Boats and Barns

These have been something of a recurring theme over the last 7 days. Last Friday I had the pleasure of visiting Mark Lewis at Custom Yacht Works in Upper Swanmore to inspect the fantastic repairs that he and his skilled team are undertaking to a client’s (formerly) Fairey Huntsman which suffered significant damage as a result of a mid channel collision with another similar craft. It is a measure of the strength and resilience of the Fairey Moulded Agba Hull that the vessel remained afloat, and is now undergoing full and effective repairs, notwithstanding damage which would have consigned most modern GRP equivalents to the scrapheap.
It is also a delight to see that the cabinet making skills required to construct those yachts are still alive. I saw at least three other Faireys up there awaiting or undergoing restoration, and as Mark describes it, their owners have the same dedication and commitment to preserving the vessels, to some extent irrespective of costs, as any class racing car enthusiast.
As the former owner of the only original Fairey Cinderella still in existence (Fairey’s equivalent to the smaller outboard Rivas produced in the 50s). I can testify that these boats were designed and built by people who knew their stuff. With prices only seemingly going one way at present, I rather wish I had hung on to mine now. Still, I have always had a yearning for a Huntress, so if anyone knows of an old and tired one that is looking for a new and sympathetic home, please let me know!
One of the most surprising things about Mark’s premises is that they are located in a large Atcost barn on a working farm 30 miles from the South Coast, set amidst the rolling Hampshire countryside. Aside from having additional boat transportation costs, Mark believes that the rental savings enable him to offer owners a very competitive hourly labour rate, which, combined with his state of the art machinery, must give him a definite edge over some of his competitors saddled with expensive waterside rents. Judging from his workload, my client is lucky to have secured his services.
Barns were the subject of further discussions through a very pleasant lunchtime meeting with Fred Laverton of Marina Equivalent Trader Limited, who has for 25 years been specialising in the service, repair and resale of used and new boat handling equipment.
Fred has kindly agreed to assist me in writing an Article on the benefits and pitfalls of the ever increasing use of this equipment and, based on the American experiences, the likely introduction of large purchase built “barns” racked out to store ever larger vessels all year round. Having previously experienced this with a small motor boat in Sweden (where such facilities are widespread because of the weather and somewhat more relaxed planning environment) this is definitely going to be the way forward unless you are one of those rare (and lucky) people who genuinely need (or enjoy the opportunity of) unlimited access to your vessel.
With racking already something of a sensitive planning issue, it is clearly something that is not going to be available in many of the older more traditional Boatyard locations but, as operators of Trafalgar Wharf in Gosport have demonstrated, this is something which is ideally suited to old commercial Wharfs, where a combination of large open buildings and well constructed quayside basins provides the ideal setting.

Posted in Uncategorized | Tagged , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , | Leave a comment

Not gone (round the island) with the wind.

As ever, the British weather provided the proverbial brickbat for the recent record entry round the island race, and with the organisers predicting somewhat more balmy conditions than the Met Office forecast, I found history repeating itself as I stood on Bosham Quay on that Friday afternoon, persuading my bitterly disappointed 17 year old son and his co-owner that they should not venture out around the Needles in their rather smart and newly rebuilt e-boat “Mr Muddle”.
Remembering well the experience of breaking a mast during a gybe in overfalls off St Katherines some years ago, I was able to paint a reasonably accurate picture of the conditions to be experienced, and the obvious hazards of taking a relatively untested boat and crew around the other side of the island. Disappointed as they were, commonsense prevailed , particularly when I pointed out to the boys that bending the boat would inevitably mean they would not be able to participate in Cowes Week this year, their other great goal.
Disappointment all round, but at least entering the race had obliged them to identify and complete all of the outstanding work on the vessel, which to their credit they managed to fit in between exam revision.
Speaking to others who did participate, this was clearly the right decision all round, as even large vessels reported very exacting conditions (one client even indicating that they were able to race with a storm tri-sail following the loss of their main, and still do well in Class).
There can be no doubt that whilst there is still a slight tendency to view the round the island race as a “jolly”, the large number of retirements (many of whom never even got out to the start) confirms that most of the participants were sensibly taking the race (and the safety of their boats and crews) seriously. Hats off to the round the island organisers for agreeing to hand out the commemorative pewter mugs to all who entered, whether they went round or not. Commonsense needs to be rewarded on occasions as well as bravery!
On a further bright note, lots of riggers, sailmakers and GRP repair specialists around the Solent are presently enjoying an unexpected unseasonal fillip in activity as a result of the event.

Posted in Uncategorized | Tagged , , , , , , | Leave a comment

VAT update

In a further indication of Pan EU tightening of VAT concessions on yachts, HMRC brought into effect changes to the intra EU Rules relating to yachts purchased by UK VAT Registered Businesses. Whereas it was previously permissible for UK VAT Registered Businesses to purchase yachts from suppliers in other EU States, accounting for the acquisition VAT in the UK notwithstanding that the yacht in question never actually arrived in the UK, recent decisions now mean that this practice will cease from the 1st June 2011. From that date, UK Businesses will not be able to recover such VAT as an input then filing Returns as before.
HMRC are introducing transitional measures to cover contracts entered into before the 1st June deadline, so anybody seeking to take advantage of the old Rules will need to move swiftly and should sensibly get expert advice so to ensure that they do not lose out.
Further on the subject of VAT, we have recently learned of yet another enterprising scheme whereby it would seem that VAT payments on a yacht were significantly reduced in an elaborate scheme which would appear to involve the original Manufacturer supplying a partly completed and fitted out yacht to the owner at a significant discount (and would proportionately lower VAT paid) with the remaining parts of the “kit” being seemingly exported to a non-EU country, there to be reunited with the vessel which is then brought back into the EU. Ingenious as it may be, it still leaves subsequent owners with a receipted invoice indicating a payment of VAT on a value which is patently unrealistic, and an explanation which must in turn raise question as to the lawfulness of the “export” of the gear. In the present environment, it would take a bold purchaser to buy such a vessel.
Finally, conversation today highlighted the problems with the anomaly between construction and commissioning dates, and HIN numbers. As is well known, builders are obliged to mark the hull as at the date that she is effectively delivered into the market (which in some instances can be many months or years after completion of the construction effectively concluded). The date on the HIN would perhaps be better described as commissioning rather than completion date, but problems really arise when Dealers or Brokers market and sell the vessel on the basis of the HIN number, and the purchaser subsequently discovers the true age, and concludes (on occasions perfectly correctly) that he has paid over the odds given the vessel’s true age. We have been involved in such cases where such a craft was built by a well known yard, and used for sea trials and demonstrations for a period before the HIN was applied, and marketed as a new craft. The owner was less than entertained to discover the truth, and we duly recovered compensation from the Manufacturers in question.
If you have been effected by or need advice in relation to any of the above issues do not hesitate to be in touch.

Posted in Uncategorized | Tagged , , , , , , , , | Leave a comment

Killing the Golden Goose.

VAT is, as ever, still a bone of contention, and the indications that individual EU member states are now likely to require charter yacht owners to charge ,and account to them for VAT on charter fees earned whilst operating in their territorial waters, may well prove to be the kiss of death to longstanding cosy arrangements whereby certain member states have essentially made money and built up thriving national industries constructing and supporting fleets of super or mega yachts ,through offering their owners generous and tax advantageous operating/acquisition arrangements.
It is particularly interesting the France and Italy now appear to be leading this charge, having so successfully attracted such large yachts and owners, to the point where more modest craft, or owners with limited means, long ago departed, having found it impossible to find, let alone even temporary moorings in the more popular marinas.
There is inevitably much concern at the manner and the pace with which these changes of policy are being implemented, some commentators suggesting that the French and Italians are introducing changes by stealth, intending to “catch” and shake down unwary owners.
Whatever the truth, the reality is that given the present economic climate, the provision of such tax breaks and incentives to conspicuously wealthy owners is a political hot potato, and indeed various struggling euro zone economies, prevented from exercising independent measures to balance the books, will find the concept of raising additional taxes through targeting such wealthy(largely foreign owned) yachts too popular to resist, even if, as in the case of Spain ,this causes their wholesale exodus to France .
With a series of high profile arrests and detentions throughout Mediterranean EU countries last year, such owners will be rightly anxious about operating their craft in, or out of, those jurisdictions. These “Golden Geese”, operated and owned by astute individuals, are accordingly seeing the way of the world, and taking flight to more sympathetic climes.
It is accordingly unsurprising that non-EU countries ,ranging from old favourites such as the Caribbean and Turkey ,to new “Boutique locations “such as Montenegro, are seeing dramatic increases in the numbers of large vessels now based there, fuelling local demand for moorings, accommodation and services ,and adding greatly to the local economy.
All good so far, but many predict that the unrestricted construction of the marinas, and the other grand shore side developments which inevitably ensue, will destroy the comparatively cheap and relaxed charm of these locations, the very features that initially attracted the smaller yachts and their owners, fleeing from, or displaced by these Superyachts .
The Med is a big place, and there are many places where a well found yacht and capable independent crew can still get away from it all .If the recent unrest in countries bordering the Eastern and Southern Mediterranean can be resolved, and these struggling democracies thrive, then they too will undoubtedly also benefit from owners looking for new and more interesting bases from which to operate their craft. In that event, “ordinary” yachts may be able to afford to return to the Riviera.
There is however a sting in the tail as far as positioning vessels outside the EU is concerned. Even proper” VAT paid “vessels will lose that status if they are kept outside the EU for a period in excess of three years, or if such a vessel is sold whilst outside the EU. It is also not widely recognised that, for these purposes, the Channel Islands fall outside the EU.
We were recently instructed to act on behalf of a Purchaser who had already contracted to buy a vessel, VAT paid, where she lay in the Channel Islands. Had the transaction proceeded as originally agreed between the parties, then a significant VAT liability would have been incurred once the vessel was brought back to the UK as our client intended. Fortunately, we were able to renegotiate the agreement and hold the purchase money to order pending the completion of the sale occurring once the vessel had been cleared back into the UK.
With the clear resolve by many national authorities to collect as much Tax as possible, it pays to get clear and expert advice before undertaking any dealings with vessels which may have uncertain VAT provenance. Craft that has been subject to a lease arrangement, or has been owned or operated by commercial organisations, or outside of the EU can all provide significant traps for the unwary prospective purchaser, and even for unwitting Vendors and their Broker Agents.

If you have any experience of these matters then we would like to hear from you.

Posted in Uncategorized | Tagged , , , , , , , , , , , , , | Leave a comment

BMF Business

Attending the BMF South AGM last night, it was a pleasure to see so many familiar faces and to hear such encouraging news from Berthon and Brockenhurst College regarding the successful take up of Marine Apprenticeships. The low dropout rates, and the high demand for places reported bodes very well for the long term future of the industry. The fact that so many of the applicants are of good secondary or even higher education qualifications also demonstrates that the industry provides both job satisfaction and a reasonable income potential. Attracting and retaining skilled workers is going to be the key to preserving the UK’s lease in innovation and technology. In a market increasingly flooded by cheap but depressingly good foreign products, we need to keep our cutting edge sharp and full credit to all those who have made this possible.
Interesting also to hear that the BMF are undergoing a process of re-evaluation and re-organisation. With money in tight supply, everyone is looking to get the best bang for their bucks from their subscription. I was certainly impressed (and I confess a little jealous) of with size of the BMF’s “rainy days fund”, but with John Dodds indications of an industry growth revenue approaching £3bn, and an industry workforce of 32000 (and with the BMF South numbers also showing an increase in recent months) there are guarded reasons for optimism as to the future.
Thanks all for a pleasant evening, good food and good Company

Posted in Uncategorized | Tagged , , , , | Leave a comment

Deposits. Golden Hellos or Handcuffs.

I have been involved in a number of recent cases involving circumstances where one party to the transaction has made a payment, whether to a Broker or to the Vendor, which has been variously described as a deposit, payment on account generally, or slot or holding deposit in relation to new builds. There appears to be considerable confusion as to the effect of either parties breach of such agreements upon the refundability (or otherwise) of these payments. That situation has been to some extent exacerbated by the necessary distinction drawn in the average purchase contract between circumstances in which deposits become refundable or alternatively forfeited in the event of breach and/or rescission.

Essentially, the position of commonlaw is that payment of money expressed to be a deposit has certain natural consequences, the most obvious being that the sum is automatically forfeited to the Vendor in the event of the Purchaser’s breach of the Purchase Agreement. It accordingly follows that, save where the parties have specifically contracted otherwise, forfeiture of the deposit is the natural consequence of a Purchaser’s breach, and it would be wise for both parties to the transaction to therefore proceed on that presumption when negotiating the terms of any Purchase Agreement. Use of the expression “non refundable” can therefore confuse what is otherwise a clear position at Law. Worse still, indicating that a deposit is refundable without clearly recording the precise circumstances in which such reversal of the norm applies, invariably creates confusion and the probability of avoidable dispute.

Most of the better recognised standard form contracts do a reasonable job in this regard, but problems are invariably caused if monies are paid over in advance of the execution of the Contract, sometimes against the background of oral assurances as to the nature and consequence of the payment or clumsily drawn pre-contractual documents such as letters of intent (as increasingly favoured by some Mediterranean Yacht Manufacturers. The simple but obvious solution is for all Purchasers to assume that payments made by way of a deposit will not become returnable save in the event of specific and agreed circumstances, which should be recorded in writing, and signed by both parties.

In circumstances where the deposit is made to a third party (either a Stakeholder or Broker acting on behalf of the Seller) then it clearly also makes sense that the third party should also be made aware of the precise terms of the agreement, representing the parties intentions, so that they are fully aware of, and agree to, the obligations that this may place upon them.

By way of a slight aside, we may find that the use of deposits is going to become increasingly contentious in the future, with many Purchasers no longer being prepared to put up 10%, or indeed to pay any deposit or enter into any contract, in advance of their having an acceptable Survey in their hands on the purchase. In that sense, the procedures and formalities for purchasing yachts are going to become increasingly in line with those for purchasing houses.

Posted in Uncategorized | Tagged , , , , , , , , , , | Leave a comment

Call for RIB Manufacturers, Designers and Operaters to improve seating arrangements

Following the recent announcement of the river safety alert concerning the lower back compression fractures sustained by the crew of a commercial rib in May of last year, it has emerged that the marine accident investigation bureau has details of 12 other similar accidents which have occurred in the last 2 years. With continuing demand for ever larger and more powerful ribs, particularly in the leisure market, it is clear that the onus is increasingly going to be placed upon Manufacturers to ensure that ribs are supplied with seating capable of absorbing the very significant pounding loads generated by extreme  conditions, or an inexperienced helm. As a member of the spinal injuries association panel of solicitors, my firm has experience  of the serious injuries that can so easily occur in these circumstances, and the ever rising compensation awards being made by the Courts to those unfortunate enough to suffer them.
Whilst the MAIB warning arises out of commercial operation, exactly the same obligations are likely to apply to owners of both commercial and private pleasure craft, as evidenced by the fact that the MAIB has recommended that both the Royal Yachting Association and the Marine Coastguard Agency jointly issue a safety alert in respect of these matters. In the interim, the MCA are clearly going to revise the small commercial vessel’s code to focus on the issues of safe seating and design, which will invariably then set the new standards for both commercial and pleasure boat construction thereafter.

If you are involved in the design, construction or sale of high speed ribs, then you need to be aware of your obligations under the Consumer Protection Act, which in certain instances will impose a strict liability on you in relation to injuries caused through poor design or manufacture.

 If you are an owner of such a craft, then you need to both consider whether its current seating arrangements are appropriate for the sort of use that you intend, and ensure  in the future  that whoever is placed in charge of ,or helms the vessel is suitably trained  to not only operate the craft in a manner as to avoid causing unsafe high shock and vibration impacts, but also to ensure that suitable seating is provided, appropriate to each passengers particular needs ,and actually used.

 Insurers are obviously going to be very mindful of these matters when dealing with any claims which may arise in the future, so the tendency to  allow young ,often inexperienced ,teenagers to operate such craft, may result in claims being avoided, or as with motor policies, premiums rising to reflect these risks.

 Putting this in context, much  progress has been made in both RIB and  seating design over recent years, to produce better and safer handling in lumpy conditions, and such incidents are still fortunately quite rare. I  remember trying to commute daily  to Cowes Week from  Chichester Harbour in an early well respected rib design, but  being obliged to give up and revert to the Red Funnel  after 2 days when the old bucket seat fitted to this otherwise excellent craft split in half upon landing  in a wave trough half way home, pitching me into the rear. Wonderful invention the kill cord!.
If you have been affected by any of these matters, or need assistance, then please contact Tim Reynolds on 02392 446905 or Email tgr@verisona.com

Posted in Uncategorized | Tagged | Leave a comment

Marine Surveys – The Boat Kind

Surveys seem to be all the rage at the moment, but it does seem that there are still large numbers of boat purchasers who seem to be electing to do without a pre-purchase survey.  A little birdie tells me that the yacht I referred to earlier may now have been sold to an unwitting purchaser, who chose to spend his money without such a survey.  I hope he does not come to regret that decision in due course. 

I am also very aware that, unlike the British, Scandanavians have such a trusting nature that they seldom see any need to instruct surveyors when purchasing in the UK, wrongly assuming that UK consumer protection legislation is as all encompassing as the Scandanavian equivalent, which essentially impose draconian measures on both private and commercial transactions.

Posted in Uncategorized | Leave a comment

Marine Survey

Today Verisona Marine has published an online survey intended to help identify weakpoints in your marine business documentation.  Like anything worthwhile, it takes a little time and thought to properly complete, but better to be aware of any shortcomings now, than when it’s too late!

For a copy of the survey, please contact me at tgr@verisona.com

Posted in Uncategorized | Leave a comment

Balsa cores-realities strike home!

Having yesterday pontificated on the joys of buying older GRP boats, and the hazards of damp cores, I had by remarkable coincidence an interesting personal reminder of the problem whilst working on a rudder yesterday evening .

A friend and I purchased  an old E boat Minitonner last year.  She had been laid up ashore for some time and was tatty but sound.  Still quick, and with a lifting keel, and minimal accommadation, she is an ideal boat for our teenage sons and their mates to race and fool about with in the Solent.  Having carefully checked out the readily visible balsa core panels in the hull and deck before buying her, I was confident that I had spotted all  the problems.

3 months of interesting work followed as we rebuilt the decaying ply interior, replaced all the linings and cushions, rebuilt the keel lifting mechanism and “supervised” the lads sanding down, refairing and epoxy treatment of her underwater surfaces before relaunching  in September.  I thought  that was the end of the structural work and I could go back to work on my own “fleet” of projects!

Our limited sea trials indicated(amongst other things) a heavy helm, which explained why most of the other E boats racing have modified their vertically lifting rudder blades to make them semi-balanced.  We accordingly resolved to follow suit and modify our  grp moulded rudder blade which involved cutting away part of its leading edge,and refairing and glassing it -an evenings work I thought!

I started the job last night and upon detailed inspection the rudder blade appeared to be in excellent condition, and reassuringly heavy (indicative I presumed of a solid wood core within the moulding).  Investigatory drilling of various parts of the rudder  revealed a 3mm grp moulding, bonded around a 40mm laminated ply core, which terminated 75 mm short of the blades leading and trailing edges and foot.  Holes drilled beyond that point  encountered no resistance once the drill bit had passed through the grp moulding, and once withdrawn, the bit retained unidentifiable damp pale  granular material. 

This put me in mind as to how, keen to save weight, I had built composite rudder blades for sundry racing dinghies using a thin ply core, sheathed with profiled polyurethane foam, contained within  a light split grp moulded blade, with bonding paste filling  the gaps.  Surely not?

Ten minutes work with  a  jig saw confirmed my fears and revealed that the builders, in a fit of excess, had gone one further and built the core using a combination of WBP plywood, polyurethane foam, and balsa at the extreme edges.  Water had been getting inside the moulding,via a poorly sealed fitting, over a protracted period.  It was not a pretty sight!

 The ply had delaminated and had only been  held together by the grp, whilst the balsa and foam fitted had lost all form and strength, and become a sodden mass.  The blade would invariably  have failed once put under any real load, with potentially serious  consequences.

Suffice to say a new rudder blade is now under construction, laminated from utile and cedar and to be clear epoxy sheathed.  That way we can see any further problems coming.

Next time, I wont make any such assumption, or take any chances.

Posted in Uncategorized | Leave a comment