|
|
29-10-2010, 13:28
|
#46
|
Registered User
Join Date: Feb 2010
Location: UK
Posts: 834
|
Quote:
Originally Posted by KillerBoo
Every person interviewed in this case has been most credible and many of them possess vast expertise on the subject. There is no reason to believe that any of them has given false information, neither knowingly or unknowingly. The court must therefore weigh the parts credibility against eachother, if meanings differ.
|
So. the conclusion is that if the experts argue and differ then the finding must be ambiguous otherwise the experts would all agree therefore the plantiff has not proved there is a case to answer.
Hmmmm..... does it not occur to the court that the plantiff and defendents will produce experts to back up their own sides of the case? That disagreement is inevitable?
__________________
Arthur Dent: "I wish I'd listened to what my mother told me when I was younger"
Ford Prefect: "Why? What did she say?"
Arthur: "I don't know - I didn't listen!!"
|
|
|
29-10-2010, 13:50
|
#47
|
Registered User
Join Date: Oct 2010
Location: Sweden
Boat: Maxi 77
Posts: 171
|
Quote:
Originally Posted by mintyspilot
So. the conclusion is that if the experts argue and differ then the finding must be ambiguous otherwise the experts would all agree therefore the plantiff has not proved there is a case to answer.
Hmmmm..... does it not occur to the court that the plantiff and defendents will produce experts to back up their own sides of the case? That disagreement is inevitable?
|
In a perfect world.. one would assume that the court consists of reasonably intelligent people...
__________________
If there really is a God, he must be like me
|
|
|
29-10-2010, 14:24
|
#48
|
Registered User
Join Date: Jun 2003
Location: Chesapeake Bay
Boat: HR 40
Posts: 3,651
|
I have been watching this thread with great interest.
I have not seen the boat in question. I have no access to any technical information specific to the case. I have never been to the facility where HR builds hulls.
I have however been to the principle HR factory in Ellös on three occasions. On my last visit I lived aboard my then-new HR 40 for three weeks while shaking out the boat and preparing for sailing across the Atlantic. I'm a fan of HR boats based on my experience with my own boat and other HRs.
Based on personal experience examining the build processes at HR before I decided to make the significant investment in a new boat I believe it highly unlikely that HR would build a boat they had any thought would have the issues the claimants contend. The management at HR is very conservative and do not adopt any process they haven't vetted. There were a couple of things I asked for on my boat that they tested on employee boats for several months before agreeing to implement on my boat. The individual building staff at HR take great pride in their work and do a good job. I can't think of a company that universally works so hard to maintain their reputation.
When issues arise between companies and consumers sometimes it is in fact the company that is in the right. I don't know if that is the case here, but unlike some of the posters in this thread, unless there is real information to the contrary and based on what I do know I tend to think HR is correct and the claimant is not.
__________________
sail fast and eat well, dave
AuspiciousWorks
Beware cut and paste sailors
|
|
|
29-10-2010, 14:52
|
#49
|
Registered User
Join Date: Sep 2010
Location: Halifax
Posts: 451
|
Quote:
Originally Posted by hummingway
Laws that lean towards protecting business at the expense of the consumer seem fairly common in most countries. A successful economy is an elected governments best friend so if the burden of proof is somewhat overwhelming it isn't surprising.... It sucks to have poison in your well, or a poorly built boat, etc., but that is a small price to pay for a stable, elected parliament of drooling idiots.
|
If I recall correctly, when Sweden Yachts went under (I think they're Scandinavian, maybe even Swedish too ) they (or at least the majority owner) left a trail littered by unpaid suppliers, banks, boat owners who had made significant deposits with no intention of boats being built, and a shell of a company stripped of everything including its intellectual property such as the boat designs. The courts favoured the company's owner in the subsequent proceedings despite what was alleged to be an outright fraud. I wonder if Sweden is really trying hard to protect it's struggling boat building industry. I certainly would have thought Swedish courts would be more inclined to favour consumers than seems the case.
I might add that in a previous life as an evil banker (note- now just evil) our experience was that Canadian courts invariably sided against the big banks when employees terminated for cause sued for severance regardless of the strength of our defence. Small employers seemed to have much greater success defending such actions suggesting a bias towards employer and consumer protections only when the defendant has deep pockets. It is a conspiracy!!
|
|
|
29-10-2010, 15:10
|
#50
|
Registered User
Join Date: Feb 2010
Location: UK
Posts: 834
|
Quote:
Originally Posted by Auspicious
I have been watching this thread with great interest.
|
Likewise
Quote:
Originally Posted by Auspicious
Based on personal experience examining the build processes at HR before I decided to make the significant investment in a new boat I believe it highly unlikely that HR would build a boat they had any thought would have the issues the claimants contend.
|
And yet, the issues are there. They came from somewhere.
I have no axe to grind with HR, but I would have been happier with this outcome if all the experts had said "This boat is solid. 100%" but they did not. Some of these experts, who the court acknowledged as being expert in their fields, said that they had issues with the materials used. Now the court may make this go away by weighing it in the legal scales and saying "2 experts for, 2 experts against - result nil" but that does not change the fact that there is a boat sitting out there with a lot wrong with and possibly with a weak hull.
Quote:
Originally Posted by Auspicious
The management at HR is very conservative and do not adopt any process they haven't vetted.
|
I do not subscribe to the theory of evil corporations. I do not doubt that HR operates with the best of intentions, but even the best run company can occasionally turn out a dud.
__________________
Arthur Dent: "I wish I'd listened to what my mother told me when I was younger"
Ford Prefect: "Why? What did she say?"
Arthur: "I don't know - I didn't listen!!"
|
|
|
29-10-2010, 15:15
|
#51
|
Registered User
Join Date: Oct 2010
Location: Sweden
Boat: Maxi 77
Posts: 171
|
Since the court ruled in HR´s favor, I guess that means HR was right..
In many cases that might be correct but I do react on the way the court chose to ignore 3-part expertise as well as disapproving the ultrasound technique, while saying that the tapping on the hull is unreliable. Most ppl would say that a properly done laminate wouldnt split in 2 when drilling for a core, but since HR says its happens on some occasions of the "thousands of samples" they gathered, the court instantly chose to believe that angle. No other such split core was presented.
It´s a lot to translate and I can fully understand that you -even if you were not a HR-owner- are sceptical to the case since you havent been able to read up on the case. I´ll try to summarize the entire court case the next few days, but I need to read it a few times in swedish first. since Im not a lawyer or have any direct legal knowledge I need to make sure that I have got it right before I say something here that I may have misunderstood. Asked a friend of mine, who´s a legal clerk at another court, to read it and give me a summary in ordinary swedish terms hehe.
No matter the outcome though, I find it hard to believe even HR sees this as a win. They have lost most credibility they had on the swedish forums, however their main market isnt Sweden so maybe they calculated the risk of this not reaching the foreign customers to affordable levels...
In Sweden it´s already being looked upon as a miscarriage of justice (of course, not officially, but by the potential buyers of HR boats) and several voices has been raised to start up a collection for the buyers in order to get an appeal. Noone wins, everyone lose. Unfortunately. I´ve always loved HR boats and knowing I could never afford one it´s stayed at a drooling relationship.. Oh well, I´m done drooling anyway
__________________
If there really is a God, he must be like me
|
|
|
29-10-2010, 17:32
|
#52
|
Moderator Emeritus
Join Date: Jan 2010
Location: Gabriola Island & Victoria, British Columbia
Boat: Cooper 416 Honeysuckle
Posts: 6,933
|
Quote:
Originally Posted by Auspicious
When issues arise between companies and consumers sometimes it is in fact the company that is in the right. I don't know if that is the case here, but unlike some of the posters in this thread, unless there is real information to the contrary and based on what I do know I tend to think HR is correct and the claimant is not.
|
They may well have been but it confuses me that when a 3 million dollar boat is purchased by a costomer who feels there are serious problems they wouldn't do everything they could to work with the customer. To my mind there aren't to many 3 million dollar customers out there and the that the ones that are out there might associate with other potential customers. It would seem to be bad business to let this get to court. Winning may not be all it's cracked up to be.
p.s. Was the boat worth 3 mil? I thought I saw that somewhere.
__________________
“We are the universe contemplating itself” - Carl Sagan
|
|
|
29-10-2010, 17:53
|
#53
|
Registered User
Join Date: Oct 2010
Location: Sweden
Boat: Maxi 77
Posts: 171
|
Quote:
Originally Posted by hummingway
They may well have been but it confuses me that when a 3 million dollar boat is purchased by a costomer who feels there are serious problems they wouldn't do everything they could to work with the customer. To my mind there aren't to many 3 million dollar customers out there and the that the ones that are out there might associate with other potential customers. It would seem to be bad business to let this get to court. Winning may not be all it's cracked up to be.
p.s. Was the boat worth 3 mil? I thought I saw that somewhere.
|
3Mil SEK roughly 500K USD
__________________
If there really is a God, he must be like me
|
|
|
30-10-2010, 01:33
|
#54
|
Registered User
Join Date: Sep 2009
Location: Melbourne, Australia
Posts: 2,844
|
$420k actually
|
|
|
30-10-2010, 03:26
|
#56
|
Senior Cruiser
Join Date: Jan 2010
Location: PORTUGAL
Posts: 30,586
|
Quote:
Originally Posted by noelex 77
|
So what it boils down to in reality is... this is a case HR can/could ill afford to lose.... it would have opened a whole new can of worms in possible lawsuits...
__________________
It was a dark and stormy night and the captain of the ship said.. "Hey Jim, spin us a yarn." and the yarn began like this.. "It was a dark and stormy night.."
|
|
|
30-10-2010, 03:38
|
#57
|
Registered User
Join Date: Jun 2003
Location: Chesapeake Bay
Boat: HR 40
Posts: 3,651
|
I think that is the same case, is it not?
__________________
sail fast and eat well, dave
AuspiciousWorks
Beware cut and paste sailors
|
|
|
30-10-2010, 03:42
|
#58
|
Senior Cruiser
Join Date: Jan 2010
Location: PORTUGAL
Posts: 30,586
|
This is from the HROA in UK. Since you have to be a registred member to read it, here is a quote:
"Posted: Wed Apr 14, 2010 2:31 pm Post subject: HR37
I have just seen your post regarding alleged hull delamination on an HR37 and I wonder if in fact the problem is water in the foam core, which seems much more likely. There is a current post on the HROA site about water in HR42 hulls and I have had serious problems with my 1999 HR34. I discovered this by chance when my boat was 5 years old. Water had got in at the site of a badly installed galley sink skin fitting and spread through a large part of the core. I was just in time to prevent a similar serious problem at the heads skin fittings on the other side of the hull. During the past five years I have spent much time and money drying the hull out as much as possible, to the point where I would now feel reasonably confident in putting the boat on the market. It has been a very sad and stressful experience.
Magnus Rassy was not helpful. He said that all boats are wet and I should give up and go sailing. But he managed to lean on a UK yachting magazine and prevent them publishing an article.
Germanischer Lloyd agreed there was a serious defect in the construction of my boat but regretted there was nothing they could do.
You would have to work very hard to persuade me to buy another HR or indeed any other boat with a cored hull below the waterline.
Oh, and I have another problem with water in the foam core of the rudder, where more poor detailing has allowed it to get in. At least one other 34 has had this defect.
Best of luck with your research. I would be pleased to hear what you learn.
Regards,
__________________
It was a dark and stormy night and the captain of the ship said.. "Hey Jim, spin us a yarn." and the yarn began like this.. "It was a dark and stormy night.."
|
|
|
30-10-2010, 05:12
|
#59
|
Registered User
Join Date: Dec 2008
Location: St. Georges, Bda
Boat: Rhodes Reliant 41ft
Posts: 4,131
|
We should have run a poll as to who we thought would win--big guys or liitle guys.
__________________
so many projects--so little time !!
|
|
|
30-10-2010, 10:26
|
#60
|
Nearly an old salt
Join Date: Jun 2009
Location: Lefkas Marina ,Greece
Boat: Bavaria 36
Posts: 22,801
|
Interesting isn't it that high quality HR tends to use cored hulls below the waterline and beneteau in general doesn't !!!
Dave
|
|
|
|
|
Thread Tools |
Search this Thread |
|
|
Display Modes |
Rate This Thread |
Linear Mode
|
|
Posting Rules
|
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts
HTML code is Off
|
|
|
|
Advertise Here
Recent Discussions |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Vendor Spotlight |
|
|
|
|