Anyway, I have a question to ask you, or anyone else on here with knowledge, about why your survey didn't catch the leaky problems with the boat. I would have assumed that for the money you paid for the boat that it would be in better shape than it was, or at a minimum your survey should have showed that it wasn't in decent shape. What I am getting at is, shouldn't a saturated deck or weak hull/deck joint be found in a survey?
Surveys aren't all that great. My boat came with 2 old ones when I bought her and I hired the most recommended surveyor in Seattle to do a 3rd. Hold the three up to the light and practically nothing matches.
I'd like to say that if you know nothing about boats then they can be really helpful, but based on some of the things they missed on my boat, or just got wrong, or the things that the REALLY missed on my wooden boat, it's not true that they'll save the newbie from trouble.
If you are not already very wise in the way of boats, then get as many experienced opinions as you can. Get a survey, have experienced friends look at it, and also check online for your make and model of boat and find their flaws.
With the advent of the internet, unless it's a brand new boat, odds are that many others before you have already found and dealt with your prospective boat's flaws. I bet you could figure out exactly which years Catalina got their Catalina 30 right and which years to stay away from just by using google.
PS My anti-surveyor sentiment comes at a time when my insurance company wants me to haul out and have a surveyor go over my boat. I already know exactly what's wrong with the boat and what's right with it. I'm not happy about paying a $urveyor to get it all wrong and write it up for the insurance company...