Maverick 400 cracking up

[ForumAdmin]

quote dopes work Karen

[Karen]

quote dopes work Karen

It dopes work now, but it dopen't work when I originally put my reply to Rudi!

[ForumAdmin]

Ok .... now that the boat builder has replied may I suggest that both Peter and Rudi talk directly to each other to provide a rapid solution for what is claimed as a one off problem boat.

If a deal can be struck between the parties I will agree to post a message on the opening post to give a statement agreed by both parties.

I do not enjoy this sort anguish and hope that both parties can reach a quick solution by directly dealing with each other without the need for any SA procedures ..... in my opinion time is critical in settling this matter.

[Karen]

The Quote button again not functioning!

In reply to your comment above, Paul, while I understand you want to close the chapter on this, I would still like Rudip to answer the questions I put to him in my earlier post. I think they are both relevant and pertinent. To reiterate:

Originally posted by Rudip

Rudip Quote:
Quote:
[...]The quality concerns on Andando are unique and are not present on the other 15 (fifteen) yachts we have built. We have built 7 (seven) yachts since Andando.[...]

A few questions, Rudi:

1. Just to clarify, in spite of a statement to the contrary on this forum, are you categorically saying Catlyn, Hull No. 1 did not have any cracking at all?

2. And if Andando really is the only boat to have such a worrying array of cracks and shortcomings in the build, then why was that??? What went so drastically wrong with her build and only her build?

Lastly, this paragraph forms part of your statement made on this forum on the 3rd September 2011:

As to the twisting of the boat and a number of small cracks appearing in some places which we believe are cosmetic. This is directly due to the mast not being maintained during the voyage. Such maintenance is part of a delivery skipper’s duties

But the cracks shown in Peter's videos and Allan's photos appear to be neither small nor cosmetic and they are very, very numerous. Nor can they reasonably be blamed on the skipper failing to re-adjust the rig tension. In fact, looking at Peter's video evidence, there is very little if anything that can be attributed to the negligence or ignorance of Allan Firbank - just the ignorance and/or negligence of Maverick. So do you not think it is high time - in fact, long overdue - that you make Allan a public apology?

Karen

[smj]

In the US I believe we would call Andando a LEMON. As the builder basically admitted that, wouldn't it be right for Rudi to replace Andando with one of the other 15 that were built correctly?

[wannab]

Wow, as usual Karen right on the mark.

What what went wrong, and why?

Kent

[ForumAdmin]

What what went wrong, and why?

Yes, needs to be dealt with but more urgent would be for Rudi to kill this matter now and sort out with Peter a solution.

[capesailor]

This has been a very interesting thread to say the least.

And this does seem to be great progress for Peter. Hopefully there will be a good outcome here.

Rudi, now that you've agreed to arbitration with Peter, will you be extending the same offer to Allan? I'm sure right now Peter is busy making arrangements with his bank to transfer the money he owes?

[ForumAdmin]

I personally think that the facts are pretty straight forward and SA arbitration is not the best way to go. I know others who have taken this slow route to no avail just like the SA legal system approach which I also rejected.

It also seems that the basic facts about the boat itself are not in dispute.

It has been stated this is a one off so it should be treated like that and both parties deal with each other to get an agreed settlement. That way this publicity train stops which is helpful to the builder and the matter is settled fast which is helpful to the customer.

[Southern Star]

I'm with Paul on this one. At this point the parties should be given an oppotrunity to resolve these issue without inerference from, or having to spend time answering to third parties. Are there questions of general interest? Absolutely. But surely they can wait.

Brad

[allan65]

Dear Brad, Until a couple of weeks ago I did not even know this was a blog so please forgive me if I don’t follow protocol.
The cracks on Andando appeared less than 2 weeks out of C.T. that is 3 years ago. During that time I have had to endure the ignorant, uninformed comments of certain people on this forum and in person. I have for that three years not gone public with the facts. I was challenged by Peter to debate as to whether he should pay me or not. Sounds crazy I know but true. So I’m not sure who the third party in this is, Peter, Rudi or I. I avoided this forum for three years and have never wanted to be on it so I hope Peter will do the honourable thing and you can all get back to discussing more important things.

[Southern Star]

Allan, I am not suggesting that you are a third party - quite to the contrary. 'Third parties' are persons not directly invovled in the dispute. I (and other members of this forum) are third parties in the dispute between yourself, the owner of the boat and the manufacturer.

What I was suggesting was that, at this stage, since the manufacturer has become involved in the discussions, it may be wise to let the three of you attempt to hammer out your differences without outside interference.

Brad

[smj]

Allan, I am not suggesting that you are a third party - quite to the contrary. 'Third parties' are persons not directly invovled in the dispute. I (and other members of this forum) are third parties in the dispute between yourself, the owner of the boat and the manufacturer.

What I was suggesting was that, at this stage, since the manufacturer has become involved in the discussions, it may be wise to let the three of you attempt to hammer out your differences without outside interference.

Brad

I figured since someone brought this up on an Internet forum they were asking for input and other peoples opinions. Otherwise why would they have brought it up?

[D&D]

...since the manufacturer has become involved in the discussions...

Where? Did we miss something? It appears here that both Peter and Allan (and others here) are still hoping to see just that involvement, but those hopes are meeting either silence or attempts to crush any further discussion.

As for arbitration and as Paul noted, arbitration may sound good, but really only ultimately add to the costs and delays IF any of the parties enters the process with less than good faith.

The Forum's role in all this is all about information to the world of vessel owners and buyers and those just contemplating vessels; on that score this seems to us to be a very relevant thread. We may all rest assured that the Forum will NOT solve this issue, but no-one should expect that. Paul's experience, however, shows the role the Forum(s) can also play in bringing reluctant principals to the discussion table...and that seems to us (unless we missed something?!?) to be a very worthwhile role in this matter.

[ForumAdmin]

D&D
Rudi the boat builder has made a post.

I totally agree with your analysis pif the situation.
Again, for the record, I did try as I always do to have this matter resolved before any publicity but was told to keep out of it.

The evidence of a faulty boat is overwhelming and the builder seems to accept it is a one off bad one so surely it should now be possible to settle the matter and put a stop to this negative thread?

You are so right, the forum cannot solve this matter but the light jot casts can help the parties to the issue resolve the matter. It is almost suicide for a builder not to feral with this issue quickly.

[D&D]

D&D
Rudi the boat builder has made a post.

I totally agree with your analysis pif the situation.
Again, for the record, I did try as I always do to have this matter resolved before any publicity but was told to keep out of it.

The evidence of a faulty boat is overwhelming and the builder seems to accept it is a one off bad one so surely it should now be possible to settle the matter and put a stop to this negative thread?

You are so right, the forum cannot solve this matter but the light jot casts can help the parties to the issue resolve the matter. It is almost suicide for a builder not to feral with this issue quickly.

Thanks Paul...and apologies to all for somehow managing to miss Rudi's post...

Rudi's post appears to be lawyer-drafted and, while that may be appropriate as between the parties, it does very little to advance Maverick's profile in the market. Then further and very importantly, Rudi's remarks also raise the questions (for both the parties and the rest of us) that Karen so succinctly put in her post(s) above...and we now join with everyone in looking forward to Rudi's further response.

In the meantime, we send our best thoughts for a speedy and satisfactory end to this obviously lengthy and very problematical matter for both Peter and Allan, however that end may be achieved!

[andando]

Paul is spot on .In my case ,regarding arbitration I can prove the trap too . Thank god I never fell for it !
At the moment I am waiting for Rudi . Before I continue to deal with my side of the delivery or the cracking issues .

[biochemist]

Paul is spot on .In my case ,regarding arbitration I can prove the trap too

Peter can you expand on that.


Good luck to all of you in sorting this out.

[ForumAdmin]

I know of a St Francis that went that route and years later is still nowhere.

The videos in this case make the issues crystal clear and the builder accepts its a one off ........ so what is the disagreement? To even think of arbitration you need to have disagreement.

Its the same for the SA boating organisation SABBEX . They are are total waste of time and are an organisation there paid for by boat builders and wanting to defend boat builders no matter what is right. Forget what they claim about standards.

Members or even boat builders raising these issues on the forum is all about enforcing by public opinion the other party to do the right thing. The forum cannot settle the matter nor should the negotiations be settled on the forum. In this case the best thing is for the boat builder and customer to talk directly to each other and do the right thing with each other. It is that simple.

In my own thread with my issues on my St Francis I at least achieved about $50.000 in corrections .... ok I still wasted a few years and had to fork out a lot from my own pocket but I did far better than those taking the legal route with their boat. However since then the boat builder has suffered in sales and never reached the previous levels of sale. The pity in my case was that the basic boat is great and we are now more than happy with her. There is no logical reason why a new boat cannot be built to the right standards and sales recover.

In this case, I would like to see the two parties get together now, settle the matter and then make a public statement. My advice is that this matter will not go away unless that is done.

As regards the delivery skipper issue - that needs finally sorting. There has been a public apology but the matter is not yet settled. I hope once the matter is settled with the boat builder the delivery skipper issue can also be cleared up.

Let nobody forget thatI tried to get resolution to this matter behind the scenes so as to prevent it going public because the prime concern was justice to all the parties involved. However now its gone public I hope it can be settled quickly and everyone take a lesson from it.

[smj]

Maybe I'm missing something but did the boat builder hire the delivery skipper? If not, why should the delivery skipper have to wait for the boat builder and buyer to settle before he gets compensated? Seems he was hired by the buyer and the buyer needs to take care of his obligation to the skipper whether the buyer reaches a settlement with the builder or not. All this of course depends on whether the skipper is actually due more money.