of one time exception rider. Just finished fixing that with the agent. My navigational insurance has been extended to Dec 31, then reverts back to winter lay-up. 100 bucks. Gee. If the deal falls through, I might be able to head south after all. Ahem - - obviously, you will need some assistance with that trip. :) Not that I'm hinting or anything. |
To sea trial/haul or not
On Mon, 17 Dec 2007 20:28:30 GMT, Short Wave Sportfishing
wrote: Ahem - - obviously, you will need some assistance with that trip. :) Not that I'm hinting or anything. ================================== Ahem - - obviously, you will need some experienced assistance with that trip. Not that I'm hinting or anything. |
To sea trial/haul or not
"Wayne.B" wrote in message ... On Mon, 17 Dec 2007 20:28:30 GMT, Short Wave Sportfishing wrote: Ahem - - obviously, you will need some assistance with that trip. :) Not that I'm hinting or anything. ================================== Ahem - - obviously, you will need some experienced assistance with that trip. Not that I'm hinting or anything. ...Ahem..and you'll need someone to keep the previous two in line.... Not that I'm hinting or anything. |
To sea trial/haul or not -update
I arrived at the boat around noon today, only to find the back basin frozen
over. I got a couple of good sized rocks, walked out to the end of the finger pier and tossed them about 30 feet in the air to the middle of the channel. They just bounced off the ice, so it's solid. Nobody I've talked to recommends trying to use a fiberglass boat as an ice breaker, even in thin ice, so I called both of the involved brokers to give them a heads up. I explained to the buyer's broker that unless we have a major heat wave overnight, moving the boat from the slip tomorrow will not be possible. I told them they are welcome to come up and do a dockside survey, run the engines, etc., but hauling or a sea trial is very unlikely. It's their call. (The buyer is flying three people up here.) Meanwhile, I found out that the closing on the buyer's current boat originally scheduled for Dec 10th still has not happened. An oil sample came back with some strange readings on one of the transmissions and is apparently causing a delay. I again suggested to the buyer's broker that we all chill out, wait until spring and see how many issues have resolved themselves. We will hold the boat for them at the agreed upon price and do a full up survey and sea trial in the spring. I know it doesn't serve a broker's interests, but it is what it is and some things cannot be forced. Eisboch (learning that buying a boat is a hell of a lot easier than selling one) |
To sea trial/haul or not -update
Eisboch wrote: I know it doesn't serve a broker's interests, but it is what it is and some things cannot be forced. Eisboch (learning that buying a boat is a hell of a lot easier than selling one) Well, I know that purchasing large hull craft is much more stringent than a typical runabout, but concerning a "sea trial"? around here is, something like "show me the money then you can "sea trial" it all you can stand!" I know that wouldn't go over well with a boat like Richards, but then again, to ask someone to take their boat out in winter weather is really kind of foolish that is, in my opinion. Like cold weather won't produce stresses on the hull (maybe)" diesel engines don't want to start as easy etc. oils are cold, and when warmed up will want to draw more moisture. Plus as what has been mentioned that hitting ice isn't good. especially when that's not what the craft was intended for. So why risk wadding up the boat (not counting the prospective clients as well as yourself) just to take somebody for a possible "joy ride" then to have them dicker even more if something breaks off? Oh yeah, are they wanting you to provide the drinks and hors devours too??? Now Harry says the economy is waning, which it very well may be, but evidently a lot of people haven't figured that out yet. There's money out there that people are willing to spend. If Ebay is any kind of an economic barometer, I'd like to mention that the used boat market is stronger now than it was two years ago. In this off season, I'm seeing used craft actually sell for just as good if not better money than compatible craft did in the spring of 2005 when people are hit with the boat fever, and are armed with tax return money. And I doubt if Richard ahs to sell it to survive, so I would say that I'd pass on this type of deal. It really doesn't seem that great, especially to go through all this hassle (maybe even deadly) just for somebody to say "well, I'll think about it".... Now Richard if this is deemed to be a MUST SELL item, then I am prepared to give you a buck forty-nine for it, just the way she sits. . And I would hope you would consider that my more than generous offering is far more gratuitous than Toms petty "50 quatloos". ?: |
To sea trial/haul or not -update
On Dec 18, 3:05�pm, Tim wrote:
Eisboch wrote: I know it doesn't serve a broker's interests, but it is what it is and some things cannot be forced. Eisboch � (learning that buying a boat is a hell of a lot easier than selling one) Well, I know that purchasing large hull craft is much more stringent than a typical runabout, but concerning a "sea trial"? around here is, something like "show me the money then you can "sea trial" it all you can stand!" I know that wouldn't go over well with a boat like Richards, but then again, to ask someone to take their boat out in winter weather is really kind of foolish that is, in my opinion. Like cold weather won't produce stresses on the hull (maybe)" diesel engines don't want to start as easy etc. oils are cold, and when warmed up will want to draw more moisture. Plus as what has been mentioned that hitting ice isn't good. especially when that's not what the craft was intended for. �So why risk wadding up the boat (not counting the prospective clients as well as yourself) just to take somebody for a possible "joy ride" then to have them dicker even more if something breaks off? �Oh yeah, are they wanting you to provide the drinks and hors devours too??? And I doubt if Richard ahs to sell it to survive, so I would say that I'd pass on this type of deal. It really doesn't seem that great, especially to go through all this hassle (maybe even deadly) just for somebody to say "well, I'll think about it".... It's customary when buying a larger boat to make an offer "subject to sea trial and survey". Sellers aren't going to joy ride every casual prospect that happens along, but if a buyer is willing to put up at least a few thousand dollars "earnest" money and state "If I like the way the boat runs and if it surveys to my satisfaction I'm willing to buy it for $XXXXXX", that's a totally different scenario. Would you pay a six figure price for a boat that you had never been aboard while underway? I'll bet you insist on taking a $2500 used car for a spin around the block, and there's a lot more that can go wrong with a boat than with a '92 Honda Accord. The ball is really in the buyer's court all the way through the deal in any case. A good broker will ask the buyer to sign off on a written statement proclaiming the sea trial "satisfactory" (assuming that it was)....but if a buyer is looking for an out all he really needs to say is "I didn't like the way the boat wallowed in following seas" or something similar and the buyer is off the hook. Same with the survey. I've seen buyers go sideways based on entirely inconsequential items in survey; in fact I specifically remember a guy using the survey clause to escape a deal and recover his deposit when I was selling a1-year old boat with about 40 hours on the meter. His excuse: "The surveyor said the bilge was a little bit dirty, and there's no acceptable reason for a dirty bilge on a boat with 40 hours on it." Even after signing off on the sea trial and the survey- all the buyer is really risking if he doesn't ultimately close on the deal is his deposit. The seller has the right to sue for "specific performance", but almost nobody ever does and there's always a chance the court would say that the forfeited deposit was sufficient compensation for the buyer's non- performance. |
To sea trial/haul or not -update
On Dec 18, 5:36Â*pm, Chuck Gould wrote:
On Dec 18, 3:05�pm, Tim wrote: Eisboch wrote: I know it doesn't serve a broker's interests, but it is what it is and some things cannot be forced. Eisboch � (learning that buying a boat is a hell of a lot easier than selling one) Well, I know that purchasing large hull craft is much more stringent than a typical runabout, but concerning a "sea trial"? around here is, something like "show me the money then you can "sea trial" it all you can stand!" I know that wouldn't go over well with a boat like Richards, but then again, to ask someone to take their boat out in winter weather is really kind of foolish that is, in my opinion. Like cold weather won't produce stresses on the hull (maybe)" diesel engines don't want to start as easy etc. oils are cold, and when warmed up will want to draw more moisture. Plus as what has been mentioned that hitting ice isn't good. especially when that's not what the craft was intended for. �So why risk wadding up the boat (not counting the prospective clients as well as yourself) just to take somebody for a possible "joy ride" then to have them dicker even more if something breaks off? �Oh yeah, are they wanting you to provide the drinks and hors devours too??? And I doubt if Richard ahs to sell it to survive, so I would say that I'd pass on this type of deal. It really doesn't seem that great, especially to go through all this hassle (maybe even deadly) just for somebody to say "well, I'll think about it".... It's customary when buying a larger boat to make an offer "subject to sea trial and survey". Sellers aren't going to joy ride every casual prospect that happens along, but if a buyer is willing to put up Â*at least a few thousand dollars "earnest" money and state "If I like the way the boat runs and if it surveys to my satisfaction I'm willing to buy it for $XXXXXX", that's a totally different scenario. Would you pay a six figure price for a boat that you had never been aboard while underway? Â*I'll bet you insist on taking a $2500 used car for a spin around the block, and there's a lot more that can go wrong with a boat than with a '92 Honda Accord. The ball is really in the buyer's court all the way through the deal in any case. A good broker will ask the buyer to sign off on a written statement proclaiming the sea trial "satisfactory" (assuming that it was)....but if a buyer is looking for an out all he really needs to say is "I didn't like the way the boat wallowed in following seas" or something similar and the buyer is off the hook. Same with the survey. I've seen buyers go sideways based on entirely inconsequential items in survey; in fact I specifically remember a guy using the survey clause to escape a deal and recover his deposit when I was selling a1-year old boat with about 40 hours on the meter. His excuse: "The surveyor said the bilge was a little bit dirty, and there's no acceptable reason for a dirty bilge on a boat with 40 hours on it." Even after signing off on the sea trial and the survey- all the buyer is really risking if he doesn't ultimately close on the deal is his deposit. The seller has the right to sue for "specific performance", but almost nobody ever does and there's always a chance the court would say that the forfeited deposit was sufficient compensation for the buyer's non- performance.- Hide quoted text - - Show quoted text - I agree Chuck, that it seems like buying a large craft can be like buying a house. Would you pay a six figure price for a boat that you had never been aboard while underway? Actually I wouldn't pay a 6 figure for a boat anyhow, so I dont' count. besides I DID offer him a "buck forty-nine" for it... ?: I'll bet you insist on taking a $2500 used car for a spin around the block, and there's a lot more that can go wrong with a boat than with a '92 Honda Accord. Not really. But I have bought and paid fo two boats before inspection (practically sight unseen) and have been very satisfied with my purchase[s]. what I'm saying is that for a prospective client to ask for a (for the most part) fiar weather pleasure craft to be taken out in harsh cold with a threat of ice. and ice damage. I'm saying that I would think that a fool would ask the owner to do that, and that the owner would be a bigger fool to give in to that request. Thats all... |
To sea trial/haul or not -update
"Tim" wrote in message ... Eisboch wrote: I know it doesn't serve a broker's interests, but it is what it is and some things cannot be forced. Eisboch (learning that buying a boat is a hell of a lot easier than selling one) Well, I know that purchasing large hull craft is much more stringent than a typical runabout, but concerning a "sea trial"? around here is, something like "show me the money then you can "sea trial" it all you can stand!" I know that wouldn't go over well with a boat like Richards, but then again, to ask someone to take their boat out in winter weather is really kind of foolish that is, in my opinion. The process for buying or selling a boat that has some value should be the same, big or small, especially when brokers are involved. It's not unlike a house sale. Initial inspection/tour, think about it, decide you like it and make an offer. The offer may be accepted or a counter offer proposed. The offer contains any contingencies ... sale of existing boat, obtaining financing, survey and sea trial, mechanic's inspection and, importantly, time period for execution and closing assuming successful accomplishment of all contingincies. When the offer is agreed to by both parties, a deposit is made, usually representing 10 percent of the sale price. (Interesting that this amount is usually the same as the broker's commission who holds the deposit in escrow). Another standard test for diesel powered boats is an oil analysis of engines, generator and transmissions. One major difference between a boat sale and a house sale is, as Chuck pointed out, it's much easier for a boat buyer to walk away from the deal based on a subjective impression of the survey or sea trial. The results of the survey/sea trial may also produce another round of price negotiations or obligation on the seller's part to address any problems. I don't think the sale of an old rowboat needs this process, nor the purchase of a specific boat that you know very well and it's history. When we bought the Navigator it was brand new. No financing was involved, so there was no requirement for a survey from a bank. We did one anyway, even though it was new, and it was well worth it as I learned more about the boat than I ever would have learned from the dealer. Eisboch |
To sea trial/haul or not -update
"Tim" wrote in message ... what I'm saying is that for a prospective client to ask for a (for the most part) fiar weather pleasure craft to be taken out in harsh cold with a threat of ice. and ice damage. I'm saying that I would think that a fool would ask the owner to do that, and that the owner would be a bigger fool to give in to that request. Thats all... You are correct. It is the brokers who tend to want to close the deal as quickly as possible for two reasons. 1. Commission 2. They realize that boat buyers are fickle and any delay includes a risk of the buyer changing his/her mind. Sellers often change their mind also, but it is more difficult for them to walk away from a signed agreement. In my case, more pressure was applied by the buyer's broker to execute the survey/sea trial and close the deal. He even alluded to legal obligations on my part, but backed off when I made it clear that I would be the one to decide if we got underway or not, contract or no contract. But, in the end, common sense prevailed. Eisboch |
To sea trial/haul or not -update
On Wed, 19 Dec 2007 02:08:33 -0500, "Eisboch"
wrote: No financing was involved, so there was no requirement for a survey from a bank. We did one anyway, even though it was new, and it was well worth it as I learned more about the boat than I ever would have learned from the dealer. I'll second that - although I think one can get carried away with surveys on new boats under say 25 feet. |
To sea trial/haul or not -update
On Dec 19, 5:02 am, Short Wave Sportfishing
wrote: I'll second that - although I think one can get carried away with surveys on new boats under say 25 feet. Agreed, Tom. When I was considering buying my 23 ft. cuddie, somebody on here firmly suggested that I demand a survey and sea trial... For a boat I was going to give less than $2000.000 for? |
To sea trial/haul or not -update
On Wed, 19 Dec 2007 05:16:54 -0800 (PST), Tim
wrote: On Dec 19, 5:02 am, Short Wave Sportfishing wrote: I'll second that - although I think one can get carried away with surveys on new boats under say 25 feet. Agreed, Tom. When I was considering buying my 23 ft. cuddie, somebody on here firmly suggested that I demand a survey and sea trial... For a boat I was going to give less than $2000.000 for? I can understand as you are mechanically inclined and have no small knowledge of engines, transmissions and mechanical systems. For the average schmuck, even at $2000, inspections can be very important. |
To sea trial/haul or not -update
Short Wave Sportfishing wrote: On Wed, 19 Dec 2007 05:16:54 -0800 (PST), Tim wrote: On Dec 19, 5:02 am, Short Wave Sportfishing wrote: I'll second that - although I think one can get carried away with surveys on new boats under say 25 feet. Agreed, Tom. When I was considering buying my 23 ft. cuddie, somebody on here firmly suggested that I demand a survey and sea trial... For a boat I was going to give less than $2000.000 for? I can understand as you are mechanically inclined and have no small knowledge of engines, transmissions and mechanical systems. For the average schmuck, even at $2000, inspections can be very important. Well Tom, I woudl say that with a $200,000.00 craft, then yes. But if a person is afraid they're going to waste 2K on a runabout, then they probably don't have any business boating anyhow. Not saying they shouldn't boat, but ..... |
To sea trial/haul or not -update
|
To sea trial/haul or not -update
"Dave Hall" wrote in message ... Wow, I have never had a boat surveyed and have never had any problem getting insurance. Of course my boats are more along the line above (one was worth about $4,000, another about $6,000. Both were 19 ft cuddys). One boat was totaled in Ivan less than a couple months after buying it and the insurance company didn't bat an eye paying for it. Of course I think they paid more to have the damn thing drug out of the woods along a desolate part of the river bank and hauled out of the river to a junk yard than they paid me for the boat ;-) Dave Hall Both of our boats (the Navigator and the Grand Banks) are insured by a major, international marine underwriter. A survey was not required for either boat to get insurance as best as I can recall. We may have sent copies anyway, to document the boats' equipment inventories and to provide engine serial numbers and stuff, but I don't recall a survey as being specifically required to obtain coverage. The coverage includes replacement cost, $2 million liability, damage by uninsured others, fuel spill and, surprisingly, storm and or ice damage during storage (assuming certain precautions are taken). They also cover half the cost of emergency hauling in the event of severe storms, which I didn't know until I read the policy carefully the other day. Years ago with smaller boats I originally got "insurance" as a low cost rider on our home owner's policy. Then I found out it covers next to nothing, including fuel spills, which scared the bananas out of me. You don't want to be uninsured for fuel spills, have an "event" and then have the Fed coming after you for reimbursement. Eisboch |
To sea trial/haul or not -update
"Eisboch" wrote in message ... "Dave Hall" wrote in message ... Wow, I have never had a boat surveyed and have never had any problem getting insurance. Of course my boats are more along the line above (one was worth about $4,000, another about $6,000. Both were 19 ft cuddys). One boat was totaled in Ivan less than a couple months after buying it and the insurance company didn't bat an eye paying for it. Of course I think they paid more to have the damn thing drug out of the woods along a desolate part of the river bank and hauled out of the river to a junk yard than they paid me for the boat ;-) Dave Hall Both of our boats (the Navigator and the Grand Banks) are insured by a major, international marine underwriter. A survey was not required for either boat to get insurance as best as I can recall. We may have sent copies anyway, to document the boats' equipment inventories and to provide engine serial numbers and stuff, but I don't recall a survey as being specifically required to obtain coverage. The coverage includes replacement cost, $2 million liability, damage by uninsured others, fuel spill and, surprisingly, storm and or ice damage during storage (assuming certain precautions are taken). They also cover half the cost of emergency hauling in the event of severe storms, which I didn't know until I read the policy carefully the other day. Years ago with smaller boats I originally got "insurance" as a low cost rider on our home owner's policy. Then I found out it covers next to nothing, including fuel spills, which scared the bananas out of me. You don't want to be uninsured for fuel spills, have an "event" and then have the Fed coming after you for reimbursement. Eisboch And if you have a small cheaper boat, you probably only get liability insurance, and since the company is not paying for boat loss, probably no survey needed. My boat cost $20k in 1995 and is probably worth $25k now. New motor and a T-8 kicker added. And the replacement boats like mine are now $50-75k. BoatUS has never asked for a survey. |
To sea trial/haul or not -update
"Calif Bill" wrote in message ... "Eisboch" wrote in message ... "Dave Hall" wrote in message ... Wow, I have never had a boat surveyed and have never had any problem getting insurance. Of course my boats are more along the line above (one was worth about $4,000, another about $6,000. Both were 19 ft cuddys). One boat was totaled in Ivan less than a couple months after buying it and the insurance company didn't bat an eye paying for it. Of course I think they paid more to have the damn thing drug out of the woods along a desolate part of the river bank and hauled out of the river to a junk yard than they paid me for the boat ;-) Dave Hall Both of our boats (the Navigator and the Grand Banks) are insured by a major, international marine underwriter. A survey was not required for either boat to get insurance as best as I can recall. We may have sent copies anyway, to document the boats' equipment inventories and to provide engine serial numbers and stuff, but I don't recall a survey as being specifically required to obtain coverage. The coverage includes replacement cost, $2 million liability, damage by uninsured others, fuel spill and, surprisingly, storm and or ice damage during storage (assuming certain precautions are taken). They also cover half the cost of emergency hauling in the event of severe storms, which I didn't know until I read the policy carefully the other day. Years ago with smaller boats I originally got "insurance" as a low cost rider on our home owner's policy. Then I found out it covers next to nothing, including fuel spills, which scared the bananas out of me. You don't want to be uninsured for fuel spills, have an "event" and then have the Fed coming after you for reimbursement. Eisboch And if you have a small cheaper boat, you probably only get liability insurance, and since the company is not paying for boat loss, probably no survey needed. My boat cost $20k in 1995 and is probably worth $25k now. New motor and a T-8 kicker added. And the replacement boats like mine are now $50-75k. BoatUS has never asked for a survey. Seems like I remember BoatUS requiring a "self-survey" to obtain their insurance. Basically a form you filled out. Eisboch |
To sea trial/haul or not -update
"Dave Hall" wrote in message ... On Wed, 19 Dec 2007 23:54:48 GMT, wrote: It is a specific policy from Progressive for my boat. I have another specific policy on my jetski. Like I said, they paid a professional marine salvage company to haul my boat out after it was washed about 60 miles or so down the Ohio river over 4 dams. When it went down river it had a full tank of gas, the engine had oil in it and the outdrive had a full load of gear lube. I rapeled down a godforsaken riverbank to view the boat before it was hauled back into the river and from what I could see I doubt that any of these fluids remained intact. The insurnace adjuster said that the salvage company would take the needed actions to meet environmental requirements to get the boat out. I never paid a cent nor heard anything from anybody about the boat so all I can say is I was satisfied. No surveys were asked for or required. In fact I can't think of any way that I could have sent them one as I never saw an agent. Dave Hall Regardless of who you carry insurance with, you should specifically ask if it includes fuel spill coverage which has nothing to do with damage, loss or salvage of the boat itself. Usually the standard coverage is for half a million and is intended to protect you against claims for reimbursement costs to clean up the spill. It could be that the Progressive policies include that, but most homeowner "rider" policies don't. Eisboch |
To sea trial/haul or not -update
On Thu, 20 Dec 2007 03:04:06 -0500, "Eisboch" wrote:
It could be that the Progressive policies include that, but most homeowner "rider" policies don't. It's odd that you should mention that. We were told recently that we need to adjust our rental insurance to include fuel spill insurance. Seriously. I started looking into it and sure enough - some states are now requiring additional specifications for residential oil storage and if those specifications aren't met, insurance is required. A lot of local farms have had to build spill-proof bunkers for fuel storage above ground. |
To sea trial/haul or not -update
|
To sea trial/haul or not -update
On Thu, 20 Dec 2007 03:04:06 -0500, "Eisboch" wrote:
"Dave Hall" wrote in message .. . On Wed, 19 Dec 2007 23:54:48 GMT, wrote: It is a specific policy from Progressive for my boat. I have another specific policy on my jetski. Like I said, they paid a professional marine salvage company to haul my boat out after it was washed about 60 miles or so down the Ohio river over 4 dams. When it went down river it had a full tank of gas, the engine had oil in it and the outdrive had a full load of gear lube. I rapeled down a godforsaken riverbank to view the boat before it was hauled back into the river and from what I could see I doubt that any of these fluids remained intact. The insurnace adjuster said that the salvage company would take the needed actions to meet environmental requirements to get the boat out. I never paid a cent nor heard anything from anybody about the boat so all I can say is I was satisfied. No surveys were asked for or required. In fact I can't think of any way that I could have sent them one as I never saw an agent. Dave Hall Regardless of who you carry insurance with, you should specifically ask if it includes fuel spill coverage which has nothing to do with damage, loss or salvage of the boat itself. Usually the standard coverage is for half a million and is intended to protect you against claims for reimbursement costs to clean up the spill. It could be that the Progressive policies include that, but most homeowner "rider" policies don't. Eisboch The fuel spill coverage came automatically with my Progressive policy for the Key West. USAA now forwards their boat coverage to Progressive. -- John H |
To sea trial/haul or not -update
On Wed, 19 Dec 2007 17:53:23 -0800, "Calif Bill"
wrote: "Eisboch" wrote in message ... "Dave Hall" wrote in message ... Wow, I have never had a boat surveyed and have never had any problem getting insurance. Of course my boats are more along the line above (one was worth about $4,000, another about $6,000. Both were 19 ft cuddys). One boat was totaled in Ivan less than a couple months after buying it and the insurance company didn't bat an eye paying for it. Of course I think they paid more to have the damn thing drug out of the woods along a desolate part of the river bank and hauled out of the river to a junk yard than they paid me for the boat ;-) Dave Hall Both of our boats (the Navigator and the Grand Banks) are insured by a major, international marine underwriter. A survey was not required for either boat to get insurance as best as I can recall. We may have sent copies anyway, to document the boats' equipment inventories and to provide engine serial numbers and stuff, but I don't recall a survey as being specifically required to obtain coverage. The coverage includes replacement cost, $2 million liability, damage by uninsured others, fuel spill and, surprisingly, storm and or ice damage during storage (assuming certain precautions are taken). They also cover half the cost of emergency hauling in the event of severe storms, which I didn't know until I read the policy carefully the other day. Years ago with smaller boats I originally got "insurance" as a low cost rider on our home owner's policy. Then I found out it covers next to nothing, including fuel spills, which scared the bananas out of me. You don't want to be uninsured for fuel spills, have an "event" and then have the Fed coming after you for reimbursement. Eisboch And if you have a small cheaper boat, you probably only get liability insurance, and since the company is not paying for boat loss, probably no survey needed. My boat cost $20k in 1995 and is probably worth $25k now. New motor and a T-8 kicker added. And the replacement boats like mine are now $50-75k. BoatUS has never asked for a survey. I had my Proline covered for boat loss, but no survey was required. -- John H |
| All times are GMT +1. The time now is 03:09 AM. |
|
Powered by vBulletin® Copyright ©2000 - 2025, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.
Copyright ©2004 - 2014 BoatBanter.com