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!

Angry at my surveyor....

11K views 90 replies 45 participants last post by  Minnewaska 
#1 · (Edited)
:mad: I just got my survey, and I'm not happy with my surveyor. It was an insurance survey, and thus the information contained therein may be used against me by insurance lawyers in the event of a claim.

My boat is not in an unsafe or unseaworthy condition, and it even says so much at the beginning of the survey. What I am mad about, is that he has outlined 10 findings that he says need to be corrected to be in compliance with ABYC standards and I don't believe there really is a standard for 2 of them.

What I'm REALLY mad about is that he seems to have totaled up a bunch of small stuff and made the broad, general, nonspecific (and damning statement) that "The vessel is well found but needs work before any cruising is commenced."

Great. Well found, yes, but needs "work" before "any cruising" is commenced??? I'm afraid the insurance company won't read "well found" but will only read the part about "work before any cruising".

There is a very lively thread started by Brian about what cruising means. It doesn't seem like a well defined term. What about "any". Can I not take this boat back to my slip, or anchor overnight 1km from home? What most peeves me is the word "work". Surveyors, I believe are supposed to use precise language. While a couple sentences ago he says that findings 1-10 need to be done to meet abyc standards (that's precise language) "work" needing to be done is completely nebulous.

Now I know what some of you are thinking. "MedSailor's boat is a death-trap and he's blind to the real state of the hulk. He's lucky to be alive and it might sink in dry-dock tomorrow." I'll let y'all decide if that's true. Here are the 10 findings that he says are out of ABYC standard compliance, with comments in brackets by me:

1: Soft wood at the tab in a forward bulkhead. (Is a soft bulkead really an ABYC standard??? Couldn't find it if it is. They also don't provide much strength to my boat.)
2: Household wire nuts found in 3 locations. (2 are decommissioned wires and one was unknown to me)
3: Start of soft wood at the aft end of the bowsprit (been keeping an eye on this. Again, is there an ABYC standard for this?)
4: Fuel gauge wiring is bare wire and needs terminal. (gauge broken, is on the to-do list)
5: Shifting cable starting to rust through. (Just found this at haulout definitely need to replace)
6: No carbon monoxide detector aboard. (Yes, I have one but he didn't find it)
7: Engine exhaust hose single clamped (don't know how I, or my previous surveyor missed something so obvious)
8: Inverter positive wire terminal exposed (news to me. I never use it. Will fix)
9: Flares expired. (wrong. Got new ones, he only found the expired stash)
10: Fuel fill hose at deck is single clamped. (didn't know it needed double)

So tell me if I'm wrong. Is there really an ABYC standard for a soft bulkhead inside the boat or "start of soft wood" on a bowsprit? I'm not arguing that they need to be on my fix-it list, but is there really an ABYC standard that I'm not in compliance with?

Also, what do you think about the "work needs to be done before any cruising is commenced." I think that statement is too general and might prompt the insurance company to freak out.

What do you think?

MedSailor
 
See less See more
#2 ·
I think that "Minor repairs should be completed as soon as possible" would have been more appropriate.
I'm pissed at a surveyor today too. I called him to ask when he was available. He said Fri. or Wed. I called the owner, the buyers, (my in-laws who are out of the area)the boatyard, and my PAYING CUSTOMER that I had lined up for some work for Fri. and rescheduled him, and set it all up. I call the flakey ass back an hour later and he says, sorry, Friday's out. He can only do it next Wed when the boatyard will have their travelift down for maintenance!!!
 
#3 ·
Can the ABYC regs be found or searched online? I was able to find the standards at abyc.com but there were very short summaries for about 40 topics that I could purchase for $50 each. Ummmm...... no.

Dang! I thought paying $250 each for medical textbooks was bad!

MedSailor
 
#4 ·
My surveyor said something similar on my survey, although he was more specific; "The following items should be corrected before sailing". They were similar things to yours. Not soft wood, but some separated tabbing that needed to be re glassed, replace a few hose clamps, etc.

As far as my insurance company was concerned they just told me that they trusted that I would remedy the deficiencies in a timely manner because otherwise my policy would be void. Fair enough. It didn't effect my premiums at all.
 
#6 ·
Depending upon how well you know the surveyer, they may be willing to change some things. My last survey two yrs ago he did just that. Altho, a number of items were not what I really had on the boat.......like a bronze shaft, which was really SS!

You should also be able to get him to say you have the correct flairs on board, being as he did not see/find the updated ones........or at least let the agent know you have updated ones.

Not sure about some of the other stuff.........not sure the survey is as damning as it seems to be!

marty
 
#7 ·
Yeah he sounds like a dick.

Shouldn't he talk to you before this write up to see if he missed things like flares and what not? Also, since you are the one paying him, and probably alot, shouldn't he, you know, like write what you want him too, as long as it isn't anything major?

If you have a cracked hull and are about to sink, I know he has a reputation and all, but it doesn't sound lie that. I don't know much about surveyors(besides they are overpriced) but since we the sailors pay them, you would think they would give two surveys, one for you that is accurate, or for a potential buyer, and one for the insurance company. I would think that word would get around which surveyors to go for for good insurance surveys. Is this not the case?
 
#22 ·
Also, since you are the one paying him, and probably alot, shouldn't he, you know, like write what you want him too, as long as it isn't anything major?
Wow. There's a part of me that hopes you are kidding, or at least being sarcastic. But then, I don't really think so.

What you are suggesting would constitute fraud. It would lose a surveyor his accreditation. No. He absolutely cannot just "write what you want him too [sic]." And he very definitely cannot do two surveys--one that is accurate and one that is not!

On the other hand, it is perfectly reasonable for the OP to ask the surveyor to change the phrase in question to make it less vague, more precise. It would also be reasonable to ask him to cite the ABYC standards that are in violation for each of the items. That, of course, would force him to note that there is no specific standard concerning the soft wood. I can't imagine that any reputable surveyor would refuse these requests.

I think the OP has every reason to be disappointed with this survey as it is, but I see no reason why it can't be corrected. Good luck.
 
#8 ·
I don't think it is unreasonable to ask him to change his wording to be more accurate. Does he mean that the "soft wood" must be repaired before you use the boat again?

As for the idea of getting "less than accurate" survey for insurance purposes, surveyors have an accreditation that recognizes their qualification to perform the surveys. If word got out that he was selling fraudulent insurance surveys, you can be sure he would lose that accreditation. There IS a big difference between a buyer's survey and an insurance survey, and a good insurance survey should only look at items that could result in damage or loss. That's all the insurance companies care about.
 
#9 ·
My lesson learned from this exchange is that I will continue to be on hand during any future survey. Not only do I get to see parts of the boat that I never or rarely look at and discover niches and crannies that only a surveyor can find, but simple questions or problems such as the flares or unused wiring could have been verbally explained and would never have made it into the survey.
 
#19 ·
Agreed.

Our broker scheduled our survey at the same time as our sea trial so all three of us were together for the entire day. While we sailed and then while we did the short haul (all still together since we had to sail to the yard) the surveyor did his thing and when he had questions he just asked the owner.

Until I came to SailNet and heard how others do it, it never occurred to me not to be present for either a sale survey or insurance survey.
 
#10 ·
A few points:

- It sounds like you weren't present, or weren't supervising the surveyor during the survey. You could have prevented some of these comments from making it into the report, if you had been present.

- It sounds like all items except #1 and #3 can be quickly and easily corrected by you, without hiring outside workers.

- Could you speak to your surveyor and have him re-word the statement about repairs and cruising?

- Take photos with your smartphone or digi-camera, of your repairs, email them to your insurance company, and you should be good to go.

I don't think your boat is a death-trap, but you might want to start saving your pennies for those expensive wood repairs.
 
#11 ·
You can square away the impact of the survey directly with the insurance company or agent (but not a broker). Ask them if you remain covered for taking the boat off the dock. This is where you really want a good agent to explain the ups and downs. The carrier themselves is not often motivated to explain every out they have.

While I understand the annoyance, it doesn't seem like you really disagree with the findings, other than the flares and CO detectror, only the severity. Is fixing them and making this go away an acceptable approach? You would have a better boat for it, even if not a death trap today. That's probably what I would do, even if I had the language changed.
 
#12 ·
I agree that the language used was a bit harsh considering all those items on the punch list can be fixed in an afternoon. The "soft wood" seems to be the only structural issue and I am sure that many of us wish that we only had two soft spots;);)

You obviously have a fine vessel if that was all he could find so pull out the regs and show the insurance company the lack of a standard for the "soft spots".
 
#13 ·
I recently purchased a boat. I had the surveyor look at the forward bulkheads in the main salon because the chainplates (bolted to the bulkheads) had leaked and ruined the teak veneer. I was concerned that the underlying wood in the bulkheads was also damaged and would involve a large (and expensive) repair.
If the bulkheads in your boat were glasses in, are they glassed in to provide structural support to the hull? If so, soft wood in your bulkhead matters. If it is glassed in to anchor the interior components, not so much.
But I had to *ask* my surveyor to look at it for me. He said that surveyors didn't do that kind of testing and he didn't put the condition of the bulkheads into the report. So how did your surveyor even find *soft wood*? He had to be poking it with an awl or something. Did he poke all the wood on your boat? Is there evidence of prior leakage on the bulkhead?
By the way, on the port side only, I had to have a small area of wood cut out and new wood epoxied in, but it was NOT under the chainplate so there was no compromise in the structure. The new veneer looks good, the carpenter matched both sides of the salon with a new veneer panel and put a molding strip over the joint. Looks like original construction.
 
#14 ·
As a surveyor I will add my comments.
Yes the wording is vague and I would ask that he reword it to name the specific items that need repair prior to "cruising"
Most items seem small and you can fix them in an afternoon. You say they were on your to do list so just do them.
Send the report to the insurance comp. They may or may not send back a letter of compliance giving you 30 days to fix the problems. You then simply sign off that they have been fixed. Rarely do they ask for more than that or a sign off by the surveyor. They take your word that the problems have been fixed.
This should not be a big deal and your boat will be better off after you are done.
There are no ABYC standards for the soft wood but some things just are common sense. Most surveyors are not trying to make life difficult but rather protect you and your boat. Sounds like you knew about most of this anyway.
Hope this helps
 
#15 ·
I had a similar statement in my survey. I sent it to the insurance company anyway. They took it and issued me a policy, and I never heard a peep about needing to correct any of the issues. In my case, the survey was both an initial purchase survey and an insurance survey, so I had no problem with him noting things like no CO detector, expired flares, etc. But, again, those deficiencies didn't stop the insurance company from issuing a policy.
 
#16 ·
For What It's Worth, I know of no yachts without a "To Do" list that never seems to shrink. The issues will be more or less severe and are normally addressed in the order of their importance (to the owner) and not in the order of their appearance or addition to the list. Consequently, some items are repeatedly pushed down the priority list and, as so, many become accustomed to leaving them aside--until, of course, the minor issue becomes major, such as the "Soft Wood" (which I assure you can become "major" much more quickly than one might imagine).

Considering the foregoing, an insurance surveyor may do one a favor--re-awakening one to issues one has become so accustomed to that one fails to appreciate prospective impacts. It is not unlike being required to take a Traffic Safety Class after having received a ticket (in lieu of points on ones driver's license). While time consuming and a pain in the neck in some respect, one is re-awakened to the needs for awareness and moderating one's behavior behind the wheel--or aboard ship.

In the OP's case, he/she was evidently not aboard the ship at the time of the survey which, if so, was certainly an error. A surveyor cannot in an hour or two, find/discover things in obscure locations that may seem obvious to the owner--e.g. up-to-date flares or a carbon-monoxide detector--unless the owner is there to point them out.

N'any case, the enumerated issues are not so great that they cannot be rectified fairly quickly and easily and a Certificate of Compliance completed and provided to his/her insurer to resolve the matter. (Of course, providing such a Certificate without making the corrections will void one's coverage, even if an otherwise covered incident may not involve any of the listed issues).
 
  • Like
Reactions: svHornblower
#18 ·
The entire "surveyor" system, as far as it concerns pleasure craft and insurance, is a useless scam. Insurance companies inspect cars, houses, etc. themselves. If they are truly interested in minutia found by surveyors, they ought to hire company employees to look at boats themselves. The level of competence varies so widely in this independent, unregulated, and standard-less industry that any findings are suspect at best. The vague wording in your written document is a perfect example. Not only that but no one knows a boat better than the owner if he/she has owned it for any amount of time. As you indicated, you knew about the soft spots already and did not need to pay someone to point it out to you. How much did it cost for someone to tell you what you knew already? Oh I forgot, finding that deadly missing 1/4" of insulation must have been worth it.:mad:
 
#20 ·
On the plus side that sounds like a pretty thorough survey for an insurance one. I pretty much dictated the last insurance survey and paid $450 for the privilege.

We've had issues in the past with survey wording and insurance-mandated "30 day" time frames that were inappropriate (bought in late Oct, and had to reseal portlight lenses within 30 days... in Vancouver - the Wet Coast - wasn't going to happen) Ended up changing carriers.

I'd try for a wording edit..
 
#21 ·
1: Soft wood at the tab in a forward bulkhead. (Is a soft bulkead really an ABYC standard??? Couldn't find it if it is. They also don't provide much strength to my boat.)
2: Household wire nuts found in 3 locations. (2 are decommissioned wires and one was unknown to me)
3: Start of soft wood at the aft end of the bowsprit (been keeping an eye on this. Again, is there an ABYC standard for this?)
4: Fuel gauge wiring is bare wire and needs terminal. (gauge broken, is on the to-do list)
5: Shifting cable starting to rust through. (Just found this at haulout definitely need to replace)
7: Engine exhaust hose single clamped (don't know how I, or my previous surveyor missed something so obvious)
8: Inverter positive wire terminal exposed (news to me. I never use it. Will fix)
10: Fuel fill hose at deck is single clamped. (didn't know it needed double)
So out of the 10 things that need to be replaced only 2 can be checked off the list. I'm not seeing how this surveyor was a "dick". You agree with a lot of what he found and have it on your to do list. Maybe his choice of words could've been different, but I don't think it's off the mark.

If anything you need some connectors, heat shrink tubing, and a fuel gauge. Not exactly what I would call a complete re-fit. Why so angry?

I agree with Bubblehead, the wood repairs will need to be done eventually, and they won't be cheap or easy.
 
#23 ·
Thanks for all the thoughts and comments.

As for why I'm angry at him it is not for finding things or missing things. It's the imprecise language that I feel could put my policy at risk. I'm also mad because he said I need to fix the 2 wood issues in order to be in ABYC compliance. I feel that statement is wrong.

Agreed that these items should eventually be fixed, but I'm currently in the yard paying for MAJOR repairs. (everything between the transmission and prop is being replaced) I fear that my bank account can't easily absorb the cost of the wood repairs and I would much rather do them later this year or next. My bulkheads aren't structural. His statement makes it sound like I should be chained to the dock until I do those things.

I'll try for a word edit on the general statement and I'll see if he made a mistake by saying I need to fix the wood to be in ABYC compliance. If he doesn't feel he made a mistake, I'll ask him to quote the standard.

If no joy with the word edits, we'll just have to see what the insurance company says. They've been good to us in the past so maybe I'm stressing out over this prematurely.

MedSailor
 
#24 ·
Last surveyor my insurance company sent to do a survey on my boat was a contract surveyor who had never set foot on a sailboat with an inboard diesel engine before. She had a checklist that she had to complete that included all the CG reg requirements and some other simple to check things. I walked her through the list and pointed out what she needed to check to complete her list and explained the attributes she should be looking for at each item. I hesitate to use the word "clueless" but the word does come to mind.

My company is one of the top rated insurance companies in the world and insures my house/car/boat/valuables and I have an umbrella policy with them. They have carried my boat policy for 30 years.

Why the company gives boat surveys such short shrift I don't know...but I am confident the company will stand by their contract with me if I have a loss.
 
#25 · (Edited)
I'm a little curious as to why you don't just take the afternoon off spend a hundred bucks and fix the findings. 10 findings is nothing, the average survey has dozens, even on new boats. You have 1470 posts here so obviously time isn't a factor :) On another point I'm truly shocked that boats have survived before ABYC came about, its an absolute miracle that they haven't all just blown up and sunk.
PS I'm just up the bay from you and would be happy to lend a hand.
 
#26 ·
This is just an example why I have always had a nervous feeling about a surveyor. Frankly, When you get over your anger, I think he really did you a favor. I am more than a little cautious about boat condition. It really does not take much to sink the boat. These are all rather minor but he is right, I would want to have them all fixed ASAP. Certainly before I did any sailing I did not have to do. I would want several fixed before I headed for my home port to. Even "soft " word scares me a bit.

But I think I would see what my insurance company said before I got excited.

Frankly, I would get a lot more excited if the boat sunk and it was from one of these things and he had missed it.

Sorry my friend. A flaw on a boat to me is a bit like a rotten fuel line on a tank in a combat zone.
lefty2
 
#27 ·
In all fairness, the surveyors aren't regulated any any kind of license or common standards, so they probably have to lean towards the more "harsh sounding" and "serious" words, in order to protect their own a$$ should you have a serious problem and come back to him. It's like conservative reporting. They can say "Well I told you so" rather than "Well, remember, we talked about that 2 years ago, kind of, but I should've emphasized the risk you were taking by not fixing it"
If a surveyor gets a reputation for giving every boat a simple pass, it would eventually lead to trouble.

But, those things (with the exception of the soft wood) are all pretty minor and if you can do them (I would suggest NOT paying somebody else) and show your insurance company they were completed ASAP then that will make them happy.

Good luck! I don't think you need to worry as much as you have been. You should see some of other peoples surveys!
 
#28 ·
In all fairness, the surveyors aren't regulated any any kind of license or common standards...
There are two independent organizations within the United States that accredit marine surveyors, SAMS and AMS. Any surveyor who is accredited by either of these does, in fact, have to adhere to specified standards.

I would never even consider hiring a surveyor who was not accredited.
 
#30 ·
First, while I would only hire an accredited surveyor (SAMS, NAMS), I've become very jaded over the years that they do much of anything to insure quality control. They absolute best survey I've ever had still had notable errors and omissions.

Second, Philzy makes a good point about what would happen if they ommitted something and one was hurt by the failure. Imagine the bowsprit failing under sail and something cutting across someone on the foredeck. I can hear it now, "but she was just surveyed last month, I can't believe this happened". Wood is supposed to be hard. It grows that way. Soft is soft and not good. It's just a question of how not good.
 
#31 ·
A few thoughts from a 30-year sailor and API licensed inspector of large oil tanks.There are many concepts in common that have not been discussed. The items seemed pretty reasonable.

1. Whether soft wood is a standard (may not be as my understanding is that they are construction standards and not suitability for use standards) is semantics. He has to evaluate suitability for service.

2. In general, if I do not use VERY stern wording in inspection reports, the advice is ignored. Thus, if it is serious I require that the tank is immediately removed from service. If it is a maintenance item, I require that the maintenance is performed and if important, require that they pay for a re-inspection (they can use another inspector). Same with car inspections.

3. "We're watching that" is the mother of all cop-outs in many cases. Yes, they are watching it fall apart and will spend the money when it fails. No, perhaps not this sailor, but he can only inspect what he sees. An inspector cannot give such comments much weight.

4. I have to assume worst-case stresses. You could put the boat on a bar just outside your home marina. Additionally, an inspector should have FAR more exposure to actual failures. When I state that the corrosion on a tank is excessive or that a weld is not suitable, it is because I have seen that failure BOTH in a code book and in a tank that has failed.

5. He is not inspecting the condition just at the time of his visit; he has to make some educated guesses about the condition over the next 5-10 years. He wants to prevent failure before the next survey, not just next month. I will fail tanks for conditions that could become serious with 20 years, depending on the element of the tank. So soft wood is clearly something that will be a problem within 5 years.

When you get your inspection license you sign a sheet of paper that makes you legally responsible for the quality of your inspection. I carry errors and omissions insurance for that reason, though I have not had a claim. If I ding you for a missing item and you provide evidence it is there, I cheerfully retract that comment (though I wish you had taken the time to join me in the field to review my findings before the report is issued--generally we don't get paid for time wasted on revisions).

---


Sorry if that sounds severe, but I don't see how the surveyor was in error. Every item seemed reasonable. That you did not know they did not meet code is neither here nor there; I get that all the time, I believe it is generally honest, but it still must be corrected.
 
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