# Marine Surveyors



## Tucamonday (Mar 1, 2017)

I see so little on this subject and it has such a huge impact on boating that I just felt we should open up some dialog on the subject.

Now I will be open about this from the start, I don't think much of the marine survey industry on a whole specifically when it comes to smaller pleasure crafts, let me explain. 

1) The prerequisites to become a "Certified Marine Surveyor" are little more than a can of spray paint and stencils to hang a shingle (or in today's age a website). Pay a few dollars to a society and now you have some letters behind your name! It's absurd at very best.

2) You will often hear that surveyors "are hired to find something". This is a fact and in today's environment of sue anyone, surveyors will find everything. I like to think of it a-kin to the Salem witch hunts, if there is a scintilla of concern on anything list and CYA and what you get in the end is a 50 page report of copy and pasted disclaimers and legalese jargon that does no one much good in the end.

3) Almost no single individual has all the expertise to accurately assess as many different systems that we find on small pleasure craft. Between electronics, navigation, rigging, engines, hulls, domestic plumbing, electrical systems and the different ages of everything it just ain't going to happen!! Back to point 2 and my analogy, if it sinks it's a witch. My point is you are going to get so many uncertainties listed that in the end, until if fails you won't know if it was a legitimate concern or not.

Here is my recommendation. First find a experienced broker in the type of boat that you are buying, make them work. If they don't travel with you to the vessel you are looking at there is a serious problem right off, get another. Look at the boat thoroughly with them and get there assessment of particular systems and concerns they might identify along with your own. I might stress here what might seem elementary but look for the obvious, take lots of pics with your cell phone or camera. Once you identify any specific concerns if there are any that will help you locate a surveyor but here is the hard part, surveyors are not cheap! Problem is you want one that first and foremost knows your kind of boat, couple that in your search with looking for one that has expertise in specific systems that might be in question and lastly has a good reputation and you often will find that you have to hire more than one individual.

Unfortunately there is no one site that reviews/rates surveyors, God forbid if someone ever make one, that would be the end of allot of counterfeits! But here is a real problem, it's not just what they miss say if you are on the buying end but it's what they might earmark as a concern if you are the seller!! Think about this.. You have a vessel for sale and the buyer hires a incompetent surveyor that basically has no credentials, may not have experience with your make or kind of craft and this yahoo drums up a bunch of nonsense based on his/her incompetence (you don't get to pick the surveyor!) now you have to go behind them and clean up the mess so you don't have a laundry list of disclosures to deal with, its egregious! But happens everyday and its expensive.

In closing I will say this, surveyors are almost a necessary evil, I know plenty and the good ones will agree with me on that. I have seen so much weird stuff throughout the years I can't even start but the important thing to keep in mind that what you get will seldom be definitive.


----------



## colemj (Jul 10, 2003)

Tucamonday said:


> 1) The prerequisites to become a "Certified Marine Surveyor" are little more than a can of spray paint and stencils to hang a shingle (or in today's age a website). Pay a few dollars to a society and now you have some letters behind your name! It's absurd at very best.
> 
> &#8230;&#8230;
> 
> Here is my recommendation. First find a experienced broker in the type of boat that you are buying, make them work.


HAHAHAHAHAHA!!! Thanks for that laugh!

Unless you really do think that it takes more experience, training and certification to become an "experienced broker" compared to a "certified marine surveyor". Then that isn't funny&#8230;

Mark


----------



## MikeOReilly (Apr 12, 2010)

I view surveys and surveyors as another set of (hopefully) experienced eyes examining the boat I own, or the one I am thinking of acquiring. A good surveyor will be one who is not overtly biased against my interests (as in the case of surveyors recommended by selling brokers, for example), and who is experienced with the type of boat (s)he is surveying. I don't view their report as the final word, but mearly as another source of information about a boat I am interested in.

What really irks me about the business is the whole insurance-forced survey crap. Since this is a tool used by the insurance company to set the rate they are going to charge me, then they should arrange and pay for the survey. Right now we have a joke system where owners simply do as Arcb outlines. Because of this, the insurance surveys I've seen (and been involved in) are jokes. They are useless, expensive, time consuming check boxes in the insurance process.


----------



## Maine Sail (Jan 6, 2003)

Tucamonday said:


> 1) *The prerequisites to become a "Certified Marine Surveyor" are little more than a can of spray paint and stencils to hang a shingle* (or in today's age a website). Pay a few dollars to a society and now you have some letters behind your name! It's absurd at very best.


A large number or reputable insurers these days will only work with or accept surveys from NAMS or SAMS _certified_ surveyors. Not quite as easy as spray paint and a shingle.


----------



## capta (Jun 27, 2011)

Arcb said:


> The only reason I personally would hire somebody else to assess the condition of a vessel I plan on taking my family out on is if somebody made me.
> Rant over.


In one way I agree with you and wouldn't really *NEED* to hire a surveyor as I had a survey company in the past and can do the job just fine.
On the other hand, I'm the sort who might pass a few things if I really wanted a boat, thinking it will be OK because I kinda think it is a minor problem I can fix. A good independent surveyor isn't going to be so nice. A "Just the *FACTS* ma'am" sort of guy.
As for the international yacht insurance industry, well that's a rant from me that would take hours, so I'll just say, "What a grand con they have going."


----------



## JimMcGee (Jun 23, 2005)

Well since the person starting this thread joined this morning and immediately posted rants against surveyors to two threads I'm guessing they recently had a bad experience !


----------



## JimMcGee (Jun 23, 2005)

Actually this topic hits close to home for me. I've sold two homes in the past two years so I've dealt with several home inspectors - and frankly I haven't seen a lot of competence. What I have seen is that you can buy software that generates a stock report that "sounds" very knowledgeable, scares the hell out of buyers and costs sellers a lot of money getting functional items "re-certified" by "professionals".

Unfortunately the same is true in marine surveying. I've been through two surveys now. The first surveyor was great, she was knowledgeable, patient, didn't miss a thing. Her survey was pragmatic and didn't blow things out of proportion. She concluded with a section that broke out "things to address immediately" versus "maintenance items to be addressed" with suggested time frames. It was extremely useful for a first time boat owner.

The second surveyor was a hack. I wasn't pleased with his 30+ page boilerplate survey and told him so. It was only after owning the boat I realized just how much he'd missed in a survey filled with insignificant items -- and yes he was certified by one of the two organizations mentioned (or at least used the letters after his name). If I had known then what I know now about marine systems he wouldn't have been paid at all.

It's a real issue for the industry that's not being adequately addressed by NAMS or SAMS.


----------



## albrazzi (Oct 15, 2014)

Im in the "Two Survey" group. After getting the initial survey done and purchasing, I was told all I needed to do was address the Items in safety and must do categories. All of which was done before I set out and most before launch. Then I was told they needed another survey to verify the items were actually done basically adding cost to my purchase. I still contend its all about propping up the industry
and if I hadn't ended up with a good stated Value and best price from quantity discounts I would have told them to shove it. There is no substitute for good owner maintenance and with most conscientious hands on owners you always dig harder than the surveyor has time for.


----------



## RegisteredUser (Aug 16, 2010)

"The boat was demasted sometime in the past, but it was repaired properly." Truth: the boat came from the factory with sectioned mast.

"The rudder shaft is bent. But it can be heated and straightened." Truth: the shaft was arrow straight.

"The cutlass bearing is bad. I felt some vibration." Truth: cutlass bearing in newish condition.

"Genoa is a 150 single stitched. You may want to have it restitched." Truth: double stitched 130.

"Turnbuckles look fairly new. Rigging is good." Truth: all rigging needed replacing. 

I could add much more......

Save yourself a lot of butt and wallet pain by learning it yourself. You will need to know it anyway, right?


----------



## olson34 (Oct 13, 2000)

Some observations--
I have been told that some (tho not all) "insurance surveys" are mainly ordered up to verify that the insured item actually exists. Which is a depressing peek into the mind-set of some boat owners, as well. 

While some folks believe that a survey is only good for beating down a price, I find that the summation I received from one of the best surveyors in the NW is really useful (wording not exact, but the gist is): 
The seller is motivated by money, the broker is motivated by commission money, and the buyer is infatuated and often a bit overwhelmed. 
The ONLY party to the proposed transaction who Speaks For The BOAT..... is the surveyor. 
The boat is the only "party" without a voice, as it were.

As for a demanded insurance survey, BoatUS (unless they have changed their procedures since the sale to GEICO) always pays for the survey when it is randomly demanded by their database. I have a friend that had that happen to him. He did have to upgrade a couple of systems that dated back several decades, and he did so. He stated that he had done the upgrades (and indeed he had) and all was well.
I have been with BoatUS for many years and altho they have stated that they might want to schedule our boat for a survey they have not (yet) ever done so. 
I maintain our boat to a pretty high level, believing that it's the best way to lower the chance of breakdowns...
You cannot prevent Murphy from the occasional visit but you can reduce the odds!


One feature of boating forums like this one is finding out who is a knowledgeable surveyor in your geographic area.
(And....... who to avoid.....)

Regards,
Loren


----------



## MikeOReilly (Apr 12, 2010)

That’s very interesting and useful to know Loren. In all my years of chatting to others (both online and in real life), I’ve never heard of a boat insurance company which has done as I said they should, and pay for insurance-demanded surveys. I’ve also never heard of randomly ordered insurance-demanded surveys. My understanding is that insurance companies simply demand surveys every set number of years (usually five or seven). If BoatUS is in the random category, then that too is better.


----------



## JimMcGee (Jun 23, 2005)

I would have a lot more respect for the certifying agencies if inspectors had to report the boats they surveyed along with contact information for the owner/buyer back to NAMS/SAMS and if they then did random followups to determine the quality of work being delivered. 

It would weed out the kinds of surveyors RegisteredUser encountered and it would be a good learning tool for conscientious surveyors.

Yes there would be costs involved, and it won't happen until the industry demands it.


----------



## Maine Sail (Jan 6, 2003)

Tucamonday said:


> I think folks need to stop drinking the Kool Aid, these certifications come in the bottom of Cracker Jack boxes!...


Perhaps you could do an experiment for us and see how fast you can produce for us a genuine SAMS or NAMS certification with your name on it. :wink


----------



## colemj (Jul 10, 2003)

MikeOReilly said:


> That's very interesting and useful to know Loren. In all my years of chatting to others (both online and in real life), I've never heard of a boat insurance company which has done as I said they should, and pay for insurance-demanded surveys. I've also never heard of randomly ordered insurance-demanded surveys. My understanding is that insurance companies simply demand surveys every set number of years (usually five or seven). If BoatUS is in the random category, then that too is better.


When we were struck by lightning, our insurance company demanded a survey and paid for it.

Insurers paying for a pre-purchase survey just doesn't make sense. And purchasing a boat without a survey, then demanding that the insurer covers it without survey or pays for one seems silly to me also. The purchase survey is for the buyer, as is fulfilling insurance requirements when purchasing insurance.

Taking the "insurer should pay for purchase survey" idea further along would have the insurer paying for safety equipment, new rigging, etc.

Mark


----------



## eherlihy (Jan 2, 2007)

I have posted my experience with two surveyors elsewhere in the forum. Short version; the first surveyor insisted on 50% payment ($400) upfront, and found a major problem with the vessel that I intended to purchase only after I insisted that something looked very wrong with that system. After that issue was addressed, about a month later, I contacted him again to complete the survey. This time he wanted to charge me an additional $200 for travel time to go 7 miles in addition to the remaining 50%. I found another surveyor. 

The second surveyor who charged $700, found NOTHING but identified several areas of the vessel for me to "watch." His survey did, however, provide me with a report which allowed me to insure my vessel.

I am NOT impressed with either surveyors or home inspectors.


----------



## Tucamonday (Mar 1, 2017)

Mark-
Want a good laugh?.. I would rather hold a seance or have a fortune teller survey my boat than many of the "certified surveyors" out there. But to be clear on brokers and surveyors, I never suggested replacing one for the other however, you have questioned "experienced broker" over "certified surveyor"? I am not sure I want to open the can of worms on brokers (save that for another thread) but you touch on what might be the biggest problem here, many and I mean MANY surveyors lack experience and thrive only on their certification and it's here where I think folks need to stop drinking the Kool Aid, these certifications come in the bottom of Cracker Jack boxes!...

-Acrb.. Brings up many great points I left out, thanks

-Albrizzi... I am watching a fiasco on a scale of 7.8 on the richter beside me as we speak that is exactly what you talk about with a fatal twist. Here is how this is playing out. New owners of a really nice 49' sailboat that is a high end vessel (a boat with a pedigree), I am going to leave some identifying details out because I just don't think it's appropriate at this point. So said boat has davits, really small ones, think of it like this. The wenches look like they are off the Queen Mary and the davits look like they're off a runabout, really look out of place. So during pre-purchase inspection surveyor says something to the effect that davits look like they need re-enforcement. Now there are lots of ways of looking at this but the reality is that they should be replaced, they are clamp on mail order but as they are the worst that would happen if the boat got pooped is they would rip off and most likely mess up the stanchions. 

So, the fix works like this, some recommendations form surveyor and then Jonny Costallot yacht service shows up and starts installing vertical supports, 3/4 inch SS pipe with a base around 2" foot through bolted in the sugar scoop. So now what they have is a really unsightly fix to some really unsightly davits that have no business on a vessel in the first place with permanently installed spears that should the boat ever take a wave over the back with a dingy attached the weight will drive said supports straight through the stern edge of the sugar scoop and now we are sinking, easy math to figure out. 

But this is a fix recommended and necessary for insurance since it's on the report! Go figure.. When you start making modifications at the water line to support unknown amounts of sudden weight it's a modification that a naval architect should be consulted on and not performed in the manner it is being done on the recommendation of a surveyor.

Here's the kicker, I recently had a survey done on one of my boats (what prompted me to start this) and low and behold the discussion of davits came up. Davits and there use again a subject for another thread but allow me here. When I mentioned the perils of davits this surveyors response was (standard response I hear a lot btw) is that davits are okay as long at you're not crossing the ocean. I sail a lot and much of it blue water and will tell you the biggest wave I have ever taken over the stern was within sight of land coming in a pass just south of Charleston.

Bottom line, no oversight, no industry standards... Scary and that's no laughing matter!


----------



## Tucamonday (Mar 1, 2017)

colemj said:


> HAHAHAHAHAHA!!! Thanks for that laugh!
> 
> Unless you really do think that it takes more experience, training and certification to become an "experienced broker" compared to a "certified marine surveyor". Then that isn't funny&#8230;
> 
> Mark





Maine Sail said:


> Perhaps you could do an experiment for us and see how fast you can produce for us a genuine SAMS or NAMS certification with your name on it. :wink


Is that your litmus test, how long it takes to get a certificate? Enjoy the Cool Aide!

I am addressing pleasure craft surveys (read my post). I would submit this, how many surveys as a percentage are SAMS or NAMS doing small pleasure craft?


----------



## AJC506 (Nov 3, 2016)

Maybe I got lucky. 
I asked questions and got recommendations here. I got a list from my broker. I cross-referenced and searched for names on web. 
Got a guy who gave me clear instructions as to what was good, what was bad, what needed to be fixed and what we could be done at a later time or ignored. Yes I got a 20 page report, but the one I pay attention to is the second sheet which list the major and minor points. 

As well as perhaps getting lucky... I did my homework.


----------



## Tucamonday (Mar 1, 2017)

Arcb said:


> This is probably the boating topic that gets me more worked up than any other. The marine survey business drives me crazy.
> 
> There are some very good surveyors out there, I know because I've met them, but many I have met aren't really impartial surveyors at all. They are buyers agents using the title of marine surveyor to beat down sellers on price.
> 
> ...


Great post, thanks. Correct I just had a bad experience, I am selling and the buyer showed up with a counterfeit, now I am cleaning up the mess! Problem number one, sellers don't get to pick and in this case I did remove them from my vessel and thus, the baby gets thrown out with the bath water.. Very frustrating.

I might add, I have indeed used surveyors in the past and there are some good one but on a whole this is a run-a-muck industry.


----------



## JimMcGee (Jun 23, 2005)

Something I did when I listed our home -- and I will do when the day comes to sell our boat. 

The listing agreement stipulated that I was to be present for any pre-purchase inspection and the inspector had to share any concerns while everyone was in the room including the buyer and his agent. 

In our case several things being "flagged" had to do with gaps in the inspector's knowledge not actual problems. The ability to address the issues immediately saved me at least $500 in having these items re-inspected by a "licensed professional".


----------



## JimMcGee (Jun 23, 2005)

Here's a serious question.

When you look at the NAMS/SAMS sites it "sounds" like it's very hard to become a marine surveyor. 

If that's the case why does everyone agree there are so many bad ones?

I don't think I've ever talked to anyone in boating more than a few years that doesn't have a bad surveyor story.


----------



## MikeOReilly (Apr 12, 2010)

colemj said:


> When we were struck by lightning, our insurance company demanded a survey and paid for it.
> 
> Insurers paying for a pre-purchase survey just doesn't make sense. And purchasing a boat without a survey, then demanding that the insurer covers it without survey or pays for one seems silly to me also. The purchase survey is for the buyer, as is fulfilling insurance requirements when purchasing insurance.
> 
> Taking the "insurer should pay for purchase survey" idea further along would have the insurer paying for safety equipment, new rigging, etc.


My comments (and my beef) are around mandatory insurance surveys Mark, not around pre-purchase or other surveys. Again, I'm pleased to hear there are insurance companies who pay for these things. I've not experienced this, either in real life on online when I've made this kind of comment before. But what you say is great. It's how it should be.

Surveys commissioned for purchase, or for other reasons, I have no beef with. That's part of my buying process. Like I said, I value good surveys and surveyors. I don't treat their word as somehow spoken from _On High_. I think they are useful in the purchase process b/c they provide me (the buyer) with an expert examination on things which is hopefully less biased than mine. But I don't expect them to catch everything or be perfect. And sometimes I will disagree with their assessment.


----------



## olson34 (Oct 13, 2000)

Regarding only the problem of finding a credible surveyor for a pre-purchase survey (and probably for an insurance survey also), you might try what worked well for us decades ago when we bought our first "big" boat.
We found our dream boat up in BC, and given that we know no one there in the industry, had to puzzle out how to find a reputable surveyor.
The seller and broker seemed plenty honest enough, but as greenhorns we were concerned about getting an unbiased opinion.

After some thought, I cold-called the loan departments in two large banks in Victoria BC, and talked to their person in charge of approving boat loans... and explained my problem... and asked if they had a short list of surveyors they would trust before lending any of their bank's money on a boat purchase. 

After a chuckle, each gave me several names and we went with one fellow on both of the lists. And yes, I did have to talk my way past a bemused receptionist.

The chosen surveyor was very good, and I watched him work and was impressed with how thorough he was. We owned that boat for ten years, and were never sorry for the purchase (from a fastidious prior owner) or the quality of the boat (a Hinterloeller-built Niagara).

So, sometimes it helps to ponder who else might be paranoid about spending money (or risking their job) on a boat loan!


Regards,
Loren


----------



## colemj (Jul 10, 2003)

MikeOReilly said:


> My comments (and my beef) are around mandatory insurance surveys Mark, not around pre-purchase or other surveys. Again, I'm pleased to hear there are insurance companies who pay for these things. I've not experienced this, either in real life on online when I've made this kind of comment before. But what you say is great. It's how it should be.
> 
> Surveys commissioned for purchase, or for other reasons, I have no beef with. That's part of my buying process. Like I said, I value good surveys and surveyors. I don't treat their word as somehow spoken from _On High_. I think they are useful in the purchase process b/c they provide me (the buyer) with an expert examination on things which is hopefully less biased than mine. But I don't expect them to catch everything or be perfect. And sometimes I will disagree with their assessment.


My point was that insurers require a survey before they will sell a policy. This is known up front and is part of the cost of getting insurance. They have to know the asset exists and that it is in the condition they are insuring it for. I think it is unreasonable to demand that they pay for this (although I would greatly like it). The catch for them is that the boat will not be in the stated condition and not insurable for the asked value - thus be wasted money for them.

If they did uniformly pay for these surveys, my bet is that owners would greatly inflate the asked for value and condition, which would result in a lot of surveys paid for by the insurance companies that never resulted in offered insurance.

This would only drive up the price of insurance for everyone.

Surveys are part of the cost of ownership if one wants insurance. This is not hidden or even small print - it has always been stated up front before even an estimated quote is offered for every insurance company interaction we've ever had (and that has been quite a few).

BTW, every policy we have ever had (encompassing at least 5 different companies) stated that in the event of damage, the insurance company will pay for the damage assessment survey as well as a post-repair survey if needed. At the point of a claim, understanding the damage and making sure it is repaired properly is of high importance to the company in terms of keeping the immediate and future costs as low as possible. Then, paying for a survey or two is well-spent money for the company.

If this is not the case for one's insurance company, then I would be shopping for a different company.

Mark


----------



## capecodda (Oct 6, 2009)

IMHO, after buying 5 sailboats and selling 4 (still own the last one), is that marine surveyors are like any other professional consultant. You need to vet the one one choose.

How do you do that? The marine industry is so small it's really easy. Ask the people you know in your neighborhood. Ask the people who are long term boat owners, or operate marine businesses with good reputations. 

It is impossible to be in the boat business with a bad reputation and have it be a secret, because the whole business, marinas, boat builders, surveyors, boat yards, sail makers, component manufacturers, ....its just too small to hide.

Do this simple step, and the bad ones will go away, because no one will hire them. Yea, it's a little harder than just hiring the first person you heard about, but just a little harder...just a tiny bit.

Yea, and don't trust this medium to decide. Talk to actual people.


----------



## MikeOReilly (Apr 12, 2010)

colemj said:


> My point was that insurers require a survey before they will sell a policy. This is known up front and is part of the cost of getting insurance. They have to know the asset exists and that it is in the condition they are insuring it for. I think it is unreasonable to demand that they pay for this (although I would greatly like it).


When I arrange insurance for my home, there has never been a demand for a survey to determine if the asset exists. So to with my cars. The only reason that the practice of having customers pay for the assessment (the survey) is b/c we, the boat owners, haven't stood up against this practice to say no.



colemj said:


> If they did uniformly pay for these surveys, my bet is that owners would greatly inflate the asked for value and condition, which would result in a lot of surveys paid for by the insurance companies that never resulted in offered insurance.
> 
> This would only drive up the price of insurance for everyone.


This one I don't understand at all. If the insurer controlled the survey process they would only hire surveyors they accredited. There would be zero ability to inflate value and condition. What you describe as a risk is exactly the scenario we have now.

If insurance companies arranged, paid for and controlled the survey process then my prediction is:


There would be a lot less frivolous insurance surveying being conducted.
The price for surveys would be driven down b/c insurance companies command a larger share of the market. Right now it's small owner contracting surveyor. This means small negotiating power for the owner. Insurance companies would be large contractees hiring surveyors. Much more clout in the transaction. Much great ability to keep costs down.
The cost would be passed on to the client (us), but since these would now be signals in the competitive marketplace of insurance, companies would respond accordingly. Right now there is ZERO market signal back to the insurance company, so there is NO incentive to keep survey prices down.


----------



## albrazzi (Oct 15, 2014)

MikeOReilly said:


> When I arrange insurance for my home, there has never been a demand for a survey to determine if the asset exists. So to with my cars. The only reason that the practice of having customers pay for the assessment (the survey) is b/c we, the boat owners, haven't stood up against this practice to say no.
> 
> This one I don't understand at all. If the insurer controlled the survey process they would only hire surveyors they accredited. There would be zero ability to inflate value and condition. What you describe as a risk is exactly the scenario we have now.
> 
> ...


Mike good point on cars, But. I have never shopped for a car in a lot where 90% of the cars never or don't run and are not used at all. There are SO many slipped unused whatever condition Boats out there so I don't fault insurance from determining some condition before covering. So its just not existence they are concerned about but that sure is part of it. Cars and Boats in this comparison are just not the same animal.

I do like your ideas on routine surveys, though I doubt carriers will see the valve in them controlling that part. I don't see them complaining about the process. If they see a process problem they will take care of it without talking to us first.


----------



## JimMcGee (Jun 23, 2005)

MikeOReilly said:


> When I arrange insurance for my home, there has never been a demand for a survey to determine if the asset exists. So to with my cars. The only reason that the practice of having customers pay for the assessment (the survey) is b/c we, the boat owners, haven't stood up against this practice to say no.


We switched homeowner's insurance companies a couple of years ago and a condition of writing the policy is they sent out a home inspector to determine condition and any "safety concerns".



MikeOReilly said:


> If the insurer controlled the survey process they would only hire surveyors they accredited. There would be zero ability to inflate value and condition.


Mike, you're much more optimistic than I.

Among the gems reported by the inspector hired by the insurance company "There is some surface mold on the siding of the north side of the garage. This needs to be addressed before it causes rot in the wood siding."

*The problem is we have vinyl siding !*

It actually took a week to get that one resolved. The insurance company paid for the inspection, I suggested they get their money back.


----------



## Maine Sail (Jan 6, 2003)

Tucamonday said:


> Is that your litmus test, how long it takes to get a certificate? Enjoy the Cool Aide!


You painted and stereo typed entire industry with one brush stating falsely that surveyor _certifications_ essentially come in a Cracker Jack box.

When challenged to show us how it actually works, to back up your falsely made claims, it is others who are the Cool Aid drinkers..?? Wow...

What you have presented about the survey industry, as a whole, is not only false but untruthful & inaccurate.

I work fairly regularly with numerous excellent surveyors, many of whom have previously been boat builders, service technicians, even marina managers. The guys I work with know boats inside and out. I know one guy, currently apprenticing, and has been a NAMS apprentice for 4 years. Yes, still training to get a NAMS certification after 4 solid years.

He will make an excellent surveyor when he finally gets certified because the guy he is apprenticing under is top notch. The guy he works with, for his NAMS apprenticeship, I see regularly, with his apprentice, at ABYC training events. Yes a surveyor & his apprentice going above and beyond just NAMS, go figure. He also regularly attends NFPA training on top of his NAMS training events. He's a Maine Maritime graduate, holds a 1600 ton unlimited any seas tag, has managed boat yards and been in the marine industry wearing numerous hats for approx 40 years. He's also a sailor and has restored numerous vessels from the keel up and knows every aspect of boat construction & repair. His restorations have been stunning and top quality. That type of experience was not found at the bottom of a Cracker Jack box...

Are there bad surveyors? You bet, just as there are bad lawyers, doctors, accountants, mechanics, electricians etc. etc. etc.. Painting an entire industry with a single brush / stereo type is simply showing a lack of respect.

We must remember that the surveyor is almost always in a no-win situation. Sellers dislike them because issues are pretty much always found on a vessel, a vessel the seller almost always believes is in _great condition_.. Buyers dislike them because they then need to bring the boat into compliance to get underwritten or they are required to get an insurance survey and it cost them money. Brokers dislike them because once a boat has been surveyed, and a sale falls through, the vessel essentially becomes tough to sell inventory.

Even honest & excellent surveyors still get beaten up unfairly and the disreputable surveyors out there just make it worse.



Tucamonday said:


> I am addressing pleasure craft surveys (read my post). I would submit this, how many surveys as a percentage are SAMS or NAMS doing small pleasure craft?


Every pleasure craft survey I have been involved in (LOTS) used either NAMS or SAMS surveyors. Most insurers I have worked with, in making boats under-writable (LOTS), will now only work with NAMS or SAMS surveyors. The insurance industry is steadily narrowing the window for "shingle hanging" surveyors.


----------



## colemj (Jul 10, 2003)

MikeOReilly said:


> When I arrange insurance for my home, there has never been a demand for a survey to determine if the asset exists. So to with my cars. The only reason that the practice of having customers pay for the assessment (the survey) is b/c we, the boat owners, haven't stood up against this practice to say no.


I've only bought one house and getting both a loan and insurance required me to pay for an assessment/inspection. This may be different for different states and countries.

Imagine the cases where a buyer purchases a boat thinking it is worth $X, only to find the insurer paid survey finds it not worth insuring at all, or at least not worth the price the buyer is asking to be insured. In both cases, the buyer does not purchase insurance. Now the insurer is out of money for no fault of its own. IMO, this would happen a large percentage of the time.



MikeOReilly said:


> This one I don't understand at all. If the insurer controlled the survey process they would only hire surveyors they accredited. There would be zero ability to inflate value and condition. What you describe as a risk is exactly the scenario we have now.
> 
> If insurance companies arranged, paid for and controlled the survey process then my prediction is:
> 
> ...


My example above is the same. The buyer thinks his boat is worth much more than the insurance company surveys it for. Now the buyer walks away from the insurance purchase AND most likely goes on all the social media bad-mouthing the "scam surveys" the insurance company does to screw the owners. Maybe even filing legal action that the insurers need to defend. None of this would be the fault of the insurer, and the insurer loses a lot of money and goodwill.

I don't know what the survey rates are around the world, but all of the surveys I have ever had cost only a few hundred dollars - equating to 0.2% or so of the hull value or purchase price.

Cars and boats cannot be used in the same debate because they are completely different beasts in this context.

Mark


----------



## MikeOReilly (Apr 12, 2010)

Well, we can all agree to disagree. I don't really want to get into a long e-battle right now (boat launch is getting closer). This is the typical response I get from people online when I dare to suggest the current system is flawed and not in the boat owner's best interest. This is why I was intrigued when previous posters were saying BoatUS did do as I suggest.

I've got no beef with surveys or surveyors. Some are good, some are bad. I've had excellent service from the surveyors I've engaged, so this is not about surveying. I also have no problem with insurance companies conducting a survey on a client's boat as long as they arrange and pay for it (as apparently does happen in some cases). My beef is the arbitrary insurance-demanded survey where the client is forced to arrange and pay for it before they can remain insured.

Some of you cite fear of fraud. Even if this is real (and I'm sure there is fraud going on at some level), how does the current system protect against this? As Arcb pointed out many posts ago, it's very easy to find a surveyor to provide the client with a survey they want. If you're going to introduce fraud as a possibility, then the current system is ripe with opportunity for this.


----------



## Arcb (Aug 13, 2016)

I don't really see how a buyer can lose on a survey, since they are in total control of the process. They can hire a good professional surveyor who will make an honest and accurate assessment of the vessel. They can hire a buyer's agent wearing a surveyors mask who makes his money off of slandering vessels in an attempt to shake sellers confidence and give the buyer an edge in negotiation. They can hire some guy who generates boiler plate reviews over the phone, so the buyer can get easy cheap insurance.

I only have an issue with one of these types of surveyors, and that's the dishonest one in the middle. If the report is objective, accurate and made without prejudice, fair game.

I think it's in the industries best interests if sellers sue more of these surveyors who are in the business of misrepresenting boats to give a negotiating edge to one party. 

I don't really have an issue with an insurance company requiring a third party inventory of parts. Nor do I have an issue with insurance companies requiring boats meet minimum legal safety requirements, since those minimum requirements are incredibly low. However, if a surveyor starts taking creative licence with those requirements, I will definitely call them out.


----------



## colemj (Jul 10, 2003)

MikeOReilly said:


> I also have no problem with insurance companies conducting a survey on a client's boat as long as they arrange and pay for it (as apparently does happen in some cases). My beef is the arbitrary insurance-demanded survey where the client is forced to arrange and pay for it before they can remain insured.


Maybe we are not on the same page. Let me relate my experiences with numerous insurance companies and surveys in an attempt to show what page I am on.

If I want to purchase insurance, all insurance companies have made me present them with a recent survey of the vessel (usually up to 1yr old or so, but I have had 3yr old surveys accepted). I have to pay for this survey, and I consider it part of the cost of obtaining insurance.

Once the insurance is purchased, any other necessary surveys have been paid for by the insurance company. I previously sited an example of a lightning strike claim in which the insurer provided a surveyor for the vessel to find all damage. Since there was no structural damage and only replacement of in-place equipment, they did not send another surveyor to assess repairs - but they indicated they would have for structural repairs.

Other than that, I have never been asked for a survey during the period of being insured with a company. I do document any upgrades or changes we make with the insurer - for example, when we replaced rigging.

If we decide to change insurers, then we start back at the beginning again, where we provide a recent survey to the new company.

Believe me, I would love for the insurers to pay for everything. However, I don't find our experience above unreasonable.

In a similar vein, the bank also required us to present them with a survey at our cost before they would lend us money to buy the boat (they gave us a conditional note dependent on survey). Do you think banks should pay for surveys also?

Mark


----------



## MikeOReilly (Apr 12, 2010)

colemj said:


> Maybe we are not on the same page. Let me relate my experiences with numerous insurance companies and surveys in an attempt to show what page I am on.
> 
> If I want to purchase insurance, all insurance companies have made me present them with a recent survey of the vessel (usually up to 1yr old or so, but I have had 3yr old surveys accepted). I have to pay for this survey, and I consider it part of the cost of obtaining insurance.


Yes, I agree this is the current standard process. It is part of the cost of insurance, but that doesn't mean it's fair for us, the boater. It's great for the insurance company, which is why it is done.



colemj said:


> Once the insurance is purchased, any other necessary surveys have been paid for by the insurance company. I previously sited an example of a lightning strike claim in which the insurer provided a surveyor for the vessel to find all damage. Since there was no structural damage and only replacement of in-place equipment, they did not send another surveyor to assess repairs - but they indicated they would have for structural repairs.
> 
> Other than that, I have never been asked for a survey during the period of being insured with a company. I do document any upgrades or changes we make with the insurer - for example, when we replaced rigging.


I too have never yet received a demand from my insurance company to have an updated survey done, but I read about this demand all the time here online (here, and CF). My insurance company has said they might be doing this with our boat, but so far have not. I believe it comes down to how long one owns the boat. The need for a "current" survey seems to mean something in the order of five to seven years.



colemj said:


> In a similar vein, the bank also required us to present them with a survey at our cost before they would lend us money to buy the boat (they gave us a conditional note dependent on survey). Do you think banks should pay for surveys also?


I have bought two boats with the bank's money. Only thing I was required to show them was the sales agreement showing the agreed price. What does it matter to the bank what the boat is like? All they care is that you pay the money back &#8230; unless you're using the boat as collateral, then I guess I can see it.

(BTW, we likely move in different house and boat markets Mark. I'm sure you have a few more zeros attached to your boats and houses compared to mine. Perhaps that explains our different experiences).


----------



## colemj (Jul 10, 2003)

MikeOReilly said:


> I have bought two boats with the bank's money. Only thing I was required to show them was the sales agreement showing the agreed price. What does it matter to the bank what the boat is like? All they care is that you pay the money back &#8230; unless you're using the boat as collateral, then I guess I can see it.
> 
> (BTW, we likely move in different house and boat markets Mark. I'm sure you have a few more zeros attached to your boats and houses compared to mine. Perhaps that explains our different experiences).


Generally for a loan, the boat is the collateral and the bank needs to know they aren't being stuck with a pig in a poke if you run.

Maybe there is another zero on our boat value, but I doubt it for our house, unless you bought yours for <$10K (how do you think we afforded the boat?). Same goes for autos, btw, unless you only use a skateboard... 

Mark


----------



## denverd0n (Jun 20, 2008)

JimMcGee said:


> The listing agreement stipulated that I was to be present for any pre-purchase inspection...


I have to say that, if your home listing had this stipulation, I would find another home to buy. Every time I have bought a home (5 times now) I have had it inspected, I have been present for the inspection, and the seller absolutely has NOT been present. If I'm paying for the inspection, then the seller has no involvement in it, and gets nothing from it, other than what I might choose to share.

A pre-sale survey on a boat works the same way. I don't want the seller present. And after it is done, the results belong to me. The seller isn't getting any of the details, unless I choose to share them.


----------



## MikeOReilly (Apr 12, 2010)

colemj said:


> Generally for a loan, the boat is the collateral and the bank needs to know they aren't being stuck with a pig in a poke if you run.
> 
> Maybe there is another zero on our boat value, but I doubt it for our house, unless you bought yours for <$10K (how do you think we afforded the boat?). Same goes for autos, btw, unless you only use a skateboard...


I just looked at our old loan documents for the current boat. They boat was collateral, and they did not ask for a survey. We used (have always used) a credit union. Maybe shopping around for the right bank is the key.

No &#8230; the two houses we've bought were more than $10K, but not a lot more  Actually, we paid about the same amount for the houses as for the boat.


----------



## cdy (Nov 10, 2013)

I have had several surveys done boats in the 35 foot range , one was decent , there other was crap and missed some very basic items ( leaky fuel tank) , my theory now is to only pay cash for boats that are in decent shape that I won't have to obtain anything but liability on. I have bought dozens of boats over the years and feel fairly confident what to look for, but in this sales environment in Florida - there is no reason to overpay for a boat, buy cheap and sell cheap, if you have a large problem pop up - you can get out of the boat somewhat easily if you bought it for a good price, if you can't get it for a rock bottom price - don't buy it, there are plenty more out there.

Obviously if I was looking to spend $100K on a boat - I would want a very good surveyor - but my budget is under 10K these days - a lot depends on your price point.


----------



## Arcb (Aug 13, 2016)

denverd0n said:


> A pre-sale survey on a boat works the same way. I don't want the seller present. And after it is done, the results belong to me. The seller isn't getting any of the details, unless I choose to share them.


I agree about the house part. I've bought two houses, both were inspected. The home inspections were kind of useless, they didn't notice anything of interest that wasn't pretty obvious. However, on one house I found the septic inspection quite educational, as I grew up in the city and had no experience with septic systems. The seller was never present.

Boat surveys I have been present as a seller at the surveyor or buyers request.

My experience with being present as a seller is the surveyor asked me lots of questions (too many questions) asked me to operate equipment for him, had me perform manual labour for him (unfolding sails etc.).

As a seller, I like the idea of not being present as I dislike the pleasure craft survey process. I hope I'm not present for my next seller survey, less work, less hassle, less stress.


----------



## boatpoker (Jul 21, 2008)

Should the seller be present ? ...... As a surveyor I can say I do not ever want to talk to the seller. I am there to find fault with their baby. I am not there to act as a referee between buyer and seller. .... I've seen some nasty ones and I once had a seller try to sue for the negative statements I made about his "baby" ..... after the deal fell through 

Should the insurer pay for the survey ? .... this one puzzles me. You want insurance and they want you to prove the vessel is worthy of their risk ..... simple. The dreaded 5yr renewal survey, well bats degrade extremely quickly especially under under the misguided maintenance and/or neglected maintenance of the vast majority of owners ( Stoopid Boat Tricks by Owners ). The underwriter wants proof that his risk is still reasonable after five years .... You want his money in a claim and he wants you to prove your boat is still worth his risk ... the cost of boat ownership.

Lousy surveyors .... of course there are. Perhaps if you had put as much effort into Choosing a Surveyor as you did finding the boat with that beautiful corian countertop you would have had a better experience


----------



## MikeOReilly (Apr 12, 2010)

boatpoker said:


> Should the insurer pay for the survey ? .... this one puzzles me. You want insurance and they want you to prove the vessel is worthy of their risk ..... simple. The dreaded 5yr renewal survey, well bats degrade extremely quickly especially under under the misguided maintenance and/or neglected maintenance of the vast majority of owners ( Stoopid Boat Tricks by Owners ). The underwriter wants proof that his risk is still reasonable after five years .... You want his money in a claim and he wants you to prove your boat is still worth his risk ... the cost of boat ownership.


No different with houses, RVs, cars &#8230; lots of stuff gets insured without this kind of client-paid survey.

The issue (for me) is that this assessment is part of the business cost of the insurer. I go to a business with a job. I ask for a quote. They spend the time and resources to give me a quote. This research is their responsibility, not mine as the potential client. I can provide all the information they need, but I don't have to hire a third-party consultant to check my report.

An insurance survey is part of the cost of insurance. Therefore it should be paid and managed by the insurance company. Obviously we all pay for it anyway through our premiums, but like I said earlier, if the companies did it instead of the individual boat owners there would be clearer market messages around price efficiency and quality control. As it is now, it's all a bit of a joke - a joke that costs boat owners needlessly.

Again, I'm taking about insurance surveys, not purchase or other surveys. And I'm not criticizing surveyors in general. There are good and bad. I've had excellent services from the surveyors I've used. I even hired one once to survey my boat to help me in the upgrade process - nothing to do with a sale.


----------



## boatpoker (Jul 21, 2008)

MikeOReilly said:


> I'm not criticizing surveyors in general.


I am


----------



## boatpoker (Jul 21, 2008)

I think we may be splitting hairs ....... of course I try to be objective but the bottom line and result is that I find and report on cons, not pros.

the "spreadsheet you referred to .... Every Marine Surveyor in Ontario


----------



## paulinnanaimo (Dec 3, 2016)

When my boat required another insurance survey a couple of years ago, I asked if I could have an in-water survey to save the haul-out fees. They offered something better. If I agreed to a maximum value of ten thousand dollars for loss of the boat, no survey would be required. Obviously not a solution for everyone.

Paul in Nanaimo


----------



## olson34 (Oct 13, 2000)

paulinnanaimo said:


> When my boat required another insurance survey a couple of years ago, I asked if I could have an in-water survey to save the haul-out fees. They offered something better. If I agreed to a maximum value of ten thousand dollars for loss of the boat, no survey would be required. Obviously not a solution for everyone.


There are some subtle parts to this sort of insurance coverage - if I understand the point you make. If the insurer has set a max. payout, but no minimum, you could be out a lot of money if the boat was ever totaled. They might state a value too low for a true replacement, and you would have little recourse.
(Typically they have a lot of $$ and lots of lawyers to oppose you.)

We doubtless pay a higher premium than some owners, but have always had an Agreed On value for each of our boats. 
Reson is that in case of a total loss, our model boat, equipped exactly as we have equipped it, needs to be replaced. This would be expensive.

If none can be found the ins. payout needs to be enough to buy an equivalent boat. Since our boat is a high quality and also a low-production model, any replacement would take some searching and would likely need a lot of $$ to bring it to the standard of our insured vessel.

I have discussed this with the underwriters several times over the years and they have not quibbled. They probably figure that a well-cared-for vessel is less likely to have a loss anyway, so the premiums are all gravy to them. 

Our solution fits us, and probably would not suit everyone else, but like the towing insurance I have thru VesselAssist (or whatever they call themselves now), it provides some peace of mind. When we head up the coast to cruise for a month, it's good to have as many 'ducks lined up' as we reasonably can.
"YMMV"

Regards,
Loren


----------



## elliowb (Jun 8, 2015)

I think that one rationale that an insurer might give for requiring a survey, while such is not required of a house, is that houses don't sink.

As to why the the buyer or owner has to pay for the survey, it's simple, the insurer holds the cards. If we didn't have to pay for the survey, it would get wrapped into the premium anyway. Further at least if the money is coming from the buyer/owners pocket to the surveyor, the surveyor is more likely to have the interest of the buyer/owner in mind.

When I bought my boat two years ago, I had an excellent surveyor. I asked a friend for a recommendation and followed his advice. Worth every penny I paid the surveyor. Unfortunately, the same can't be said for home inspectors. Most home inspectors work regularly with realtors and are typically beholden to them, regardless of where the cash comes from.


----------



## eherlihy (Jan 2, 2007)

One more aspect of the survey process that did not impress me; Both surveyors began the survey by asking me what the agreed to sales price was, and I told them. When I received the written survey back from Surveyor #2, I was amazed that his professional appraisal of the value of the boat, based on upon his years of experience, matched the price I told him EXACTLY. In retrospect, I wished that I had added another $10K to the number that I told him at the beginning of the survey.


----------



## boatpoker (Jul 21, 2008)

eherlihy said:


> One more aspect of the survey process that did not impress me; Both surveyors began the survey by asking me what the agreed to sales price was, and I told them. When I received the written survey back from Surveyor #2, I was amazed that his professional appraisal of the value of the boat, based on upon his years of experience, matched the price I told him EXACTLY. In retrospect, I wished that I had added another $10K to the number that I told him at the beginning of the survey.


One of the first things I tell a client is " Please don't tell me what your offer is"
What's She Worth , one of the more contentious issues in a survey report .... valuation.


----------



## mstern (May 26, 2002)

boatpoker said:


> One of the first things I tell a client is " Please don't tell me what your offer is"
> What's She Worth , one of the more contentious issues in a survey report .... valuation.


Excellent link, BP; very informative.

When I bought my boat 17 years ago, I paid $5000 for my 1979 Oday 23. The hull was in very good shape, both cosmetically and structurally, but pretty much everything else was still original (running and standing rigging, sails, cushions, etc.). I thought I knew a lot about boats, but I hired a surveyor anyway. I was buying the boat directly from the owner, so there was no broker involved, but I had consulted with one previously during my search and had received a list of potential surveyors from him. I don't remember how I picked my surveyor from that list, but he was a crusty old gent who showed up to the boat (which was on the hard) on time and sober.

During the next couple of hours or so, he went over that boat, top to bottom and side to side. I learned more about fiberglass boat construction in that short time than in my previous 39 years of life combined. He showed my things that I never would have thought of, and frankly, things that I can't believe I didn't see and that I didn't know to look for. For example, he showed me where the foredeck had some delamination; he also showed me where the likely candidate spots for the water intrusion that caused the problem were, and how to fix them. He also quieted my fears that the delam was a deal killer. In short, it was money very, very well spent, even if the survey fee was a very high percentage of the purchase price; I still use today what learned so long ago. And even though I think I know enough now to do my own survey of potential issues on a boat that size, I would never consider buying a bigger boat without a survey. The surveyor apparently liked me too, as he wound up charging me a discounted rate, telling me that my boat was small and simple.

Based on what I'm reading in this thread, it appears I was very lucky in my choice of surveyor. BP, if I wind up buying a bigger boat and need a surveyor, I'm calling you for a recommendation (unless you want to come to Connecticut.....)


----------



## paulinnanaimo (Dec 3, 2016)

Olson34

Without a long explanation, suffice it to say that our boat doesn't owe us anything. We have had 19 great years and still counting...and while I invest a lot of labour, I have not spent much money. For us, the purpose of having insurance is for the million dollar liability in the event of a true calamity; not to get a new GPS should someone steal ours. As I stated, it's not for everyone.


----------



## colemj (Jul 10, 2003)

I like it when the surveyor asks about the purchase price. It is unreasonable to think that a single surveyor can uniformly know the market value of all boats. Particularly for boats with low production numbers or rarely sold.

The BUC guides are useless and Soldboats.com is notorious for wrong purchase numbers since the brokers themselves are responsible for that input.

I agree that for common production boats, previous sold values can be a good guide. But then there is that charter/non-charter thing where most of the BUC and other values are based majority on beat up charter boats that were sold to get rid of them quickly.

Besides, the value of a boat is what the buyer is willing to pay for it. A surveyor should be humble enough to not think himself the ultimate arbiter of what all boats should sell for, and be humble enough to understand that only his basic research may not be the end-all to pricing.

Instead, the surveyor should know what the buyer is paying, then make a value judgement based on whether this price is within a reasonably broad range that the boat could conceivably be worth. If this means that the buyer is paying the highest price for a certain boat in the past few years, so be it as long as the boat condition could reasonably be justified. 

I'm not saying that the surveyor should pass off on, say, 300K for a 100K boat, but niggling about 74K for what a surveyor personally thinks is a 68K boat due to BUC value or other sold boats is silly. Even if nobody has ever paid 74K for that particular model in the past several years. 

There could be many things that make the boat more valuable to the buyer, such as a specific location or a very rare layout they are particular about. The surveyor should take this into account by asking the buyer about these intangible values and take them into account in valuing the boat.

Mark


----------



## JimMcGee (Jun 23, 2005)

JimMcGee said:


> Something I did when I listed our home -- and I will do when the day comes to sell our boat.
> 
> The listing agreement stipulated that I was to be present for any pre-purchase inspection and the inspector had to share any concerns while everyone was in the room including the buyer and his agent.
> 
> In our case several things being "flagged" had to do with gaps in the inspector's knowledge not actual problems. The ability to address the issues immediately saved me at least $500 in having these items re-inspected by a "licensed professional".





denverd0n said:


> I have to say that, if your home listing had this stipulation, I would find another home to buy. Every time I have bought a home (5 times now) I have had it inspected, I have been present for the inspection, and the seller absolutely has NOT been present. If I'm paying for the inspection, then the seller has no involvement in it, and gets nothing from it, other than what I might choose to share.
> 
> A pre-sale survey on a boat works the same way. I don't want the seller present. And after it is done, the results belong to me. The seller isn't getting any of the details, unless I choose to share them.


Don,
That's fair and finding another home or in this case another boat is certainly your prerogative. But you left out the most important part of my quote; being present saved me over $500 - and without getting in to details likely a LOT more.

My being there also allowed me to educate the buyer on a number of things about the home that might not have been obvious to a first time homeowner. The buyer commented multiple times how glad he was that I _was_ there. BTW the process was cordial, not at all confrontational.

When selling my boat, if I was confident that the surveyor was someone like BoatPoker I'd have no problem turning over the keys and assuming there would be a fair assessment and an undamaged boat. But the spreadsheet he's attached in post 45 and my personal experience (with reports that look like this) suggest otherwise.

Jim


----------



## Arcb (Aug 13, 2016)

I'm not sure worrying about an unsupervised surveyor braking your boat during a survey is a realistic concern.

If your boat can survive a few hours of sailing in moderate conditions, surely it can survive a survey. It's not like your handing him the keys and telling him to take it for a sail.


----------



## Tucamonday (Mar 1, 2017)

Maine Sail said:


> You painted and stereo typed entire industry with one brush stating falsely that surveyor _certifications_ essentially come in a Cracker Jack box.
> 
> When challenged to show us how it actually works, to back up your falsely made claims, it is others who are the Cool Aid drinkers..?? Wow...
> 
> ...


I did indeed address this towards the industry on a whole and in regards to that I do in fact have little respect for it. The industry is problematic at best.

Let me address a few facts for you (yours are a bit blurry). Let's start with the insurance issue. Within this post are many discrepancies on how insurance and surveyor/surveyors work but your statement is by far the most egregious. I will start by saying I know a little something about this, I own a large insurance agency and insure many many boats (of the pleasure craft category). Don't know what your measurement of "lots" in regards to the number of surveys you have been personally been involved with but mine exceeds hundreds and perhaps thousands so let me clarify this for you. I wouldn't say it's rare for a NAMS or SAMS accredited survey to show up but it is an exception. I have seen no end of different "accreditations" presented (including none, which avoids the sticky fingers from digging to the bottom of a Cracker Jack box) and to be clear there is not a standard that the insurors I am associated with use or require for the survey, end of story on that subject my friend.

For a little clarification here, boats up to a certain size rarely (never in my case) are required by an insurer to have a survey as opposed to bank requirements that may require one, to earlier points made this may be to insure that the asset exists, that might be an explanation. Larger boats are required and I often see a survey regardless because the owner wants it on record to help adjust a loss.

Now to your point of "under-writable", (we in the insurance industry like to refer to this as seaworthy), underwriters look for a grade of "not seaworthy" and here is a shocker for you, I have NEVER seen a survey that states that!! Now lets be clear on this insurers have different market appetites for risks, the insurer I am associated with is one of the big 4, they are looking for the cookie cutter type vessel and one of the ways they determine that is by using RMG's (risk management guidelines) thus, age, size, power, speed manufacturer, model and other factors are used to weed out certain non desired or high risk vessels so to be fair if you are working are unique or larger vessels my experience does not relate to that however, if that is the case you are not addressing the pleasure craft industry within the mainstream of what we see which is by and far the largest sector of the pleasure boating industry.

A quick footnote on re-inspections after work being performed on a covered loss for other participants addressing this practice. One explanation on this practice depending on how the coverage was afforded per the contact may have something to so with issuing the recoverable depreciation on a loss that was covered with replacement costs coverage. Often times an insurance company will pay ACV (actual cash value) at the beginning of a settlement and then once you can verify that the repairs were completed will issue the difference of the settlement (recoverable depreciation) and depending on the nature of the loss don't trust an adjuster to verify said repairs and may look towards a expert (surveyor) to do so. Electronics would be a good example of the type of repair.

Moving on, you "know one guy" and a few others that by your account should turn out to be a good accredited surveyor, or are good ones, congratulations! I never said there weren't some good ones out there but frankly, read the rest of the posts here!

I disagree summary on your assertion that surveyors are "almost always" in a no win situation. Sellers and buyers alike along with insurers and investors look toward the industry for assistance and expertise and most often when given correctly all parties are happy and satisfied more often than not. But that's not what gets delivered consistently and after reading survey after survey I can attest to that.

With all due respect, the Kool Aide has been widely served and it would seem you have had your fair share. Too many people turn to the industry for help and come to their defense without knowing all the facts. I offered some simple advice in the beginning of this post on how one might do some simple veting and a logical approach to getting a good survey for a fair value.


----------



## boatpoker (Jul 21, 2008)

Tucamonday said:


> I did indeed address this towards the industry on a whole and in regards to that I do in fact have little respect for it. The industry is problematic at best.
> 
> Let me address a few facts for you (yours are a bit blurry). Let's start with the insurance issue. Within this post are many discrepancies on how insurance and surveyor/surveyors work but your statement is by far the most egregious. I will start by saying I know a little something about this, I own a large insurance agency and insure many many boats (of the pleasure craft category). Don't know what your measurement of "lots" in regards to the number of surveys you have been personally been involved with but mine exceeds hundreds and perhaps thousands so let me clarify this for you. I wouldn't say it's rare for a NAMS or SAMS accredited survey to show up but it is an exception. I have seen no end of different "accreditations" presented (including none, which avoids the sticky fingers from digging to the bottom of a Cracker Jack box) and to be clear there is not a standard that the insurors I am associated with use or require for the survey, end of story on that subject my friend.
> 
> ...


Please don't take this query as argumentative, it is a genuine question ....

Please take a look at some of these shocking sample surveys that were accepted by underwriters and tell me why your industry routinely accepts such pathetic survey reports from unqualified surveyors ?

Your industry could put these charlatans out of business tomorrow if they so chose.


----------



## boatpoker (Jul 21, 2008)

May I also suggest for your reading pleasure How to Become A Marine Surveyor and Choosing a Marine Surveyor.


----------



## Faster (Sep 13, 2005)

Always an animated discussion..

I can find agreement with many statements made previously - and have myself dealt with and experienced both good and bad surveyors and surveys - to the point that more than once I essentially 'dictated' the surveyor's report..

One aspect I don't think has been mentioned is the insurer's interpretation of the surveyor's recommendations.

On our last purchase, closed in early fall/rainy season, the survey recommended that the cabin windows/deadlights (partially opaque acrylic) ought to be replaced. They did not leak. The insurance company insisted that item be addressed within 30 days. Pretty unrealistic and unnecessary esp for that time of year. I was able to dissuade them and did the job (for my own reasons) the next spring.

But it seems to me that anyone underwriting marine insurance should have a clue about boats...


----------



## Tucamonday (Mar 1, 2017)

Boatpoker-

I don't take it argumentative and it's a great question. I have always been told, don't answer a questions with a question so my answer is, I don't know.. lol

I would submit though, why as a boating community so we accept it?

Further to your earlier post on the seller being present. You propose the biggest catch 22 I can image in the boat world. Remember, the seller DOES NOT get to pick the surveyor and if the buyers surveyor is an imbecile then his/hers reports is now an official record of your vessel!!!!! Now seller gets to clean up the mess. My most recent experience (I was the seller) the buyer's surveyor started in with some of the most out landish inspection I have ever witnessed and if I had not been there to end it early (I should have ended it even earlier) who knows what I would have had to do?

Let me throw another little tid bit out there, I think you mentioned having a seller coming close to sueing you for a survey you did. I will tell you this, the first thing I did when this guy left is call my attorney, it was slanderous and libel but guess what? No E&O to go back on.. In other words since there is no oversight to the industry surveyors are running around with zero assets and assuming zero capability in their incompetence. If I sue and win I get his dog and other liquid assets, great proposition!

Maybe you can enlighten me. I have done some research in the last week and I can't even find a carrier that offers E&O to the industry, is there any coverage? I don't mean liability but Errors and Omissions!


Faster-

I know I opened the bag on the insurance thing so let me first say this, I am an agent not underwriting. That means I am in sales so the more I sell the more I make. Underwriters are the enemy in a sense. 

However, there is a method to the madness. Remove surveyors from the discussion just for a moment, think of your situation involving any tangible asset. If you are protecting it from loss through insurance the better of a caretaker you are the less chance is of the asset incurring a loss. Underwriters are imperfect couple that with the fact that insurors by law must file rules and rates with every state in the union and now what we have are imperfect people following rules as best can be outlined. Insurors are aware of this and sometimes use a measure of care to assess an individual's merit of a caretaker. Think of it like this, say a insurance company says that lawns must be mowed before they insure a house. It's a measure of how well the insured may care for the property, stands to reason that a homeowner that does not maintain the yard may not shovel the walk in the winter and therefor experience a higher likelihood of a liability claim from someone falling of a slippery walkway. Again, coming from a person that is not a fan of the insurance industry you are better off with the company that insists on those ports and hatches being maintained that from the companies that don't care, more likely than not the boats that are not upkept with migrate to the companies with the lack underwriting and it's those companies that will absorb higher losses and guess what? Losses get passed to the consumer... From sales, the better my rate the more likely you are to come to me... Just a FYI...


----------



## boatpoker (Jul 21, 2008)

Tucamonday said:


> Boatpoker-
> 
> I don't take it argumentative and it's a great question. I have always been told, don't answer a questions with a question so my answer is, I don't know.. lol
> 
> ...


E&O is available but extremely expensive (I've seen quotes of 8k to 12k per year). SAMS is currently working on a group policy for it's members but not all members want to pay for it. Many people complain about the cost of surveys and I can't imagine how they'd complain if survey costs were increased to cover the cost of E&O.

Why does the boating community accept surveys from these charlatans ? ..... ignorance ! 
There are a number of intelligent, highly experienced people on this forum but 95% of the boaters I deal with are absolutely clueless. The examples shown in Stoopid Tricks By Boat Owners are the rule not the exception.

PS. Sharon and I are currently sitting in Treasure Cay waiting for this front to go through so we can continue our Exploration of the Abacos


----------



## Tucamonday (Mar 1, 2017)

Frankly, with what a Surveyor is charged with the premium cost makes since.

Enjoy the Abacos, we loved it there, especially Treasure Cay. Meanwhile I anxiously await Maine Sail to catch up and reply... hehe...


----------



## JimMcGee (Jun 23, 2005)

Arcb said:


> I'm not sure worrying about an unsupervised surveyor braking your boat during a survey is a realistic concern.
> 
> If your boat can survive a few hours of sailing in moderate conditions, surely it can survive a survey. It's not like your handing him the keys and telling him to take it for a sail.


Arcb, I think you underestimate just how bad some of these guys are...


----------



## boatpoker (Jul 21, 2008)

JimMcGee said:


> Arcb, I think you underestimate just how bad some of these guys are...


I know of one who took a boat out on an unauthorized sea trial and ran it hard aground but as much as I criticize my own industry, that is an extremely rare (only one I've heard of) case.


----------



## Arcb (Aug 13, 2016)

Maybe. What damage could they possibly do? I'm not giving them the key to the engine. I'm checking on the boat when they're done. I have 10% of the asking price from the buyer which I can not return if their surveyor has done something really crazy. The ones I have met, have all been boaters or boat owners at the very least. 

Seriously, aside from bad advice, a bad report and screwing up an otherwise good deal, what could they possibly do to your boat?

Edit:. Oops, I think BP was typing at the same time as me. Even a hard grounding shouldn't result in a 10% devaluation of the vessel. Just keep the deposit. The buyers responsible for the actions of his surveyor.


----------



## Tucamonday (Mar 1, 2017)

My sentiments exactly...


----------



## albrazzi (Oct 15, 2014)

Tucamonday said:


> Boatpoker-
> 
> I don't take it argumentative and it's a great question. I have always been told, don't answer a questions with a question so my answer is, I don't know.. lol
> 
> ...


I don't understand the permanent record statement you make here. If the buyer pays for the survey and the sale comes apart then how is this survey "recorded". Wouldn't a proper later survey be the next set of negotiating points for the transaction. Only one person owns the survey.


----------



## olson34 (Oct 13, 2000)

albrazzi said:


> I don't understand the permanent record statement you make here. If the buyer pays for the survey and the sale comes apart then how is this survey "recorded". Wouldn't a proper later survey be the next set of negotiating points for the transaction. Only one person owns the survey.


I agree. The survey is not public, initially. The person or entity that pays for it owns it completely. That person could potentially sell it or give it away, but it's their decision.
For instance, when BoatUS orders up a survey on their dime, they own it and only release the part of the result that require an upgrade. That's what happened with my friend's boat.

IIRC he declined to purchase the complete survey from them, having done the required work. His insurance continued in force, for full agreed-on value. This all seemed fair enough to me...
(The required upgrade was logical even tho the potential 'risk' appeared quite minor to both of us. But then minimizing risk is what insurers do... !)


----------



## travlin-easy (Dec 24, 2010)

I had an NAMS surveyor survey my boat and I cannot say enough good things about him. I was there during the entire survey, he was very thorough, and provided me with excellent service and saved me a bundle of money.

Gary


----------



## boatpoker (Jul 21, 2008)

travlin-easy said:


> I had an NAMS surveyor survey my boat and I cannot say enough good things about him. I was there during the entire survey, he was very thorough, and provided me with excellent service and saved me a bundle of money.
> 
> Gary


Gary, we are all too ready to name the bad ones. You lucked out, let's name names and give the guy some credit.


----------



## JimMcGee (Jun 23, 2005)

boatpoker said:


> I know of one who took a boat out on an unauthorized sea trial and ran it hard aground but as much as I criticize my own industry, that is an extremely rare (only one I've heard of) case.


LOL, I think he went into home inspections!

BTW, thanks for the time you put into your web site and the advice for finding a marine surveyor.


----------



## JimMcGee (Jun 23, 2005)

Arcb said:


> Maybe. What damage could they possibly do? I'm not giving them the key to the engine. I'm checking on the boat when they're done. I have 10% of the asking price from the buyer which I can not return if their surveyor has done something really crazy. The ones I have met, have all been boaters or boat owners at the very least.
> 
> Seriously, aside from bad advice, a bad report and screwing up an otherwise good deal, what could they possibly do to your boat?
> 
> Edit:. Oops, I think BP was typing at the same time as me. Even a hard grounding shouldn't result in a 10% devaluation of the vessel. Just keep the deposit. The buyers responsible for the actions of his surveyor.


Arcb, I'm not looking for an argument here. It's how I feel, and I didn't get to be this cynical overnight. It happened because of a string of bad experiences 

One guy was so inept I've had to show knowledgeable friends the inspection report to get them to believe me.

And honestly if it meant losing a sale I was OK with that. With the recent sale of our home it turned out to be a good thing as I was able to answer a lot of questions for the buyer who is a first time homeowner, and he can reach out to me after the sale. I would extend the same courtesy to someone buying our boat.


----------



## travlin-easy (Dec 24, 2010)

The person that did my survey was:

North Wind Marine Survey
Rock Hall, Maryland
James Reihl, AMMS
(410)778-4742
(443)480-2892

He climbed into the engine compartment, which I could never have dreamed of doing, checked every square inch of the boat, tested the entire hull for moisture, showed me things I never thought about with the rigging, and even tested the electronics. He was very courteous, efficient, and thorough. The very first section of his contract, which we both signed says:

*GUIDELINES: The survey guidelines used for the inspection conform with the standards and practices set by the USCG Code Of Federal Regulations #33 & #46, NFPA and ABYC. Guidelines for determining the fair market value of the subject vessel are the NADA Guide, BUC Value Guide, local market conditions and a nationwide search of the internet and Marine Publications for comparable vessels. *

The survey, which took about 4 hours, cost me $495 for my Morgan 33 Out Island and was well worth every penny I paid him. Additionally, in the contract, if a bank or insurance company were to reject the survey, he would issue a full refund upon receipt of a letter from the bank or insurance company. Jim, IMO, is a very professional surveyor and I highly recommend him.

All the best,

Gary


----------



## boatpoker (Jul 21, 2008)

JimMcGee said:


> LOL, I think he went into home inspections!


Jim: In 1984 I bought a stone barn. It took me and my boys 10 years to turn it into a house. When we sold it the buyers brought in a building inspector who found absolutely nothing wrong and he made $1k on a report of boilerplate in a 3" binder. That deal fell through due to financing.

A few weeks later another buyer sent a different inspector who also charged $1k and in 4hrs. found every single corner I had cut and believe me some stuff was buried very deep.

Moral : If you hire someone you must accept some responsibility for finding the right person .... they are out there.


----------



## tripl (Apr 4, 2014)

Hello and Happy New Year Maine Sail,

First of all, I am a huge fan of your tips and videos on compass marine.
Your expertise has helped me maintain my recently sold Ranger 29 in near bristol condition (well, good condition actually!)

I am in the market for a replacement and am interested in a nice looking Sabre 28 of 1982 vintage located in Newburyport, MA.

Since I am on Long Island and the boat is 250 miles north, I feel a survey is a prudent step to learn the most I can

about this particular vessel. 

/cut to the chase...

Can you recommend a professional to assist me in this endeavor in this general area of New England?

If you are not comfortable with it, I will understand.

Thanks and looking forward to your response.


Best Regards,
Tripl


----------



## boatpoker (Jul 21, 2008)

tripl said:


> Hello and Happy New Year Maine Sail,
> 
> First of all, I am a huge fan of your tips and videos on compass marine.
> Your expertise has helped me maintain my recently sold Ranger 29 in near bristol condition (well, good condition actually!)
> ...


I too am a fan of Mainesail. May I suggest a few tips on how to inspect the vessel yourself before hiring a surveyor. Marine Survey 101


----------



## tripl (Apr 4, 2014)

BP,
Very helpful, thank you sir!


----------



## KMAllen (Aug 10, 2018)

I just had this conversation this past weekend. I know with home inspectors you are better off hiring a roofer, an electrician and an HVAC guy and skip the home inspector all together. If a home inspector finds an issue where there is none, the expert on that system can refute the home inspector finding and that's it. I am thinking of purchasing a small day sailer, a 2000 23' Precision, and wonder if a survey is in my best interest. Thoughts?
Karen


----------

