SailNet Community - Reply to Topic
Thread: Got my title for the 30 footer.. Reply to Thread
Send Trackbacks to (Separate multiple URLs with spaces) :
Post Icons
You may choose an icon for your message from the following list:

Register Now

In order to be able to post messages on the SailNet Community forums, you must first register.
Please enter your desired user name, your email address and other required details in the form below.
Please note: After entering 3 characters a list of Usernames already in use will appear and the list will disappear once a valid Username is entered.

User Name:
Please enter a password for your user account. Note that passwords are case-sensitive.


Confirm Password:
Email Address
Please enter a valid email address for yourself.

Email Address:


Human Verification

In order to verify that you are a human and not a spam bot, please enter the answer into the following box below based on the instructions contained in the graphic.

  Additional Options
Miscellaneous Options

Click here to view the posting rules you are bound to when clicking the
'Submit Reply' button below

  Topic Review (Newest First)
06-18-2006 09:02 AM
pluscard 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.
06-18-2006 06:52 AM
sailingdog 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.
06-18-2006 12:39 AM
Nonkjo 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 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 ain't gonna happen.
06-17-2006 08:07 PM
pluscard 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.
06-17-2006 08:00 PM
sailingdog 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 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.
06-17-2006 02:24 PM
seabreeze_97 "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.
03-19-2004 05:51 AM
Got my title for the 30 footer..

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?
03-19-2004 04:26 AM
Got my title for the 30 footer..

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.
03-19-2004 03:32 AM
Got my title for the 30 footer..


Very well said,my friend.Fair winds!
03-19-2004 03:21 AM
Got my title for the 30 footer..

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)

Mark L.
This thread has more than 10 replies. Click here to review the whole thread.

Posting Rules  
You may post new threads
You may post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is On

For the best viewing experience please update your browser to Google Chrome