SailNet Community banner
  • SailNet is a forum community dedicated to Sailing enthusiasts. Come join the discussion about sailing, modifications, classifieds, troubleshooting, repairs, reviews, maintenance, and more!

Got my title for the 30 footer..

6K views 24 replies 12 participants last post by  SailNet Archive 
#1 ·
I finally received my Title in the mail for the Santana 30 that I bought from an Insurance Company last year. The boat was salvaged and sold to me. It needs a new Keel and some engine work but everything else is in excellent condition. THE GOOD NEW IS that the Title is not a Salvage Title, it is a regular Title (as if the boat had NEVER been Salvaged) I am very happy about this and now I know that when I decide to sell it I will get market value for it.
 
#2 ·
In other words, are you telling us that despite the biblical reference of your nom d''net you, are perfectly comfortable selling this boat without disclosing that this boat was wrecked sufficiently hard to require a new keel and that you somehow think that this is a vaguely ethical thing to do as long as the the title does not say ''Salvaged'' on it?

Or are you telling us that you are not really ethically several steps below a used car salesman, and so despite the fact that the title does not disclose the fact that the boat was wrecked, you have enough moral fiber to sell the boat at the market value of a boat that has been wrecked rather than the market value of a boat that has never been totalled?

Jeff
 
#3 ·
"THE GOOD NEW IS that the Title is not a Salvage Title, it is a regular Title (as if the boat had NEVER been Salvaged) I am very happy about this and now I know that when I decide to sell it I will get market value for it.

Sounds to me like the Free Lunch program is alive and well, wherein some folks look forward to a free lunch that others should pay for.

What was the name of that best-seller a few years ago? Something like "Everything I needed to know in life I learned in Kindergarten".

Jack
 
#4 ·
Jeff_H & Whoosh,

I question your remarks towards John232. Are they based on the desire for an accounting of the man, or are they stones of condemnation without justification? Are you worthy to be the jury,judge,and executioner based on a few lines of text that can easily be mis-construed? Surely the unjust, will see the unjust as unjust, will they not?
 
#5 ·
Stede,

Jeff and Whoosh are right. Actually, it is not only an ethical obligation, but it is also a legal obligation to disclose known defects that would materially affect the value of property. The day is past when a seller could alter an odometer to hide the mileage of a car, or sell a flood-damaged car without disclosing its history, or make cosmetic repairs to hide a serious structural defect in property.

That fact that the Title is a regular Title, and not a Salvage Title, doesn''t relieve him of the legal and ethical duty to disclose the boat''s history. It just makes it easier for him to hide it.

To put it in perspective, how would you feel if you bought the boat for full market value, not knowing its history, and then found out that it had serious, hidden damage that the seller knew about, that destroys much of the value of the boat? The worst part is that you then have to decide whether you are going to make disclosure to prospective buyers, or whether you are going to compromise your own principles and not make disclosure, so you can get your money out of the boat.
 
#6 ·
Sailorman6,

To me, the issue here isn''t about whom is right or wrong about a boat.Should stones be cast for the man before he accounts? Should we speak before we listen? Does the council of wisdom welcome hate? If I am guilty, and have errored in my ways,make your charge against me.Let me see my fault. Then I may learn.The whipped dog returns to his Master out of love, not out of the desire for punishment,does he not?
 
#7 ·
Stede,

Mostly like you, all I did is simply asked a couple pointed questions. If any one is throwing stones it would appear to be you. I did not make an assumption of right or wrong doing. My questions did not assume a particular action and was not judging or casting a stone. My questions were posed with the hope John323 would answer those questions honestly and judge his actions for himself.

Respectfully,
Jeff
 
#9 ·
Jeff_H,

I will not debate with you about the intent of your initial words as you "posed" questions to the man. I will tell you this though. I''ve witnessed numerous times on this board where people "posed" unjust accusations of your comments in a similar style and you weren''t as appreciative of the design then.Board members here came to your aid.But that was in the past, wasn''t it? So shall we reap what we sow.
 
#10 ·
Look Stede, I don''t think that I have a beef with you. I do think that the original post of this thread was more than a little ambiguous and one possible logical interpretation was to suggest that because the title came back without noting that the vessel was ''salvaged'', that perhaps John232 was suggesting that he would try to sell the boat without full disclosure of the damage. If that was the intent of the original post, then I feel that there is no reason not to question the morality of trying to palm off this vessel in that manner. I am not judging him but if that is his intent then I would think that it would be appropriate for John232 to do some soul searching.

Of course there was another possible interpretation which implied that John232 merely planned to sell the boat for the fair market value for a repaired salvaged boat. That obviously is a different story all together.

My earlier post to you was merely to point out that I was not condemning John232 without knowing what his intentions are but having listened to John''s description of this boat, I posed the somewhat provocative rhetorical questions hoping to either get a clarification that I was mistaken or to stimulate a bit of soul searching.

Respectfully,
Jeff
 
#11 ·
Jeff H

Just a little back up here...not that you needed it...but I went back to your post that initiated the response from Stede...all I read was two questions...each posing a different scenario and asking which way John 323 intended to go...I read no accusations on your part.
I do find it interesting, however, that John323 has not yet responded.

Bobbi

Kokopelli9
 
#12 ·
John232
I''ll play the grinch here:
Unless you are a craftsman, and take great lengths to cleverly blend in the repairs, any inexperienced eye, let alone an average surveyor, will easily recognize the boat has having been underwater and extensively repaired, and the market value of this boat will be, and may forever remain, some discount off any "blue book" list value, which is what most folks think of as "market value". So surpressing the history of this boat is probably moot.
Be that as it may (or may not), the really interesting question, remains not whether you''ll get some market value when you sell the boat, but how much of what you end up putting into it, you''ll actually get back... On that of course, only time will tell.
Bye the bye, what''s the latest with the Volvo, and do you have a launch date?
 
#13 ·
First of all
Thanks Jeff for another well written post of yours. I wouldnt have been so nice about this, if I would have answered to the original poster.

here my 2 cts about the title...
Its illegal and inmoral.. But the good part in this is the following. He will spend more money to repair the boat, as he thinks he got a good title and can sell it for regular market value.
Than when it comes time to sell the boat a good surveyor will find the new keel and the rpairs.... BOOM .. if he hasnt declared it before, everybody will walk away from the boat.
Than he will think twice about his honesty.

Thorsten

honesty pays, maybe not right away, but with interest in the long run
 
#14 ·
I am a professional Composite Fabricator, I will have the NEW keel installed by Valiant yachts in Gordonville Texas, (i went up to visit there plant last week and made arrangements) also there is nothing unsafe about the boat and when I get done fixing the engine or replacing it I will have basically a totally refurbished yacht. I will keep the boat untill I retire in 2012, and even if I sell it in a year...So what. When I do decide to sell it I will have it Surveyed by a Professional, and if the Surveyor discovers that the boat was a Salvage boat than I will tell future buyers, But if the Surveyor finds the boat in a safe, sound and seaworthy condition then thats how the boat will be sold. This boat wasn''t in a Hurricane or pulled up from the deep after resting there for awhile, infact the boat only got enough water in it to damage the wiring around the engine area and the water did not even reach the tops of the settees. I already plan on replacing all the wiring anyway. Are you saying that if I had a brand new J42 and the boat dismasted in a race and caused some dammage to the top of the cabin and fell on the side of the deck causing some more dammage and the boat took on a little water from a storm that was reeking havac at the same time that after the boat was fixed and time came to sell it I should tell the buyer that once upon a time this boat lost its mast and had to be repaired. There are lots of boats out there that have been fixed by an insurance claim that were more badly damaged than my boat and no one will ever know it because if you dammage your boat and have it fixed the title doesn''t change from good boat to a salvaged boat ONLY because the owner decided to NOT total the boat but instead repair it. Now whats the difference? Sure,, I will most likely let a prospective buyer know that my boat had its Keel replaced and that the Surveyor and Valiant mechanics have inspected the keel after it was fixed and found it to be in excellent condition and seaworthy. Now if the boat broke in halfs and was glassed back together than thats a whole different senerio.
 
#15 ·
John 232

With all due respect, this should not be about whether the boat ends up being visibly damaged or whether it passes survey, or whether or not the title says, "Salvage", it is about selling a boat in a fair and truthful manner. It is about simple honesty.

When you ground a boat hard enough to damage a keel, and especially when it is a lightly built boat like your Schock, there are very high stresses imparted into every bit of the boat. Rigging is stressed beyond its normal loadings. Bulkhead attachment points are also greatly stressed, as are fiberglass fibers which are elongated beyond their usual levels. Fiberglass repairs involve secondary bonds which are weaker than the primary bonds that are formed when a boat is constructed, and proper repairs by definition add weight to a boat that is certainly more than that of original construction. Saltwater has permiated areas of the boat that have limited access and so are more prone to mildew and dry rot. As I explained to you when you were getting ready to buy this boat, in theory this boat is not as strong or resistant to flexure, it is more prone to fatigue and will not have the same service life as a sistership that has not been subjected to that level of stress. These are not things that will necessarily show up on a survey but are a real life deminishment to the value of the boat.

Previous owners of the boat that I currently own had sustained two major collisions with the boat. The damage from both were repaired by very high quality boatyards and in neither case is the damage visible to a buyer or surveyor, yet the damage was disclosed so that I could research the repairs, and advise my surveyor to be aware that the damage had occurred.

In negotiating the price of the boat, I also researched this issue with a number of surveyors, and brokers. There was near unanimity that even on a boat that was repaired so that the repairs were completely invisible, the boat suffered some loss of value. The nearly unanimous conscensus was that a perfectly repaired boat had a fair market value worth somewhere between 10% to 15% less than a boat that had not been damaged in the first place and that this reduction in value was for the rest of the life of the boat.

There was also a feeling that if a boat was ever sunk (even partially), there was greater depreciation than if it was not. I heard two separate stories of boats that had partially sunk for non-structural reasons (a frozen intake hose and a boat launched with the packing removed from the stuffing box gland and by accident not replaced at launch)and in both cases, although the boats showed pristine they were harder to sell and ultimately sold at a lower price. There was some feeling that with time the amount of increased depreciation would lessen a little if the repairs remained invisble and showed no further sign of movement.

If you think that the boat is good as new after the repairs then you should demonstrate the strength of your convictions and disclose the grounding and sinking. In the case of my boat, the yards that did the repair explained why the repairs should be considered better than the original construction and why after studying the repairs vs the original construction I concluded that in one case they were right but in the other case the repairs probably had equal strength but added some additional weight. When I bought the boat, the sales price was adjusted downward to accomodate the fact that the boat had been damaged and I intend to fully disclose the damage when I sell the boat.

While, as Stede accurately points out, it is not for me or anyone else to judge your actions, from everything that I know from carefully researching this subject, in my opinion selling a boat that has had major damage, and a sinking without full disclosure is tantamount to out and out fraud. It is the moral equivelient to purposely turning back an odometer. It is not for me to judge your actions , but despite whatever other rationalization that you might be able to muster on this, after following the online description of your salvage program, it would be my opinion that selling this boat without full disclosure would be a blatantly fraudulent action no matter what the surveys or titles disclosed at time of sale. Of course, in the end, the final decision regarding the level of dishonesty that you are comfortable living with is solely up to you but I would think that any knowledgeable sailor would say that failure to disclose what has happened to your boat at time of sale is clearly an extremely dishonest act.

Respectfully,
Jeff
 
#16 ·
John, you ask what is the difference if it surveys all right and no one notices previous damage? The answer is 10 percent. The difference between a used boat asking price for one that has never been damaged and one with damage history, even though it is repaired correctly, is 10 percent (assuming two boats are equall to start with in every other way).

So if you disclose the previous damage, document the inspection and proper repairs and offer the boat with an added discount (use BUC or NADA data) there is a mutual ground for a responsible business transaction.

One last thought ... there is always "secondary property damage" to consider after any incident. If it shows up during subsequent repairs, it would be very difficult to explain unless the primary damage history had been disclosed at the time of the sale.

After a buyer''s lawyer gets into the picture, all bets are off as to the outcome.

(just my $.02)

Respectfully,
Mark L.
 
#18 ·
Adding my 2 cents to the discussion, boaters need to beaware that the "diminished resale value" is not something yours or the others guy''s insurance co. wants to talk about or even aknowage.

As many of you know,I was run down from behind last july and my boat suffered $45,000 in damages. Dealing with the Insurance Co''s (mine and his) has been a nightmare. Yes,I have an attorney involed. But at $250 an hour you can wind up deeper in the hole than when you started. So far My out of pocket expences have been in excess $4000 not including the resale issue. The other boater was charged by Coast Guard with negligent opperation.

If it ever happens to you my advice is to get your famliy and/or guests off the boat safley and let her sink. Then someone like John 323 can deal with it.

My misstate was I saved my boat and the boat was not totaled. Damage had to be 80% of value to be totaled. So it''s guy''s like me that get to bear the cost''s.
 
#19 ·
John232
Good move on the arrangement with Valiant for the keel - that''s the way to go versus your original plan to handle this type of repair yourself. Can you share their quote for this work - readers might want to continue to track your "sunk" costs as they progress towards towards the merket value of the standard boat. The decision on the Volvo repair/replacemnt has been hanging our there for a while - what''s the latest?
 
#20 ·
"and now I know that when I decide to sell it I will get market value for it."

His intentions seem pretty clear to me.
 
#21 ·
Given John232's statement in his opening post, it is pretty clear that he is going to attempt to hide the fact that this boat has suffered major damage from any future purchaser. This is both highly unethical and immoral, not to mention illegal.

Hopefully, anyone who looks this boat in the future will hire a very competent surveyor and the history of the boat will come to light.

The fact that he has decided to have Valiant replace the keel has no bearing on whether the boat was damaged in the first place. Jeff H's points about extraordinary stresses being place on the rest of the hull and rigging is very on point, and no keel replacement is going to remedy the pervasive damage caused by those stresses. The points about the water and possible mold/mildew problems is also a very valid one.

I would also question the legality of the title that John232 has come into possession of, but unfortunately, most state and federal laws regarding damaged and salvaged boats is not to the point where this is illegal IIRC. Immoral and unethical...and slimy... yes, but illegal, I don't believe so, but this may vary from state to state.

A good resource for boaters is http://nicb.org/ which has a database of many boats, which have been damaged or salvaged. In some cases, the damage is minor, in others it is very dangerous and has made the boat structurally unsound. Hope this helps.
 
#22 ·
Jeff - I'm probably joining the discussion late here, but I think you did good to raise the point with John. Initially it looks like a windfall for him, but none of us would like to be on the receiving end of a boat with undisclosed repairs.

Being an airplane owner - I can tell you they are literally worthless without the engine and airframe logbooks. Damage history may not be an issue with every buyer, but every buyer is entitled to full disclosure.
 
#23 ·
I'm the new guy here but as the saying goes, "you gotta start somewhere." Might as well be here...

Disclosure is really a consequent issue. The fact remains that the vessel IS a salvaged boat. It doesn't matter what the title says.
I think it's safe to conclude what John 232 meant in the original post. The intent was to attempt to claim market value for a salvaged boat (he even goes further to essentially say that "if they don't see it, I won't tell"). That's the whole point of even bringing up the issue of future resale...to sell the boat as if it were not salvaged. And that's dishonest. Call it casting the first stone if you like but but the fact is, when something like this is spoken as brazenly, then the community itself is just as responsible if they don't call it what it is!
Sometimes you've just got to address these things directly. Like pulling off a band-aid, sometimes it's better just to get it over with quickly instead of dragging ones feet and wasting time trying to make sure everyone is happy...it ain't gonna happen.
 
#24 ·
BTW, not disclosing the fact that the boat is salvaged is actively lying through omission... Having to replace the keel is not a simple matter, and it can have major consequences, especially if not done properly. John232's intent to only disclose the fact if it is discovered is very clear...and extremely dishonest.
 
#25 ·
The penalty for fraud and misrepresentation is treble damages - triple the amount of the sale. Since the profit on a boat is usually a fraction of the sale price, the intent of the law is to severly punish those who misrepresent what they sell.
The stakes are high enough that conscience or no conscience, most sellers aware of the law would lean towards full disclosure.
 
This is an older thread, you may not receive a response, and could be reviving an old thread. Please consider creating a new thread.
Top