Broker obligation (after sale)...

ericmx29 · 23 January 2013, 17:05

Hello,
i live in France and i recently bought a ribcraft in UK, i bought this boat from a broker.
soon as i came back to France, i went on the water with the boat.
the engine , shut off after we leave the shore , hopefully we were 2 on the boat.
it was quite hard to came back.
For this first run i use the internal tank (i fill it with 50 l of fuel).
before to buy the boat, the engine was running good, but it was tested with a small portable tank, broker said there was no fuel in internal tank.
After i came back on the shore i've notice there was water in the engine, and plenty (hundreds of liters of fuel and water into the boat:

vidange coque 2 - YouTube

obviously there was a hole in the internal tank.
i had tp pay 150€ to make the engine run again, i phone the broker and told him he should have told me about the internal tank, i asked him to pay for a new, he didn't want claiming it was the previous owner responsabilty.
Then, i ask ribcraft about the year of the boat, they told me 1993, and ask mariner about the engine year: 1993 too.
The broker sold me this boat and engine 1999 one's, it's written on the brokerage document.
now , i want this broker to take his responsabilities (but which are they?) and totally refund me ,
as i'm french , i don't know much about broker's responsability in such a case, can you please help?
thanks for any help and support,
Eric.

C2 RIBS · 23 January 2013, 17:14

Eric, you may be asked for some dates, month you bought RIB and how long you have had boat and did any warranty come with boat( I am not a broker)

ericmx29 · 23 January 2013, 17:16

I bought this boat on august 2012, and i was in touch regulary with the broker since i had the problem with the engine, asking him to do something, but he never wants, but i only discover this week that the boat was from 1993.

matt h · 23 January 2013, 18:28

Thats quite an old Craft although they are superbly built but for that age there would never be any warranty given or implied I would imagine.
I also would of thought that you asked hold old it was or at least the broker should have told you. The broker should have filled the main tank for running purposes and questions should have been raised when he used a small can to start the engine. it does sound like the broker has used dubious tactics

xs 400 · 23 January 2013, 18:43

Hi Eric you may find this helpful

http://www.ashfords.co.uk/uploads/Se...20Pitfalls.pdf

specifically

The broker may also be liable for a
buyer's losses where the broker misrepresents the facts to

the buyer.

If you have a signed purchasing contract stating the boat was 1999. instead of 1993....this could be deemed to be misrepresenting the facts

and

In the case of

Clegg v Andersson T/A Nordic Marine (2003)

the customer did not lose the right to reject his yacht when he
had had and used it for 7 months, because he had identified
a fault with the keel immediately after delivery and had
repeatedly asked the seller for information regarding the
fault. The seller failed to provide the information and when he
finally provided it, the customer rejected the yacht 3 weeks

later.

ALL That said Ribcraft are great craft,(i want one!) if that is the only issue, the best solution may be re negotiating with the broker and the boat owner to find a amicable solution.

Do you have any photos of the boat?

ericmx29 · 23 January 2013, 18:57

yes, but the rib seems in good shape, retubing in 2010.
now , i have what we call overhere a "vice caché" (= latent defect or inherent defect, i guess ), in France , when you buy something and when you have, while using what you've bought, a latent defect, it's all the responsability of the seller. Is it the same in UK?
then, i've a false commercial document stating boat is from 1999, although serial says 1993.
I'm not a lawer, but even 6 month after buying, it's plenty enough, dont' you think?

Ribshop · 23 January 2013, 19:01

Did you purchase the craft from the broker or through them? On your bill of sale who is named as the seller?

xs 400 · 23 January 2013, 19:12

Hi Eric, I dont beleive that applies in the UK to something second hand (ie not new)

The sale of goods act applies mainly to information given to the buyer at the point of sale, both verbally and in the purchase contract.

But this dependent as ribshop says on whether you bought from a business or privately.

privately you have fewer rights.

Poly · 23 January 2013, 19:52

Quote:

Originally Posted by ericmx29

yes, but the rib seems in good shape, retubing in 2010.
now , i have what we call overhere a "vice caché" (= latent defect or inherent defect, i guess ), in France , when you buy something and when you have, while using what you've bought, a latent defect, it's all the responsability of the seller. Is it the same in UK?
then, i've a false commercial document stating boat is from 1999, although serial says 1993.
I'm not a lawer, but even 6 month after buying, it's plenty enough, dont' you think?

You would need specialist advice to establish any liability. BUT the broker is likely to say:

- you had the opportunity to inspect the craft before purchase
- you had the opportunity to have a professional independent survey conducted before purchase
- you had the opportunity to investigate the boat and engine serial numbers and verify their age before purchase

Boats sold on brokerage are usually sold "as seen" and any defect is your responsibility. The wrong age may be an issue, but if that was his reasonably held belief I wouldn't hold out too much hope.

Marine brokers are like estate agents...

mister p · 23 January 2013, 20:01

Quote:

Originally Posted by Poly

You would need specialist advice to establish any liability. BUT the broker is likely to say:

- you had the opportunity to inspect the craft before purchase
- you had the opportunity to have a professional independent survey conducted before purchase
- you had the opportunity to investigate the boat and engine serial numbers and verify their age before purchase

Boats sold on brokerage are usually sold "as seen" and any defect is your responsibility. The wrong age may be an issue, but if that was his reasonably held belief I wouldn't hold out too much hope.

Marine brokers are like estate agents...

Would I be right in saying to the above statements of " you had etc., etc.,..",

"So did the broker.", but obviously didn't. We had this recently with trailer bearings and it came down on the vendor that whatever went wrong with the item post sale was the vendor's fault for selling an unfit product.

Why has the status changed here?

I reckon it sounds like a misrep of product and selling unfit for purpose.

BTW that is a reply to "What the broker might say", not to Poly's answer.

Ribshop · 23 January 2013, 20:02

Quote:

Originally Posted by Poly

Marine brokers are like estate agents...

Just marine brokers tend to wear blue shirts Chinos and really bad deck shoes, not grey suits from River Island. Oh and they don't drive Minis.

C2 RIBS · 23 January 2013, 20:06

Is there something about a sold item-- must be fit for purpose and as advertised? Come on forum lawyers help our friend out, we might all be guessing and giving the wrong info

xs 400 · 23 January 2013, 20:29

I think the info is in here
http://www.ashfords.co.uk/uploads/Se...20Pitfalls.pdf

sale of goods act 1979

sale of goods act and services 1982

specifically

Misrepresentation
This is a false statement of fact by one party to the
contract, made before or at the time the contract is
entered into, that induces the other party to enter into
the contract. A statement can be a misrepresentation
even if you do not know that it is false. Therefore, when
negotiating sales the broker should not make any
statement regarding the yacht unless he is certain that
it is true. If the buyer relies on a misrepresentation and
later suffers loss, he could claim against the broker for

such losses.

Ribshop · 23 January 2013, 20:31

Poly is quite right.

If any of you have sold a house through an agent this decade you would have been asked to confirm if the description that is going to be advertised is correct. The agent can not possibly know if your roof leaks when it blows a south westerly, therefor he can not be held responsible. It is down to the seller (the current owner not the agent) to sell what he has fairly. Unless the broker said there is nothing wrong with the fuel tank you will struggle with any claim, even if he did you need to try and prove it.

mister p · 23 January 2013, 20:46

If it were you, as a dealer, I'd imagine that you'd be a bit miffed that your customer was unhappy and offer to help? No? I would.
Even if you come out even, the good will always comes around.

ericmx29 · 23 January 2013, 20:50

Quote:

Originally Posted by Ribshop

Did you purchase the craft from the broker or through them? On your bill of sale who is named as the seller?

It's the previous owner, but what's difference, because is the broker who sold me the boat?
i 've this document from the broker:

it's written 1999 not 1993.

Ribshop · 23 January 2013, 20:54

Quote:

Originally Posted by mister p

If it were you, as a dealer, I'd imagine that you'd be a bit miffed that your customer was unhappy and offer to help? No? I would.
Even if you come out even, the good will always comes around.

Your right. That's why we stopped selling used boats 4 years ago. We were running around through no fault of our own trying to keep people happy. All for between 5 & 10% you can't carry on like that to long.

ericmx29 · 23 January 2013, 20:55

Quote:

Originally Posted by Ribshop

Your right. That's why we stopped selling used boats 4 years ago. We were running around through no fault of our own trying to keep people happy. All for between 5 & 10% you can't carry on like that to long.

have you ever sold a boat pretending it was younger than it really was?
same for the engine.

mister p · 23 January 2013, 20:56

Who described the boat to you?
Did you go to the broker or did the broker arrange for you to buy it from the owner?
Did the broker take commission from you or from the buyer?
Chaps.......the solution to Eric's problem should be obvious here.
I'm not clear on it, but I reckon Eric's in line for some fix surely.
Eric, who's the broker? Or is that unfair? Both sides offer their say.

ericmx29 · 23 January 2013, 21:05

Quote:

Originally Posted by mister p

Who described the boat to you?
Did you go to the broker or did the broker arrange for you to buy it from the owner?
Did the broker take commission from you or from the buyer?
Chaps.......the solution to Eric's problem should be obvious here.
I'm not clear on it, but I reckon Eric's in line for some fix surely.
Eric, who's the broker? Or is that unfair? Both sides offer their say.

i only had one contact, or by email or by phone: the broker, the broker describes me the boat, i often asked about the year he never told me 1993, or for the boat or for the engine.
when i came, i only saw the broker, i don't know who paid him.
when i had the issue with the internal tank, i contact him every day.
i don't know if i can give his name.