# Angry at my surveyor....



## MedSailor (Mar 30, 2008)

I just got my survey, and I'm not happy with my surveyor. It was an insurance survey, and thus the information contained therein may be used against me by insurance lawyers in the event of a claim.

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

What do you think? 

MedSailor


----------



## sww914 (Oct 25, 2008)

I think that "Minor repairs should be completed as soon as possible" would have been more appropriate.
I'm pissed at a surveyor today too. I called him to ask when he was available. He said Fri. or Wed. I called the owner, the buyers, (my in-laws who are out of the area)the boatyard, and my PAYING CUSTOMER that I had lined up for some work for Fri. and rescheduled him, and set it all up. I call the flakey ass back an hour later and he says, sorry, Friday's out. He can only do it next Wed when the boatyard will have their travelift down for maintenance!!!


----------



## MedSailor (Mar 30, 2008)

Can the ABYC regs be found or searched online? I was able to find the standards at abyc.com but there were very short summaries for about 40 topics that I could purchase for $50 each. Ummmm...... no. 

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

MedSailor


----------



## SchockT (May 21, 2012)

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

As far as my insurance company was concerned they just told me that they trusted that I would remedy the deficiencies in a timely manner because otherwise my policy would be void. Fair enough. It didn't effect my premiums at all.


----------



## MedSailor (Mar 30, 2008)

SchockT said:


> My surveyor said something similar on my survey, although he was more specific; "The following items should be corrected before sailing". They were similar things to yours. Not soft wood, but some separated tabbing that needed to be re glassed, replace a few hose clamps, etc.
> 
> As far as my insurance company was concerned they just told me that they trusted that I would remedy the deficiencies in a timely manner because otherwise my policy would be void. Fair enough. It didn't effect my premiums at all.


Right! This is not my first survey either and I'm used to precise language such as "the following items should be corrected".

Do you think I can/should ask him to change his wording? How should I go about that?

MedSailor


----------



## blt2ski (May 5, 2005)

Depending upon how well you know the surveyer, they may be willing to change some things. My last survey two yrs ago he did just that. Altho, a number of items were not what I really had on the boat.......like a bronze shaft, which was really SS!

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

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

marty


----------



## northoceanbeach (Mar 23, 2008)

Yeah he sounds like a dick.

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

If you have a cracked hull and are about to sink, I know he has a reputation and all, but it doesn't sound lie that. I don't know much about surveyors(besides they are overpriced) but since we the sailors pay them, you would think they would give two surveys, one for you that is accurate, or for a potential buyer, and one for the insurance company. I would think that word would get around which surveyors to go for for good insurance surveys. Is this not the case?


----------



## SchockT (May 21, 2012)

I don't think it is unreasonable to ask him to change his wording to be more accurate. Does he mean that the "soft wood" must be repaired before you use the boat again? 

As for the idea of getting "less than accurate" survey for insurance purposes, surveyors have an accreditation that recognizes their qualification to perform the surveys. If word got out that he was selling fraudulent insurance surveys, you can be sure he would lose that accreditation. There IS a big difference between a buyer's survey and an insurance survey, and a good insurance survey should only look at items that could result in damage or loss. That's all the insurance companies care about.


----------



## Zanshin (Aug 27, 2006)

My lesson learned from this exchange is that I will continue to be on hand during any future survey. Not only do I get to see parts of the boat that I never or rarely look at and discover niches and crannies that only a surveyor can find, but simple questions or problems such as the flares or unused wiring could have been verbally explained and would never have made it into the survey.


----------



## Ajax_MD (Nov 24, 2009)

A few points:

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

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

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

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

I don't think your boat is a death-trap, but you might want to start saving your pennies for those expensive wood repairs.


----------



## Minnewaska (Feb 21, 2010)

You can square away the impact of the survey directly with the insurance company or agent (but not a broker). Ask them if you remain covered for taking the boat off the dock. This is where you really want a good agent to explain the ups and downs. The carrier themselves is not often motivated to explain every out they have.

While I understand the annoyance, it doesn't seem like you really disagree with the findings, other than the flares and CO detectror, only the severity. Is fixing them and making this go away an acceptable approach? You would have a better boat for it, even if not a death trap today. That's probably what I would do, even if I had the language changed.


----------



## blutoyz (Oct 28, 2012)

I agree that the language used was a bit harsh considering all those items on the punch list can be fixed in an afternoon. The "soft wood" seems to be the only structural issue and I am sure that many of us wish that we only had two soft spots

You obviously have a fine vessel if that was all he could find so pull out the regs and show the insurance company the lack of a standard for the "soft spots".


----------



## sd1953 (Mar 21, 2010)

I recently purchased a boat. I had the surveyor look at the forward bulkheads in the main salon because the chainplates (bolted to the bulkheads) had leaked and ruined the teak veneer. I was concerned that the underlying wood in the bulkheads was also damaged and would involve a large (and expensive) repair. 
If the bulkheads in your boat were glasses in, are they glassed in to provide structural support to the hull? If so, soft wood in your bulkhead matters. If it is glassed in to anchor the interior components, not so much.
But I had to *ask* my surveyor to look at it for me. He said that surveyors didn't do that kind of testing and he didn't put the condition of the bulkheads into the report. So how did your surveyor even find *soft wood*? He had to be poking it with an awl or something. Did he poke all the wood on your boat? Is there evidence of prior leakage on the bulkhead?
By the way, on the port side only, I had to have a small area of wood cut out and new wood epoxied in, but it was NOT under the chainplate so there was no compromise in the structure. The new veneer looks good, the carpenter matched both sides of the salon with a new veneer panel and put a molding strip over the joint. Looks like original construction.


----------



## sailvayu (Feb 3, 2013)

As a surveyor I will add my comments.
Yes the wording is vague and I would ask that he reword it to name the specific items that need repair prior to "cruising" 
Most items seem small and you can fix them in an afternoon. You say they were on your to do list so just do them. 
Send the report to the insurance comp. They may or may not send back a letter of compliance giving you 30 days to fix the problems. You then simply sign off that they have been fixed. Rarely do they ask for more than that or a sign off by the surveyor. They take your word that the problems have been fixed.
This should not be a big deal and your boat will be better off after you are done. 
There are no ABYC standards for the soft wood but some things just are common sense. Most surveyors are not trying to make life difficult but rather protect you and your boat. Sounds like you knew about most of this anyway. 
Hope this helps


----------



## jimgo (Sep 12, 2011)

I had a similar statement in my survey. I sent it to the insurance company anyway. They took it and issued me a policy, and I never heard a peep about needing to correct any of the issues. In my case, the survey was both an initial purchase survey and an insurance survey, so I had no problem with him noting things like no CO detector, expired flares, etc. But, again, those deficiencies didn't stop the insurance company from issuing a policy.


----------



## svHyLyte (Nov 13, 2008)

For What It's Worth, I know of no yachts without a "To Do" list that never seems to shrink. The issues will be more or less severe and are normally addressed in the order of their importance (to the owner) and not in the order of their appearance or addition to the list. Consequently, some items are repeatedly pushed down the priority list and, as so, many become accustomed to leaving them aside--until, of course, the minor issue becomes major, such as the "Soft Wood" (which I assure you can become "major" much more quickly than one might imagine).

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

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

N'any case, the enumerated issues are not so great that they cannot be rectified fairly quickly and easily and a Certificate of Compliance completed and provided to his/her insurer to resolve the matter. (Of course, providing such a Certificate without making the corrections will void one's coverage, even if an otherwise covered incident may not involve any of the listed issues).


----------



## Minnewaska (Feb 21, 2010)

svHyLyte said:


> For What It's Worth, I know of no yachts without a "To Do" list that never seems to shrink....


Good point. I literally just received a part in the mail for something I put on the to-do list 3 years ago. Last season, I really started to tell myself I should get to it. I wonder how long it will be before I install it.


----------



## smurphny (Feb 20, 2009)

The entire "surveyor" system, as far as it concerns pleasure craft and insurance, is a useless scam. Insurance companies inspect cars, houses, etc. themselves. If they are truly interested in minutia found by surveyors, they ought to hire company employees to look at boats themselves. The level of competence varies so widely in this independent, unregulated, and standard-less industry that any findings are suspect at best. The vague wording in your written document is a perfect example. Not only that but no one knows a boat better than the owner if he/she has owned it for any amount of time. As you indicated, you knew about the soft spots already and did not need to pay someone to point it out to you. How much did it cost for someone to tell you what you knew already? Oh I forgot, finding that deadly missing 1/4" of insulation must have been worth it.


----------



## Donna_F (Nov 7, 2005)

Zanshin said:


> My lesson learned from this exchange is that I will continue to be on hand during any future survey. Not only do I get to see parts of the boat that I never or rarely look at and discover niches and crannies that only a surveyor can find, but simple questions or problems such as the flares or unused wiring could have been verbally explained and would never have made it into the survey.


Agreed.

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

Until I came to SailNet and heard how others do it, it never occurred to me not to be present for either a sale survey or insurance survey.


----------



## Faster (Sep 13, 2005)

On the plus side that sounds like a pretty thorough survey for an insurance one. I pretty much dictated the last insurance survey and paid $450 for the privilege.

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

I'd try for a wording edit..


----------



## zz4gta (Aug 15, 2007)

MedSailor said:


> 1: Soft wood at the tab in a forward bulkhead. (Is a soft bulkead really an ABYC standard??? Couldn't find it if it is. They also don't provide much strength to my boat.)
> 2: Household wire nuts found in 3 locations. (2 are decommissioned wires and one was unknown to me)
> 3: Start of soft wood at the aft end of the bowsprit (been keeping an eye on this. Again, is there an ABYC standard for this?)
> 4: Fuel gauge wiring is bare wire and needs terminal. (gauge broken, is on the to-do list)
> ...


So out of the 10 things that need to be replaced only 2 can be checked off the list. I'm not seeing how this surveyor was a "dick". You agree with a lot of what he found and have it on your to do list. Maybe his choice of words could've been different, but I don't think it's off the mark.

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

I agree with Bubblehead, the wood repairs will need to be done eventually, and they won't be cheap or easy.


----------



## denverd0n (Jun 20, 2008)

northoceanbeach said:


> Also, since you are the one paying him, and probably alot, shouldn't he, you know, like write what you want him too, as long as it isn't anything major?


Wow. There's a part of me that hopes you are kidding, or at least being sarcastic. But then, I don't really think so.

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

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

I think the OP has every reason to be disappointed with this survey as it is, but I see no reason why it can't be corrected. Good luck.


----------



## MedSailor (Mar 30, 2008)

Thanks for all the thoughts and comments. 

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

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

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

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

MedSailor


----------



## fryewe (Dec 4, 2004)

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

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

Why the company gives boat surveys such short shrift I don't know...but I am confident the company will stand by their contract with me if I have a loss.


----------



## barefootnavigator (Mar 12, 2012)

I'm a little curious as to why you don't just take the afternoon off spend a hundred bucks and fix the findings. 10 findings is nothing, the average survey has dozens, even on new boats. You have 1470 posts here so obviously time isn't a factor  On another point I'm truly shocked that boats have survived before ABYC came about, its an absolute miracle that they haven't all just blown up and sunk.
PS I'm just up the bay from you and would be happy to lend a hand.


----------



## jannpage (Sep 19, 2010)

This is just an example why I have always had a nervous feeling about a surveyor. Frankly, When you get over your anger, I think he really did you a favor. I am more than a little cautious about boat condition. It really does not take much to sink the boat. These are all rather minor but he is right, I would want to have them all fixed ASAP. Certainly before I did any sailing I did not have to do. I would want several fixed before I headed for my home port to. Even "soft " word scares me a bit.

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

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

Sorry my friend. A flaw on a boat to me is a bit like a rotten fuel line on a tank in a combat zone.
lefty2


----------



## Philzy3985 (Oct 20, 2012)

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

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

Good luck! I don't think you need to worry as much as you have been. You should see some of other peoples surveys!


----------



## denverd0n (Jun 20, 2008)

Philzy3985 said:


> In all fairness, the surveyors aren't regulated any any kind of license or common standards...


There are two independent organizations within the United States that accredit marine surveyors, SAMS and AMS. Any surveyor who is accredited by either of these does, in fact, have to adhere to specified standards.

I would never even consider hiring a surveyor who was not accredited.


----------



## barefootnavigator (Mar 12, 2012)

Being in the industry I have had the displeasure of working with many accredited surveyors who were less than qualified to do their job. A word of warning to any newbies, get good recommendations and not from the web, it can be very misleading.


----------



## Minnewaska (Feb 21, 2010)

First, while I would only hire an accredited surveyor (SAMS, NAMS), I've become very jaded over the years that they do much of anything to insure quality control. They absolute best survey I've ever had still had notable errors and omissions. 

Second, Philzy makes a good point about what would happen if they ommitted something and one was hurt by the failure. Imagine the bowsprit failing under sail and something cutting across someone on the foredeck. I can hear it now, "but she was just surveyed last month, I can't believe this happened". Wood is supposed to be hard. It grows that way. Soft is soft and not good. It's just a question of how not good.


----------



## pdqaltair (Nov 14, 2008)

A few thoughts from a 30-year sailor and API licensed inspector of large oil tanks.There are many concepts in common that have not been discussed. The items seemed pretty reasonable.

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

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

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

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

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

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

---


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


----------



## sailvayu (Feb 3, 2013)

Yes there are good and bad surveyors just like any other business. Yes we do have standards to adhere to. 
Surveyors have to be careful I when I do a per-purchase survey the buyer wants to know what is wrong and that is what he is paying for. If i miss something I will hear about it. Most of the time I save them more than my fee in reduced paying price due to the findings. Then when they buy the boat they call me and say "You wrote up so many things I cannot get insurance!" So what do we do?
For insurance surveys we have to place a value on the boat, If we miss something and the boat sinks guess who the insurance company is going to come after with a team of on staff lawyers looking to get their money back?
Most surveyors do not make enough in a year to pay all the costs we have to keep our professional credentials and pay the rent.
True professionals have to compete with the retired cop who likes boats and thinks it is fun to poke around in other peoples boats and charges half of what the pros charge. 
I know we are not the most liked folks around the broker hate us because we find problems the buyer does not like us because we find problems on the boat of their dreams, the seller does not like us because we find flaws in their perfect boat and those getting insurance do not like us because we add extra expense and make them fix things.
But just last week a client paid me and extra 100 because I found a major flaw in the boat he was getting ready to buy, I saved him an easy 15k. And the guy who hired me for an insurance survey thanked me when I pointed out both the from motor mounts were broken and it was getting ready too cause him a very expensive repair. It can be a thankless job but for those of us that consider ourselves professionals we try to do the best we can while dodging law suites. 
To the OP I would think a calm phone call to your surveyor would clear up the wording. 
For those needing to hire a surveyor I would say when you call do not only ask how much they charge, remember you get what you pay for, ask questions ask about their background and get to know them a bit. A 5 min phone call will tell you a lot.


----------



## barefootnavigator (Mar 12, 2012)

For what its worth I am a long time broker and love hardened surveyors. Sure I have lost many deals but its not the surveyors fault its the sellers fault. As a broker my number one duty is to find the perfect boat for my client. I personally inspect each boat before my client writes an offer so they don't waste 1500 bucks on a survey process that turns into a dead deal, after a purchase price is agreed on then we bring in a professional. I recently left my company because my standards were too high for the company and I got tired of fighting it. I got tired of haring the term your not a yacht broker your a salesman. As far as I'm concerned I'm a consultant and would never lie or hold anything back just to earn a commission. I have satisfied clients who have safely sailed their boats all over the world. One time got in a huge argument with a client when I would write an offer for him on what was clearly the wrong boat for his proposes, three years later he called me and thanked me fro mexico for finding him the perfect boat. I get paid to do a job just as an honest surveyor does. You sound like an awesome surveyor sailvayu.


----------



## Faster (Sep 13, 2005)

A side thought... are there cases where a surveyor missed a crucial item, with an incident as a result for which he/she was actually found and held liable?


----------



## barefootnavigator (Mar 12, 2012)

Make mistakes? sure why not, humans make mistakes all the time. Held liable, sounds like a long shot. DO you know anybody who has gotten 100% on every test they have taken. You have to remember your not buying the space shuttle. Every boat owner needs to understand that boat need constant maintenance, and they need to do their do diligence. They survey is a starting point and gives you a fair assessment and a list to work from, that's all.


----------



## sailvayu (Feb 3, 2013)

It is rare but it does happen. 
More often a suit is filed and the surveyor wins but the cost to defend is enormous. 
Example: surveyor surveys a boat on the Chesapeake, buyer buys the boat takes it to a inland lake and gets fined for gray water discharge. Sues the surveyor for not telling him that gray water is not allowed on the lake he took it to. surveyor wins at a cost of 3k
The only time I had a issue the buyer came back to me 2 years after he bought the boat for a problem that came up long after the survey and after more than a 2000 mile trip without problems. Wanted me to pay as if the survey was a warranty that the boat would never break. Never went to court because no lawyer would take his case as they knew it would get thrown out. 
I am sure there are cases where the surveyor was negligent as I have seen some really bad surveys myself. I have seen some surveys that were so inaccurate I wondered if the survey ever really saw the boat. I know one surveyor that will do a insurance survey just from the dock never sets foot on the boat. 
I will be interested to hear some other stories.


----------



## Faster (Sep 13, 2005)

sailvayu said:


> ...
> I will be interested to hear some other stories.


Me too... I know that the last two insurance surveys were a bit of a joke, as mentioned I mostly dictated it and payed well for that privilige. A pretty easy bit of coin - worked out to about $600/hr and I did the bulk of the 'work'.

Fact is, for most experienced owners they'll know their boat better than any drop-by surveyor will.. it does stick in my craw a bit that the insurance companies insist on these surveys, esp knowing the boat is better than when we bought it, and, perhaps to 'justify' the fee the surveyor has to 'find' something. It can also be frustrating dealing with insurance people that clearly don't understand boats and boating.

Not knocking surveyors in general, of course there are good and bad as in any field, but based on these last two insurance surveys those two were not surveyors I'd seek out for a pre purchase look-see.


----------



## sailvayu (Feb 3, 2013)

Faster, sounds to me like you are knocking surveyors in general. In the above post you complain you have to tell the surveyor what is wrong and then complain the surveyor finds things just to justify his fee. So on one hand he is finding things and on the other he is not?

Honestly I often find problems the owner was not aware of you may not know your boat as well as you think. It can help to have a fresh pair of eyes sometimes and that applies to me as well as I have had to hire a surveyor to get my insurance and yes they found things I did not know about. Why? because I have not looked at that hose or in that hole in awhile. 

I am guessing you shopped your last 2 insurance surveys on price alone wanting to get the cheapest report you could and of course you got what you paid for. And the time a surveyor spends on the boat is only part of the time spend doing your full report, somebody has to write the report do the comps and research the findings. Believe it or not most of us work hard it this stuff even if you only see a small part of what is done. 

But i know I will not change everyones mind


----------



## Faster (Sep 13, 2005)

Sorry, I didn't put all of that very well.. It's true price was a large factor for the insurance survey, and you're right about my 'getting what I paid for'. In the case of the last "dictated" survey there were no findings beyond a burnt out nav light. The report was a photocopy of the handwritten/hand drawn working document I watched him fill out. A far cry from the pre purchase survey we had when we bought.

Anyhow I did not intend any disrespect to the many competent surveyors, and apologize if it came out that way...


----------



## sailvayu (Feb 3, 2013)

Thanks for that, proves you are a good person and not what I got from the post. I just read a lot of surveyor bashing on these forums. True there are some bad ones but not all. I am glad you had a good experience when you purchased.


----------



## SlowButSteady (Feb 17, 2010)

Here's an idea:

Fix the problems and quit whining. You surveyor found some problems, including indications of rot ("soft wood" = rot), because THAT WHAT S/HE WAS HIRED TO DO. Now you're whining that "soft wood" isn't part if the ABYC standards. Whether it is or not (and somehow I think that rot in the bowsprit would put your boat out of compliance with just about ANY standards) it needs to be fixed; ditto for rot in a bulkhead.


----------



## MedSailor (Mar 30, 2008)

SlowButSteady said:


> Here's an idea:
> 
> Fix the problems and quit whining. You surveyor found some problems, including indications of rot ("soft wood" = rot), because THAT WHAT S/HE WAS HIRED TO DO. Now you're whining that "soft wood" isn't part if the ABYC standards. Whether it is or not (and somehow I think that rot in the bowsprit would put your boat out of compliance with just about ANY standards) it needs to be fixed; ditto for rot in a bulkhead.


Ummm.... yeah. I'll take offense to that. 

Here's the point of my whining. His language can be read to say that I can't even go to the fuel dock before fixing these two issues, or not, depending on how you read it.

It's ridiculous IMO to ground the boat because of these findings (the spot in the sprit is not a load bearing location and the bulkhead isn't a structural one) and they are going to take me some time and money to fix, both of which I will have more of at the end of the summer.

I intend to call him and ask for clarification. If he truly thinks that my boat is too dangerous to sail to the fuel dock then I'll quit my "whining" and fix it here and now. I don't think that's really the case though and if I can have a little more leeway to fix it then I will take it.

There are other findings that I didn't post such as peeling paint. His survey can also be read as my needing to repaint my hull before sailing 100 yards. Ridiculous but the words he used can be read that way. I'd be willing to bet that if your insurance company told you your policy was void until you painted your boat you'd be whining too.

MedSailor

PS No surveyor hate here. I'll save that for if things go south after my phone call.  I really appreciate the 2 surveyors who have been willing to post to this thread. Your input has been very useful and is appreciated.


----------



## pdqaltair (Nov 14, 2008)

I don't see how the language could be interpreted to include moving within the harbor. If he had meant "do not operate" or "do not occupy" he would have said that. Certainly cruising means--more than simply implies--open water.


----------



## chef2sail (Nov 27, 2007)

So an "independent" survey is done as required by the insurance company you choose

You are not present when they do it even though you know when it is being done
They find "X" number of things in violation or not in correct order
They write a report

You fail to call them after report or furnish them with pictures or correct the items wrong
You find fault with their "independent" language and want them to use "your" language
You have not even discussed the issues
You quibble of ACBY standards vs. obvious in sight inadequacies found at survey

Stop quibbling. Fix the issues. Send them pictures. Talk to them. Don't expect them to give up their independence by changing their language to language you want them to use


----------



## MedSailor (Mar 30, 2008)

I knew there would be a bunch of "stop whining" posts. I'm just surprised they took this long. 

I've tried to be clear in all my posts that I'm not mad about what he found, or what he missed. I'm mad that he's incorrectly holding me to a standard. I'm mad that his language might make me loose a good part of my sailing season or my insurance carrier. Not because (I believe) he truly thinks that the boat is unsafe but because of his sloppy choice of words. I work in a field where we get sued all the time. I know the dangers of imprecise language. 

My not being present had nothing to do with his use of language on the report. 

I will call him and I'll let y'all know what he says. 

Medsailor


----------



## chef2sail (Nov 27, 2007)

MedSailor said:


> I will call him and I'll let y'all know what he says.
> 
> Medsailor


That's a good and sensible solution. Bet there is a meeting of the minds
Either way hope it doesn't affect your sailing


----------



## bljones (Oct 13, 2008)

MedSailor said:


> I will call him and I'll let y'all know what he says.
> 
> Medsailor


That's the right move. Call him and ask him to cite the ABYC standards in question, not us. The very vast majority of us aren't surveyors, and the very few who are are likely not going to put their rep on the line by second-guessing the surveyor who was eyes-on.

But we'll all be happy to offer our unqualified opinion on an unseen boat, unsolicited.

Something to consider, as i discovered- some surveyors will "recycle" the template of a previously performed survey on a similar boat when asked to do an insurance survey. When i received the survey on my boat i noticed a number of discrepancies- glaring differences in bilge pumps, galley equipment, sail inventory, engine type, etc. When i called the surveyor and pointed out that the auxiliary engine on my boat was a yanmar diesel, not an atomic four, among other concerns, i was told "sorry about that, because it was an insurance survey I just reused another survey and tacked on new pictures and some new info, i discovered on my inspection."


----------



## MedSailor (Mar 30, 2008)

chef2sail said:


> That's a good and sensible solution. Bet there is a meeting of the minds
> Either way hope it doesn't affect your sailing


Now that I've slept on it for a night (albeit restlessly) I actually don't think it's going to be all that bad in the end.

Sure, the surveyor may not budge and the insurance company could be really conservative and say that all findings, including painting the hull, must be done or else. Is that really likely? No, but I have a penchant for catastrophic thinking. Working on that...

MedSailor


----------



## SolSailor (Dec 30, 2012)

MedSailor said:


> ... I'm mad that he's incorrectly holding me to a standard. ...


Standard.... Shmandard... This boils down to INSURANCE and their liability for problems that could occur. If you have any claim in the future and it is directly tied to any of the items listed in his report, regardless of whether they are ABYC standards or not, the insurance company now has basis for not paying the claim (if they choose to fight).

I think you're missing the point ENTIRELY by worrying about his choice of wording on the report about how quickly they need to be fixed. If he didn't want you sailing to the fuel dock, he would have told you so. Instead, he is providing a report that the INSURANCE company can/will use to deny claims, regardless of how strong his choice of words are.


----------



## Deric (Feb 3, 2008)

The written word has always posed communication issues because of the interpretation of the author and that of the reader. This may explain the continuous ongoings in the court of law.

If I was in the same situation as the OP, I would have a conversation with the surveyor and negotiate a rewrite whereby language can still make the meanings, but with the allowances that may not provision limited restrictions on the boat, or, have a second survey done by another person and compare the two reports to learn and negotiate once again.


----------



## northoceanbeach (Mar 23, 2008)

But by him using imprecise wording, doesn't that give the insurance company more leeway in denying claims?

Like the OP says, what if he goes to the fuel dock and something out of his control happens, couldn't the insurer say "well you weren't supposed to leave, it says so right here"
and he doesn't get paid even though he has been paying the premiums?


----------



## pdqaltair (Nov 14, 2008)

northoceanbeach said:


> But by him using imprecise wording, doesn't that give the insurance company more leeway in denying claims?
> 
> Like the OP says, what if he goes to the fuel dock and something out of his control happens, couldn't the insurer say "well you weren't supposed to leave, it says so right here"
> and he doesn't get paid even though he has been paying the premiums?


It was NOT imprecise wording.

Websters says: 
1: to sail about touching at a series of ports

Dictionary.com:
1: to sail about on a pleasure trip.

Nothing within a harbor could be construed to constitute cruising. IF he had meant "do not operate" he would have said that.

And of course, some of the violation are bad sitting at the dock.


----------



## MarioG (Sep 6, 2009)

Heres my problem with the surveyors I've had to deal with working at the boat yard, either they need to bring their seeing eye dog with them or stop taking bribes from the seller or brocker to not list the broblems the boats have. Not just because it makes me look like the bad guy when I need to tell the new owner that its going to need more repairs then was listed meaning more money and time in the yard but it..... ok it is because it makes me look like the bad guy because I will not ignore a problem I see, and Being a grunt I'm not looking for things to make more money, these are things I would want fixed on my boat, not just things like outdated flares that may or may not be needed but and mechanical issues that will come up shortly after the boats in the water.
I think a buyer should walk thru with the surveyor, and that the surveyor should explain the what and whys. When we had a survey done on the boat I am living aboard I was so far up the surveys a$$ I knew what he had for lunch. I even pointed out what I thought were problems. A surveyor needs to educate a buyer/owner when they can,that and in the case of Medsailor ask if there are things like new flares and co2 detectors aboard. It took us 6 months after moving aboard to find some of the stuff the PO's stashed.


----------



## sd1953 (Mar 21, 2010)

MarioG, I did not have any similar kind of experience with surveyors. As I said in my earlier post, I just bought a boat and I had a pre-purchase survey performed. He made a special point of doing an inspection I specifically asked for (potential rot in the forward salon bulkhead) and reported the results to me. He also found a problem (kind of a big deal, the rudder post was deeply corroded and I had to have the rudder rebuilt) that the seller would have rathered he not find. Because I made the seller renegotiate the sales price over the rudder work. I got several recommendations for surveyors before I chose one (the boat was 700 miles from my home so I was relying on his professionalism as I did not know any surveyor in that area). I researched them on line before I chose one. I drove 700 miles to be there for the survey.
I got my monies worth. And I got my boat. And I'm using the survey to get my insurance. I saw no sign of corruption in the surveyors work or attitude. Competence and professionalism, that I did see.
A local surveyor is going to get to know the boatyards in his area, it's where he works. He is going to get to know the marina owners and dockmasters. And the local boat brokers. It does not make him corrupt or on-the-take.


----------



## TakeFive (Oct 22, 2009)

I'll tell you what my broker told me about insurance surveys. He told me the insurance company may not even look at the survey. It goes in your file, and they write the policy. If/when you file a claim, then the survey gets read very closely, and coverage is denied for any issue whose cause is related to an uncorrected survey problem.

So if you are truly confident that the issues in the survey would not cause an insurance claim, you are free to ignore them. You still have coverage for anything unrelated to survey issues.

So it's entirely up to you. Nobody is stopping you from sailing now. You just won't be covered if those trivial issues cause an insurance claim.

Take my advice with a grain of salt, because free advice is worth what you paid for it, and sometimes less. :laugher


----------



## chucklesR (Sep 17, 2007)

I was present during my post purchase survey. I think he did a relatively decent job.
Here's the problems I have/had:
I pointed out that I thought the galvanic isolator on my Irwin didn't look properly installed to my surveyor. 
He didn't even seriously look at at it (I had to drop the panel cover to show it to him), but he commented in his report that it needed to be properly installed. Mind, he didn't KNOW it wasn't, just said it needed to be.
Now if my maxprop rots off I'll have to prove I had a qualified marine tech come in and install it.

He didn't find the air horn at the helm in the cup holder, or the flare kit (the big Orion orange one) so he dinged me on not having required safety gear. 

But what really pissed me off is the 'moisture found' comments. No specific level, just moisture. He told me in a side bar conversation that moisture meters don't get real specific - they just beep more if it's a lot, less if it's a little and it depends on calibration. 

He also hit me on two through hulls (engine water and sink drain) having "PVC" fittings. They are original to the boat - i.e. 26 years old. Of course they don't meet ABYC standards, there weren't any then.


----------



## windnrock (May 27, 2012)

I agree with BubbleheadMD, talk to your surveyor. Get him to be more specific not only about the condition but the the specific ABYC standard he is applying. If he uses the standards, he HAS to be able to specify. Repair the other items you can. There is a form space to rebut any survey claims in your insurance paperwork. 

If you look for an engine survey, avoid Chris Oliver in MD at all costs.


----------



## MedSailor (Mar 30, 2008)

*(WAS) Angry at my surveyor....*

Talked with my surveyor today. I thanked him for finding things that I didn't know about and I asked him about the 2 soft wood findings. I told him I couldn't find the ABYC standards for them and I would appreciate being pointed to them so I would know what standard to correct them to.

He avoided the ABYC question a few times and told me that they were both safety issues. I gave up trying to get him to admit that there wasn't really a standard. I asked if he thought the bulkhead was structural on a Formosa with it's thick glass hull and he said he did. I asked if he thought the "start of soft wood" at a non-load bearing spot on the spirit was a safety hazard and he did.

I asked him if he thought they were an imminent safety hazard or a brewing one. He said that I'd be find to sail around the San Juan islands but if I went offshore he thinks they might be a problem. (I'd have to agree with that!)

I then pointed him to the last line in his comments where he says "work needs to be done before any cruising." As soon as I read it to him he said "It's not specific enough is it?" I asked him to make it more specific. If he thinks these issues need correcting before I put the boat back in the water, please say so. If he thinks I can sail around the San Juans for a few months, please define the inshore/offshore issues. We then talked for a few minutes about which issues were real safety ones and which weren't.

He told me he'd correct the survey and get it to me in a couple hours. (pretty good service) I was hoping that he'd outline which issues in particular he wanted done now and which he wanted done later. He didn't do that. What he did do was add 2 words to the sentence about cruising. It now reads "...work needs to be done before cruising off shore."

I'm content enough with the resolution we achieved. The language is more precise where it needs to be and can't easily be read that I need to be pinned to the dock. I'm still miffed that he is saying that 2 items are out of ABYC compliance when they're not but only as a matter of principle. I wouldn't be mad if he said they represent a safety hazard in his opinion, but in principle I take issue with invoking a standard when it doesn't really apply. I'll let that go though as I don't think It'll affect the insurance issues.

So I'll submit the survey and see what happens. Hopefully I'll be able to take the bowsprit off at the end of the season and really "spruce"  it up in the shop at home as a fall/winter project.

MedSailor


----------



## chef2sail (Nov 27, 2007)

*Re: (WAS) Angry at my surveyor....*



MedSailor said:


> Talked with my surveyor today. I thanked him for finding things that I didn't know about and I asked him about the 2 soft wood findings. I told him I couldn't find the ABYC standards for them and I would appreciate being pointed to them so I would know what standard to correct them to.
> 
> He avoided the ABYC question a few times and told me that they were both safety issues. I gave up trying to get him to admit that there wasn't really a standard. I asked if he thought the bulkhead was structural on a Formosa with it's thick glass hull and he said he did. I asked if he thought the "start of soft wood" at a non-load bearing spot on the spirit was a safety hazard and he did.
> 
> ...


Sounds like a reasonable meeting with results which are palatable to you for the most part.

Glad you to it worked out and can continue to sail while you work on the issues

Dave


----------



## Cruisingdad (Jul 21, 2006)

MedSailor said:


> I just got my survey, and I'm not happy with my surveyor. It was an insurance survey, and thus the information contained therein may be used against me by insurance lawyers in the event of a claim.
> 
> My boat is not in an unsafe or unseaworthy condition, and it even says so much at the beginning of the survey. What I am mad about, is that he has outlined 10 findings that he says need to be corrected to be in compliance with ABYC standards and I don't believe there really is a standard for 2 of them.
> 
> ...


Hey MS,

I didn't read through all the comments, but I too would have been frustrated. I think I would go back to him and have him amend it to be more specific and discuss the things that are really critical. Then I would make sure my insurance company signs off on it.

Brian


----------



## padean (Jul 5, 2001)

I have followed this thread for awhile, and can appreciate and even commiserate with many of the posters. Probably don't need to add my opinion, but I have observed the following from the several pages of posts:
1. Surveys are typically a pain in the rear. I have had a couple of surveys, and been present for each one. learned a lot from all of them, and found them very valuable, but also frustrating. Remember, what is being surveyed is typically a 15, 20, 30, or more old sea-going vessel that has spent most of it's life in a hostile (to the boat material) environment - there are ALWAYS going to be problems.
2. Being present at a survey is essential. The last survey for my current boat, I drove 6 hours one way around Lake Huron to be there and follow the surveyor - invaluable.
3. Boating is not like medical malpractice (for Med sailor). I would challenge anyone to find a boat in perfect condition with no problems. That's different than saying a boat is not seaworthy (which, by the way, is on opinion, not a factual finding). In medicine (yes, I'm a physician too) we try to get everything right and always need to cover our asses, but with sailing, we try to do the best we can to keep the boat in as good a shape as possible and sail as safely as possible. 
4. All the surveyors I have worked with have been professional, but it is there job to identify as many flaws or imperfections as possible, and then to document them.
5. Sailing for most of us is recreation or past-time (though sometimes full time as well). It makes sense to enjoy it, worry about the big stuff, and fix as much of the small stuff as we can. Anyone out their have a boat project task list without anything left unchecked? I don't.​
So get out and sail, have fun, and let the insurance company try an prove that whatever problem you had must have come from some minor fault found on a survey of an old boat.


----------



## northoceanbeach (Mar 23, 2008)

I like that amendment, before cruising offshore. That's good and specific.


----------



## radcat (Apr 28, 2008)

I just had a survey done and was very pleased with the results. If there are problems, I want to know it. Safety always comes first; fix accordingly. However, I am curious about the application of ABYC standards in general. If you have a boat that was not required to be built to those standards, is there a rule that says it must be upgraded to meet them? Sort of like driving an old car that was built before air bags were required.


----------



## Minnewaska (Feb 21, 2010)

Hate to say it, but how do you define offshore? For most sailors, we think of it being more than a day from shore. However, a layperson would define that as any distance "from the shore". How an insurance company defines it may yet be another.


----------



## pdqaltair (Nov 14, 2008)

Minnewaska said:


> Hate to say it, but how do you define offshore? For most sailors, we think of it being more than a day from shore. However, a layperson would define that as any distance "from the shore". How an insurance company defines it may yet be another.


Logically, it will be defined as the Coast Guard deliniates inland vs. coastal waters.


----------



## Minnewaska (Feb 21, 2010)

pdqaltair said:


> Logically, it will be defined as the Coast Guard deliniates inland vs. coastal waters.


Perhaps, but logic is not what the interpretation of insurance contracts is based upon. 

Still, it would be pretty restrictive if contained only to inland waterways. At least around here.


----------



## MedSailor (Mar 30, 2008)

radcat said:


> ...However, I am curious about the application of ABYC standards in general. If you have a boat that was not required to be built to those standards, is there a rule that says it must be upgraded to meet them? Sort of like driving an old car that was built before air bags were required.


I'd have to say that boats SHOULD be up to the new standard where ABCY is concerned. ABCY, IMHO is a very good set of standards that are largely safety oriented.

When my 1925-built house was inspected they found some knob and tube wiring. Standard at the time? Yup. Fire hazard? You bet! Less houses burn down these days and that's largely due to the application of good standards and building codes.

MedSailor


----------



## northoceanbeach (Mar 23, 2008)

Yeah, that's true about how would the insurance companies define offshore, but it's still an improvement on the word cruising. I could see cruising being defined as a half not out in the bay, where I would define cruising as anything overnight away from your home port.

Hopefully offshore can be easily defined from his home port of Anacortes as anything outside the Strait of Juan de Fuca, i.e. the Pacific Ocean. Inshore is Puget Sound, the Strait of Georgia up to Port Hardy.

I honestly don't know how any older boats could ever pass. Look around at your local marina. Anything over 10-20 years old, which is alot of them, they don't look like they would pass to me. Especially when you read the list of things the surveyor put, what boat doesn't have a list like that, and I'll bet you, and many people that take the time to post here, well, that tells me you care, you want to learn, I want to learn, so I'll bet you've got a really nice boat in great shape.


----------



## weinie (Jun 21, 2008)

Fix the 8 easy items. Send a certified letter to the insurance company (and surveyor too I suppose) stating that you repaired them. Also state in the letter that you intend to make the other two repairs in the near future. If the boat sinks and it can be determined that it isn't caused by those two issues, they will pay. If if not, they may not pay. 
Everybody happy happy happy.


----------



## sailvayu (Feb 3, 2013)

For myself and I think most surveyors use a good bit of common sense. For a 30 year old boat if it does not meet every standard in the latest Book that is ok but I am going to want it to come close on some things like AC wiring and fuel systems. These are things that kill. I am not going to write it because it does not have a high water alarm which is now required. I might suggest that but not in the recommendations. 

Most surveyors will not use the word "seaworthy" as that is a law suit waiting to happen, using the word "cruising" is a bit tricky as well. It has gotten to the point where I can't use the expression "sea trial" anymore, it now has to be "water trial" unless I take the boat to sea meaning 3 miles offshore. Why? because like Mcd's and the coffee someone got sued. This is why some of you may have vague wording in your reports. Blame the lawyers.

I used to survey boats for a major manufacture, would do every boat they built starting in lamination and finishing with the sea trail before delivery. I would have at least 2 pages of write ups on those boats. On a 30 year old I will not nit pick it anywhere near that extent. 

This is why an insurance company cannot send out a agent with a 3 week training course under his belt to look at your boat. There is a lot of judgment used on the part of a surveyor, a balance between safety and not making the boat look like a wreck better left for the scrap heap. Most surveyors look to protect their clients from major problems and general safety issues. I read the forums and it sometimes surprises how little some owners know about things like AC power and why it has to be grounded. I am not putting them down you cannot expect everyone to know everything about their boats that is why they hire us to point these things out.

So most surveyors are not out to make life hard but rather help the owner better understand their boat. The sad truth is we often have to be careful because we know there is someone out there just waiting to sue us because we worded something wrong.It is a balancing act for sure some are better at it then others. 

This has been an interesting discussion and I have enjoyed seeing just how some owners see us surveyors. hopefully some of my input will help some understand it from the other side.


----------



## AKscooter (Jan 18, 2009)

MedSailor E-books work for free......

Bet with a bit o google fu I could find the ABYC regs too. If you no savvy pay a 12 year old to do it.


----------



## redfishnc (Jan 22, 2017)

I usually sit back and enjoy reading the wealth of knowledge and free 'training' that is posted here. The issue of surveyors is a hot button for me and I will try to keep this short. Beautiful Catalina 30, great condition. Read everything I could on their issues. Spent 11 hours on boat inspecting everything and taking digital pictures before survey. Surveyor shows up day early to inspect. Sends survey. Boat is in great shape except wrong boat name throughout survey. (surveyor recommended through broker). I sent him 8 pages of minor or significant comments. He, ahem, must have missed them. Meet at boat. Rudder weeping water - survey says, "no problem'. I questioned, he assured. My error for trusting, cost 3 mo. later, $2200. Tab aft of nav table separated, no problem, survey says, 'no problem'. Cost to repair $450. My point is to do your homework and do not pay for crappy survey. If you are not knowledgeable then find a friend or pay someone qualified to be there at survey while YOU ARE THERE. Next boat Compac 27, surveyor recommended by long time dealer. Surveyor comments were nothing major and BOATUS said to fix them within reasonable amount of time. Last comment from surveyor, "I have never done a sailboat so most of the sailboat stuff I just looked to see if it was ok. I specialize in sportfisherman". I take my responsibility again. Get references from 3 or more people about their experience. My next survey is soon and believe me there will be a lot of questions. Something is not up to code, show me the code reference. Have a question you are not sure of. Have third party inspect. Surveyor does crappy job and you have list of items like I did with Catalina, don't pay. I would gladly take my pages of comments with annotated pictures to a courtroom and plead my case. The fancy name on the side of their truck means NOTHING. Ask him questions. Ask more questions. As a new owner you are the only one with money invested and YOU should do your part. Unfortunately I was not fortunate enough to have one at either survey. It is not that difficult to become a "surveyor". It is not easy to be a good surveyor. My apologies to all the great surveyors out there and there are many. I will be looking for you soon.


----------



## Bene505 (Jul 31, 2008)

MedSailor said:


> ...I have a penchant for catastrophic thinking. Working on that...
> 
> MedSailor


That's not a bad thing. It's a tool to use as you see fit, like before you leave the dock.

Regards,
Brad


----------



## fryewe (Dec 4, 2004)

AKscooter said:


> MedSailor E-books work for free......
> 
> Bet with a bit o google fu I could find the ABYC regs too. If you no savvy pay a 12 year old to do it.


Perhaps...but this thread led me to look for the ABYC codes on line and all I can find are links that request a large registration fee and significant fees to access each of the codes...or more significant fees to access each if not a "member" of ABYC. Only thing I can find that is open is wiring codes for color and current carrying capacity.

Think I will rely on open source and experience and common sense until they fail me.

Why are the codes behind firewalls requiring payment? Never mind...I know...because "they" can make money by charging for them.

Doesn't make sense to me to have "codes" that everyone is expected to meet and then keep them "secret" unless you pay...but this isn't the first time something hasn't made sense to me and probably won't be the last.


----------



## miatapaul (Dec 15, 2006)

redfishnc said:


> I usually sit back and enjoy reading the wealth of knowledge and free 'training' that is posted here. The issue of surveyors is a hot button for me and I will try to keep this short. Beautiful Catalina 30, great condition. Read everything I could on their issues. Spent 11 hours on boat inspecting everything and taking digital pictures before survey. Surveyor shows up day early to inspect. Sends survey. Boat is in great shape except wrong boat name throughout survey. (surveyor recommended through broker). I sent him 8 pages of minor or significant comments. He, ahem, must have missed them. Meet at boat. Rudder weeping water - survey says, "no problem'. I questioned, he assured. My error for trusting, cost 3 mo. later, $2200. Tab aft of nav table separated, no problem, survey says, 'no problem'. Cost to repair $450. My point is to do your homework and do not pay for crappy survey. If you are not knowledgeable then find a friend or pay someone qualified to be there at survey while YOU ARE THERE. Next boat Compac 27, surveyor recommended by long time dealer. Surveyor comments were nothing major and BOATUS said to fix them within reasonable amount of time. Last comment from surveyor, "I have never done a sailboat so most of the sailboat stuff I just looked to see if it was ok. I specialize in sportfisherman". I take my responsibility again. Get references from 3 or more people about their experience. My next survey is soon and believe me there will be a lot of questions. Something is not up to code, show me the code reference. Have a question you are not sure of. Have third party inspect. Surveyor does crappy job and you have list of items like I did with Catalina, don't pay. I would gladly take my pages of comments with annotated pictures to a courtroom and plead my case. The fancy name on the side of their truck means NOTHING. Ask him questions. Ask more questions. As a new owner you are the only one with money invested and YOU should do your part. Unfortunately I was not fortunate enough to have one at either survey. It is not that difficult to become a "surveyor". It is not easy to be a good surveyor. My apologies to all the great surveyors out there and there are many. I will be looking for you soon.


Well you do not hire surveyors who are recommended by brokers. Brokers sole responsibility is to the seller so they are likely to suggest a surveyor who will not make trouble for the deal going through. Simple as that. It might be best to find who they don't recommend as may well be the ones who find things that make deals fail. And you never have a survey done when not present.


----------



## boatpoker (Jul 21, 2008)

Can't believe I missed this thread. interesting reading
Just a couple of things ... 

ABYC Standards are not law but have come to be given significant weight by courts in Canada and USA where there are routinely accepted as "the" standard. It costs a lot of money to produce these standards and there is none of your tax money supporting the organization, someone has to pay for it, hence the $50/standard price.

I would very much like to see a cut'n'paste from the actual survey report showing where the surveyor said soft wood was not ABYC compliant. I have a really hard time believing any competent surveyor would say such a thing. Perhaps you hired an incompetent one ?
You can check to see if he is ABYC Standards Certified at abycinc.org.

Neither I nor any of the other SAMS AMS surveyors in Ontario believe in a difference between Pre-purchase, Condition & Valuation or Insurance surveys all our surveys regardless of what you call them are done the same way (and cost the same). Think of it this way if you are doing a shorter version insurance survey .... what do you leave out ?

In Ontario there are about 250 surveyors and less than 10 that I personally would hire.
Finding a good one involves some effort but they can be found.

In my recommendation section I clearly state whether the comment is "my opinion" or cite the applicable standard concerning the issue.
what is my opinion rather than what is a standard"

If at all possible you should be present for the survey. If you have found one of the good surveyors you will learn something.


----------



## UnionPacific (Dec 31, 2013)

MedSailor said:


> 1: Soft wood at the tab in a forward bulkhead. (Is a soft bulkead really an ABYC standard??? Couldn't find it if it is. They also don't provide much strength to my boat.) bulkheads are very important in the event of a hole in the boat.
> 2: Household wire nuts found in 3 locations. (2 are decommissioned wires and one was unknown to me) How did he know they were household? my yacht has hundreds of marine grade nuts
> 3: Start of soft wood at the aft end of the bowsprit (been keeping an eye on this. Again, is there an ABYC standard for this?)
> 4: Fuel gauge wiring is bare wire and needs terminal. (gauge broken, is on the to-do list) dangerous for two reasons.
> ...


My thoughts. I dont think the whole list will cost more then $1500 combined, get to work!

woops, didnt see the date


----------



## smackdaddy (Aug 13, 2008)

redfishnc said:


> (surveyor recommended through broker)


^^^Never do this.


----------



## miatapaul (Dec 15, 2006)

smackdaddy said:


> ^^^Never do this.


I know I said it above but it never stops surprising me how many do this. If you were buying a used car and wanted a pre-purchace inspection would you use the mechanics at the dealer you were buying it from? INDEPENDENT one. Even boatpoker says most he would not use most, and he is a surveyor. He by the way has been very helpful and answers questions both here and in email.


----------



## Donna_F (Nov 7, 2005)

fryewe said:


> ...
> 
> Why are the codes behind firewalls requiring payment? Never mind...I know...because "they" can make money by charging for them.
> 
> Doesn't make sense to me to have "codes" that everyone is expected to meet and then keep them "secret" unless you pay...but this isn't the first time something hasn't made sense to me and probably won't be the last.


I listen to a LOT of podcasts. One interviewed the then head of the ABYC (no idea if he's still there). At the time he said the same thing you did and said publicly that if you sign up for the free trial period you can download the regs for free. He encouraged people to do it. I did and downloaded a bunch of documents. If you PM me your email address I will zip them up and send them to you. They are dated 2011 so I don't know if anything has changed. I have no idea how often they get updated.


----------



## boatpoker (Jul 21, 2008)

DRFerron said:


> I listen to a LOT of podcasts. One interviewed the then head of the ABYC (no idea if he's still there). At the time he said the same thing you did and said publicly that if you sign up for the free trial period you can download the regs for free. He encouraged people to do it. I did and downloaded a bunch of documents. If you PM me your email address I will zip them up and send them to you. They are dated 2011 so I don't know if anything has changed. I have no idea how often they get updated.


Typically 5 of the 42 standards are revised annually and published in July of each year. There are an additional 10 "Technical Information Reports" and 11 standards in the works through "Project Technical Committee's".

Not an inexpensive undertaking.


----------



## grampianvoyager (May 8, 2014)

denverd0n said:


> Wow. There's a part of me that hopes you are kidding, or at least being sarcastic. But then, I don't really think so.
> 
> What you are suggesting would constitute fraud. It would lose a surveyor his accreditation. No. He absolutely cannot just "write what you want him too [sic]." And he very definitely cannot do two surveys--one that is accurate and one that is not!
> 
> ...


What would be wrong with getting a survey, fixing the problems and then redoing the survey?


----------



## Minnewaska (Feb 21, 2010)

boatpoker said:


> .......Neither I nor any of the other SAMS AMS surveyors in Ontario believe in a difference between Pre-purchase, Condition & Valuation or Insurance surveys all our surveys regardless of what you call them are done the same way (and cost the same). Think of it this way if you are doing a shorter version insurance survey .... what do you leave out ?......


Technically, there should be no difference, but I think there are two.

First, an insurance survey is much more concerned with conditions that could cause liability or loss: ABYC standards for example. Some insurance companies have survey requirements that are very specific, like the standing rigging, and not at all inclusive of everything. If an insurance survey left out the fact that the topside paint was in its last year of life, I don't think the insurance company often cares. If you were purchasing the boat, you would.

Value is the second difference. In practice, it shouldn't be and issues like the topside paint should be equally considered in both. However, I will bet, if you line up a broad survey sample, the values have their thumb on the scale for an insurance survey, while the opposite is the case for a purchase.

Neither should be, but both are in my experience.

One of these days, I'm actually going to have a custom survey done. We keep saying this is the year we're going to head over to Bermuda. Before I go, I want a good survey done at the beginning of the season. However, I don't need them to inventory pfds, or check to see if the radios come on. I want a survey that focuses entirely on open water safety. I want every bit of the rigging checked, not just glanced from the deck. Dig into all the electrical connections, open up cabinetry to check all chain plates, etc. I do not want one of those surveys that comes with disclaimers on safety items they could not access well.


----------



## Hush34 (Dec 12, 2013)

I agree with Bubblehead...I would simply call and ask to meet regarding the issues you have. The survey can be edited prior to delivery by you to the insurance company. Most surveyors are reasonable people maybe you lucked out and have one that is. In light of everything, they are not supposed to record anything but facts in the survey. If he says the 10 items are out of spec he should list the specific articles within the specs that are not in compliance.


----------



## boatpoker (Jul 21, 2008)

Minnewaska said:


> Technically, there should be no difference, but I think there are two.
> 
> First, an insurance survey is much more concerned with conditions that could cause liability or loss: ABYC standards for example. Some insurance companies have survey requirements that are very specific, like the standing rigging, and not at all inclusive of everything. If an insurance survey left out the fact that the topside paint was in its last year of life, I don't think the insurance company often cares. If you were purchasing the boat, you would.
> 
> ...


I disagree, the insurer is interested in one thing and one thing only ... money !
How much will they have to pay out if she sinks. Valuation is a major part of any survey although I don't believe surveyors should be tasked with this job, sadly we are.

I don't see how anyone can arrive at an accurate valuation without a thorough inspection and I don't see how that can be accomplished with the very abbreviated "insurance surveys" I see.

So I'll continue to do things my way and I'll sleep better knowing I have tried to do an honest and thorough job.


----------



## Minnewaska (Feb 21, 2010)

boatpoker said:


> I disagree, the insurer is interested in one thing and one thing only ... money !
> How much will they have to pay out if she sinks.


You're getting a little stuborn on your point. We don't disagree as much as you would like to make it seem. How much they have to pay is not the "one thing" they are interested in. The primary thing they are interested in is they have reduced the risk they pay anything at all to an acceptable degree. The condition report is more important to them than the value itself. The value number just drives the size of the premium, that's simple for them.

Now, since the insured is usually the one that is hiring the surveyor, the majority of the time they get a value they are happy with or has a bit of a thumb on the scale.

Valuation is an art anyway, and any number is going to be +/- 10% at best. I'm just saying that pre-purchase and insurance values usually favor opposite ends of that spectrum. I will repeat that I haven't argued they should, only that they most often do.



> I don't see how anyone can arrive at an accurate valuation without a thorough inspection and I don't see how that can be accomplished with the very abbreviated "insurance surveys" I see...


That's a fairly simple answer. Because what people pay for is not always so technical. An accurate valuation should include all major influences. However, in a pre-purchase, I expect a good inventory of things that don't affect that value at all. They are only proof of what is installed or aboard and a measure to keep the owner honest. Totally unecessary for an insurance survey.

I have no beef with your approach, I just don't think its as absolutely necessary.


----------



## boatpoker (Jul 21, 2008)

No thumb on my scale regardless of who is paying or the purpose of the report.
Boat Values ... a crap shoot !


----------



## Minnewaska (Feb 21, 2010)

Let's say you would blindly determine a value of $520,000 when I purchased my boat, by looking at recent sales both above and below and trying to extrapolate equipment, age and condition differences. 

By your own report, that is a crap shoot. Of course, you would already know that I am paying $525,000. It's disclosed on every pre-purchase order I've ever had done, or at the least, they get the listing inventory and ask. Are you saying that in that vast crap shoot, you would not just bump the blind estimate to $525,000 or 1%. Well within the tolerance of you having been wrong in the first place??


----------



## boatpoker (Jul 21, 2008)

Minnewaska said:


> By your own report, that is a crap shoot. Of course, you would already know that I am paying $525,000. It's disclosed on every pre-purchase order I've ever had done, or at the least, they get the listing inventory and ask. Are you saying that in that vast crap shoot, you would not just bump the blind estimate to $525,000 or 1%. Well within the tolerance of you having been wrong in the first place??


I am not sure what you mean by a "pre-purchase order" but what ever it is I don't see it. As any of my previous clients will tell you, I specifically warn them not to tell me what their offer is as I do not want to be unduly influenced.

Now I obviously will see the listed asking price when I do my research but I've been around long enough to know how far out of whack that can be with the real world so that it has no influence on my valuation whatsoever.


----------



## MedSailor (Mar 30, 2008)

grampianvoyager said:


> What would be wrong with getting a survey, fixing the problems and then redoing the survey?


Ahhh... nice to see this thread resurface a year later. This is a good thing since there has been a lot of water under the bridge (keel?) and I just had another survey on my boat a couple weeks ago, which is to say a year later than the survey that started this thread.

Grampinan,

My issues isn't that stuff needed fixing. My issue was imprecise language and it's implications. Period. Surveys can end up in criminal and civil courts of law with very serious consequences. His language basically said that I couldn't leave the dock though when asked he told me that wasn't his intention to say anything of the sort.

Why not just fix it? Well, with his language I had to fix it before I could leave the dock. Taking off the bowsprit is a major undertaking and he agreed it could wait a year, but his language didn't allow me to wait a year. So, I was looking at owning a boat for an entire summer where I couldn't use her.

He DID change the wording to be more precise when I asked. He said his intent wasn't to keep me at the dock, but he thought the issues should be fixed before going out 100 miles offshore and finding a storm. At my request he made his language more clear to his own intended meaning, so no fraud there by my asking him to be more clear.

He was not willing to cite any ABYC regs regarding the soft wood. This was more of a semantic point and an issue of professionalism to me, so I let it go. If it's soft, it's soft and needs to be fixed even if there isn't an ABYC spec. Instead of citing code, he told me "about this time I was out on ol' Jimmy's boat and his bow sprit snapped off like a twig. 'Ol Jimmy he sure was a fella'..."

Now the soft wood he found was something I could never find, and in my more recent survey it wasn't there either.... but that's for another post. I have to run.

MedSailor


----------



## Minnewaska (Feb 21, 2010)

boatpoker said:


> I am not sure what you mean by a "pre-purchase order" but what ever it is I don't see it. As any of my previous clients will tell you, I specifically warn them not to tell me what their offer is as I do not want to be unduly influenced.......


Fair enough. I've never known the surveyor to be in the dark. Most, to your point, feel their value is so subjective they would want to avoid the pesky difference in my example.

Cheers mate.

p.s. While its taken many forms, the order I'm referring to is what provides the critical info, such as make, model and where the boat can be found, along with contact numbers of buyer and seller, etc. Price has always been in there somewhere, or they simply ask. It also usually serves as a disclaimer prior to the report itself.


----------

