When not to use a surveyor?

[rgscpat]

This has been touched on here and there but I'm not sure many folks have tried to make a clear cut-off on when they'd be comfortable with not bothering with a survey.

Very roughly, it seems that people will typically get a survey on a $25,000-plus, 28' or more LOA, diesel auxiliary sailboat, and may have to get at least an insurance survey for financing or insuring a boat even if it costs less.

With a boat as pricey as a new car or house, certainly the survey is needed and could save the buyer more than the survey cost in terms of price re-negotiation, discovery of fatal defects, getting favorable financing and insurance, and budgeting for future projects, etc. And for more valuable but older boats I'm sure many people could make a good case for additional surveying during sea trials, an engine survey, and a rigging survey.

It would seem hard to justify a survey for a small, common, inexpensive boat with simple, inexpensive systems being purchased by an experienced buyer. An example might be a $5,000 trailer sailer. And I'd be a wee bit surprised to see someone try to get a survey done on a Laser or Sunfish!

Another impediment to having a boat surveyed is if the boat is in an area where no surveyors are local and a surveyor would have to be paid significant travel expenses.

Of course, another time to skip the survey is if your own self-survey has been thorough enough to discover big problems that take the boat off your list!

However, the value of the boat by itself wouldn't automatically keep me from using a surveyor. I can imagine wanting and needing to survey a boat that someone was giving me free of charge! Perhaps my rule of thumb would be, that if the possible systems replacements and repairs on the "free" boat could cost ten times the cost of the survey, the survey could still easily pay for itself.

So, maybe my decision tree looks something like:

If financing requires a survey, get the survey.
If insurance requires a survey, get the survey.
If repair costs have the potential to exceed my repair budget, get the survey.
If there is any suspicion of storm or accident damage or submersion, get the survey.
If the cost to repair any boat systems is more than 10x the survey cost, " ".
If the boat is worth more than 50X the cost of the survey, " "
If the boat has complex systems whose condition cannot be readily determined, " "

If the buyer is experienced, there is no survey requirements for finance or insurance, the boat costs less than $25,000, there is no evidence of moisture intrusion, no suspicion of storm or accident damage, the boat does not have any complex systems whose condition cannot be readily determined, there are no systems whose replacement or repair could pose an undue expense, and the buyer does not have any significant constraints on being able to pay for unexpected repairs, skip the survey.

What do you think?

[brak]

I just recently got a survey on a boat very much like the one in your last paragraph. Didn't need it for insurance - they were happy with my description and pictures. Didn't really need it to know the condition of the boat - I am pretty good at determining what's what on my own. Really I was looking for a "second opinion". As it turned out, the surveyor I hired didn't really know much about these boats, made a very cursory examination and avoided my questions (I don't think I got one straight answer out of him).
Bottom line - no one would have benefited from a survey like that (and I wasted $300 or so).

In the same circumstances, a better surveyor would still be an asset simply because no matter how experienced you are, you could always learn something new.

[mpickering]

My insurance company didn't require a survey. Good pictures for equipment aboard was sufficient. And given the low cost of my boat at purchase time ($5K) and it using outboard power, I couldn't justify the cost of the survey since all of the potential trouble areas were visible and easily inspected including the engine.

Had my boat had an inboard, I would have gotten a survey regardless of purchase price. That's my big general rule. Issues with an inboard can easily increase the cost of a boat to unreasonable levels so I'd rather pay the money upfront and walk away rather than pay a lot more later.

My personal threshold for a survey is $7500+ and/or inboard propulsion. Lacking that, you can develop a good feel for boat condition on your own. All the signs are there. You just need to know how to read them.

I got a chuckle about the Laser/Sunfish survey comment. On sail-only dinghies and small keelboats, I would never get a survey. I know their history. Rode hard and put away wet.

Matt

[zz4gta]

In short, if you can afford to lose the entire amount paid for the boat and not lose a wink of sleep. No survey is needed.

I bought mine for $1200, rotted core, busted trailer, outboard that didn't run, blown out sails, and 6" of water in it (while it was on the trailer). I probably overpaid, but I've been loving it for the past 3 years, and now it's a very competative PHRF racer w/ new engine, bottom, sails, etc. I insure it now, but I don't invest so much that it would kill me to lose it. If the sea wants to take her, she will.

[oceanscapt]

I can't think of one instance where I would not use a surveyor. Not one.

[mikehoyt]

We bought our last boat with a lot of known problems and lowballed based on projected costs to fix. Was a pretty basic boat. As incentive to have seller accept my low offer was made on as is not subject to survey.

If hull or mast had been trashed we would have lost that gamble. Hull was sound, mast is sound and the rest I knew about.

Mike
J27 #150
http://users/eastlink.ca/~mhoyt

[rgscpat]

I can't imagine even Captain Abbott paying for a survey on a 30-year-old, $400 Sunfish -- unless maybe the surveyor was his wife and she was going to get the money anyway, grin.

So it's all a matter of trade-offs and knowing when the potential defects have a good chance of being more expensive than the survey. Of course, being wise enough to give a good hard look (self survey) at even the simple dinghy is good.

The point about the competence of the surveyor is well made. Some guy who specializes in commercial work boats might not help you much with a sailboat. Or an insurance survey might not be the thorough pre-purchase survey that you really want.

Rigs and engines are big variables since surveyors normally don't go aloft or really analyze the engine ... so on some boats separate engine tests and rig surveys could be called for. I would hope the seller wouldn't mind the buyer taking some engine oil to send to a testing lab, if the buyer wants to learn more about the engine.

[dhays]

Originally Posted by rgscpat

I can't imagine even Captain Abbott paying for a survey on a 30-year-old, $400 Sunfish -- unless maybe the surveyor was his wife and she was going to get the money anyway, grin.

Well, since he said he couldn't think of any instance where he wouldn't use a surveyor, I think it just indicates a complete lack of any imagination.

[merc2dogs]

I feel it's your immediate intent for the boat that should be the deciding factor.

If you plan to sail immediately after purchase, the survey is very important.

If you want a working project (keeping it in use) then a survey would be an advantage.

For the most part people looking for an actual take it home, rip it apart project aren't as likely to benefit from a full survey. For the most part a survey would only say replace what you planned anyway

[canadianseamonkey]

Originally Posted by oceanscapt

I can't think of one instance where I would not use a surveyor. Not one.

If you bought a boat from Ebay for $2000 you would get a survey? Seriously? You would pay 25 -30% of the purchase price for a survey?