UPDATE - Lemon-aid R 27 Ranger Tug

[bucketlist1]

I remember BandB from before . Thanks for the vote of confidence . I

thought this was Trawler Forum , not ''Dr Phil ''.....

Are you a Lawyer offering me free legal advice ?

I don't own a short or high horse .... and there won't be any begging on my knees either . No badmouthing , I just give the facts . You talk about reputation , I have insurance but I did not falsely try to do a claim on a boat that has witnesses watching the boat have the water mopped out inside , BEFORE they shipped it to me .

Thanks for explaining my ''deep down '' emotions .

 

[bucketlist1]

Toki , I have multiple Laboratory tests being done . This will tell who is right or wrong .
Tensile strength , electron microscope looking for voids in the fiberglass , compression test and burn off test which will tell the Resin percentage and Laminate Schedule ( which Ranger Tugs won't share ) . Back when I started all this , I spent the first 5 weeks on the phone , emails with the dealer and plant .I stayed off social media . I owned a very sucessful business for almost 25 years and i never liked people posting negative comments about a business before they even gave a company time to make it right .I gave the dealer and plant 5 weeks , and it looked like they where going to take care of it , and make it 100 % right ..... until i got the lawyer letter '' we are in no way responsible '' so say what you want about me , but it ain't over ..... till it's over ....

 

[BandB]

I remember BandB from before . Thanks for the vote of confidence . I

thought this was Trawler Forum , not ''Dr Phil ''.....

Are you a Lawyer offering me free legal advice ?

I don't own a short or high horse .... and there won't be any begging on my knees either . No badmouthing , I just give the facts . You talk about reputation , I have insurance but I did not falsely try to do a claim on a boat that has witnesses watching the boat have the water mopped out inside , BEFORE they shipped it to me .

Thanks for explaining my ''deep down '' emotions .

You didn't like anyone's comments before and won't this time, but you bring your rant and pursuit of vengeance to a forum and you'll get it.

You have no idea the water before was connected to the crack. Could be too separate issues. It's not a false claim if you only tell the truth. But you've made all sorts of assumptions. No, you won't beg and you will be years dealing with this. Apparently actually boating isn't that important to you.

I can't say 100% your emotions include anger at yourself, but they sure should. You are the one primarily responsible for the position you're now in.

Yes, trawler forum, not Dr. Phil and not your crusade to attack a builder and marina forum so goes together. You keep posting this and we'll keep responding.

 

[sean9c]

I'd wondered what had happened with this RT. I'd hoped the owner had just had the boat repaired and had moved on, sadly not the case.
Interesting that the RT owner mentions the Lagoon 45 Parlay. In their situation the 2 guys that owned it just said, man this is really bad, and went ahead and started repairing it and moving forward on their own. The totally opposite approach from what's going on with the RT.
The owner of the RT should learn a lesson from the guys on Parlay

 

[BruceK]

The problem in cases like this,with multiple potential causes,a fixated if not obsessed complainant, if you offer advice which is not appreciated, you join the ranks of the "enemy".
No good will come of the discussion or the efforts to keep it in the public eye. The OP has good advice, it goes nowhere, that`s predictable, it won`t change.

 

[SoWhat]

Toki , I have multiple Laboratory tests being done . This will tell who is right or wrong .

Actually no it won't. You removed the sample pieces (first error) from the damaged area (second error) and according to your video did not remove identical sample cores from an undamaged area (third error) and then sent some random samples to a lab (fourth error)

In other words, I doubt your data will ever see the inside of a courtroom, and if it does it will be your expert witness against their expert witness and guess who starts with the most credibility. Right, the manufacturer.

Of course your damaged sample is going to fail specs. It's damaged. It has no relevance to how it was damaged. Good luck in court.

 

[Toki]

... and in the mean time, you just carved two enormous holes through the hull of your expensive boat! Holy crap! Not only will this go nowhere as SoWhat suggests, but you're destroying your boat! This is taking your obsession to the extreme, can you not see that?

 

[LakeMJim]

OP says: "Toki , I have multiple Laboratory tests being done . This will tell who is right or wrong .
Tensile strength , electron microscope looking for voids in the fiberglass , compression test and burn off test which will tell the Resin percentage and Laminate Schedule"

That plus a year of fighting sure sounds a LOT more expensive than just having the boat hull repaired and filing a claim with your insurance.

The more he goes on the more the story doesn't make sense.

 

[LakeMJim]

OP you say you don't know who the transportation company was. Seems to me they are by far the most likely cause of the damage, having worked in that industry at one time.

Weren't you there when it was delivered?

Did you not sign for it? They must have given you some paperwork.

Didn't you watch them unload it?

No name on the delivery vehicle?

It's all very strange imo. Some big parts of the story being left out.

I do like a good mystery story though.

 

[LakeMJim]

The boat crossed the border, there HAS to be paperwork identifying the transporter.

 

[magna 6882]

It surprises me that most folks discount any design or workmanship problems. It seems like most modern boats will take a lot of abuse .I find it odd everyone is standing behind ranger without more facts and information. It will be interesting to see any test and some input by a qualified engineer.

 

[twistedtree]

It surprises me that most folks discount any design or workmanship problems. It seems like most modern boats will take a lot of abuse .I find it odd everyone is standing behind ranger without more facts and information. It will be interesting to see any test and some input by a qualified engineer.

I agree, somewhat. From what I’ve seen, many builders throw together un engineered boats with little to no quality control. And when they fall apart, many owners of those boats just fix them themselves because it’s the easiest and cheapest path back on the water. The builders are never held accountable, and never improve their products.

You assertion seems to be that the boat was not miss handled, but that it’s engineering or build quality is inadequate for intended use. If you are doing this on principal to hold the builder responsible, good on you, but it will cost you the value of the boat many times over. You might win on principal, but the only real winners in such battles are the lawyers. This project has already cost you the value of the boat. Between your public assertions that the design and or build are defective, the cracks, and the holes you have created, the boat is greatly devalued.

Now you might accomplish another public service by getting a court decision that faults the dealer with a failure to disclose a defect. Now that would be a huge public service, but I think is a long shot. They disclosed an AC leak, and you would have to prove they knew of the hull damage and knowingly mislead you. They may very well have done just that, but good luck proving it.

The builder’s and dealer’s counter claims will be that the damage was a result of miss handling of the boat and that they were unaware of it, and that survey responsibility falls to the buyer, not the seller.

Personally, I think you have a poor case for either holding a builder accountable, or holding a dealer accountable.

Now that said, it’s interesting that they seem to be hiding the shipper. If the shipper caused the damage, and the builder/dealer settled up with the shipper then turned around and sold you the damaged boat, that might be an interesting case.

In the end, you need to decide how you want to spend your money and your time. Is fighting this how you want to spend the next years of your life?

 

[Porgy]

My sympathy has been on the wane for a while for a number of reasons. The latest is, on his website “sources” he provides a link to an article: “Fluid Motion LLC opted in for the pandemic incentives even though their sales have gone through the roof.” Other than just wishing to impugn the company, what could this possibly have to do with a cracked hull?

He posts a page from his survey noting some deficiencies with ABYC that also have nothing to do with a damaged hull. He seems miffed that neither the builder or dealer will address them. He ignores that builders are not obligated to comply with ABYC and that the survey was done after he purchased, paid for and took delivery of a USED boat. In what universe is that normal in the course of buying a boat?

He accuses others of damaging the boat still without any evidence. You can’t go to court and a say “one of these three people must have done the damage. Pay me” and expect to win.

The dealer mopping up water is not a smoking gun. He quite legitimately could have assumed it was condensate. How many of you found water in your boats where it wasn’t expected and immediately cried out, “Oh it must be a cracked hull caused by dropping the boat and for which the builder should have made strong enough to withstand?”

He doesn’t want to blame mishandling on the original owner’s railway for some reason. And his own shipper who he paid couldn’t be responsible because well, because he said so.

It may very well be Ranger Tugs and their builder are horrible. There just isn’t any evidence here. Did the dealer knowingly and fraudulently sell a damaged boat? I’d be surprised that a builder’s dealer would be that unscrupulous and jeopardize themselves in such a way but, it’s possible. Again, there’s not a shred of evidence so far.

The constant accusations and nonsmoking guns are just so much, “Ahh, but the strawberries! That's - that's where I had them. They laughed at me and made jokes, but I proved beyond the shadow of a doubt ...”

 

[SoWhat]

Now that said, it’s interesting that they seem to be hiding the shipper. If the shipper caused the damage, and the builder/dealer settled up with the shipper then turned around and sold you the damaged boat, that might be an interesting case.

Not at all surprising given the animosity OP has displayed towards RT. Take me to court, subpoena my records. Put $100K in the slot, spin the wheel. Watch the expert witnesses fight.

 

[bucketlist1]

It surprises me that most folks discount any design or workmanship problems. It seems like most modern boats will take a lot of abuse .I find it odd everyone is standing behind ranger without more facts and information. It will be interesting to see any test and some input by a qualified engineer.

Thank you Magna , for the common sense post . I find it also strange most take the dealer/manufacturer side . All of the questions the others are asking is in '' my story '' on my website . I will see if i can paste it .

---- Freight Question -- The Ontario dealer won't use Ranger Trucking from the plant , They arrange their own freight . They won't share the company , equipment . Most companies also take pictures . Was it a properly set up trailer ? They won't share the information

---- Boat does not have Canadian compliance stickers on it , technically not legal in Canada

---- Samples are cut to do testing , you can't test without that . That area of the hull is already no good .... so what is the point of questioning my motives ?

---- Remember a large portion also has heavy delamination .
---- I have talked to repair shops all over Ontario , I can't get any to repair , inside/outside . the two shops that can/will do inside/outside can't fit me in ( have been on waiting list ) it is possible they don't want to get involved .
---- other shops will do the ''mop & glow '' outside repair , but Myself and others feel 6.3 mm thickness make a good repair hard .The boroscope pictures show cracks going everywhere inside .
---- Yes , you can tar& feather me for no survey , and i did an inspection in the water , and watertest only . The dealer said '' he would go over the boat before shipping '' Yes .... shoot me ( you can have first shot , BandB ! )

 

[bucketlist1]

 

[bucketlist1]

 

[LakeMJim]

why trust the manufacturer

There is a long thread on the forum about Great Harbour TT35's having some major problems. Only a few have been made.

I wouldn't trust that manufacturer.

I don't know how many Ranger Tugs have been made, but I assume it is in the 100's, probably over 1,000?

And as far as I can see, there is only one guy saying there is a manufacturer defect in the hull, which to most observers look like it could easily and more likely be caused during transportation.

I agree with the poster who said if the OP is making a case that the boats are not properly constructed/engineered for the purpose, he would be doing everyone a favor in winning a case about that. The next Ralph Nader, although some now argue he was wrong about a lot of things.

Is it possible that in the next few years a whole bunch of Rangers will show up with hull problems? Sure. But why hasn't it happened already?

The story just seems so disjointed and hard to follow.

Just now the OP says he tested the boat in the water.

And he didn't notice anything?

My first thought is that it strengthens the case that the damage occurred during transportation, although that whole question remains very confusing.

Some say he hired his own transporter, some say he doesn't even know who the transporter was?

The fact all these issues are vague while OP is making a case that the boat didn't have a proper Canadian sticker on it really makes me wonder.

Just sayin'.

 

[LakeMJim]

public service

twisted tree: "Now you might accomplish another public service by getting a court decision that faults the dealer with a failure to disclose a defect. Now that would be a huge public service, but I think is a long shot. They disclosed an AC leak, and you would have to prove they knew of the hull damage and knowingly mislead you. They may very well have done just that, but good luck proving it."

I had a friend who made millions in the first internet boom. But he was sued by a Fortune 500 company.

He thought he had a pretty solid case, although it was a new area of law.

He and his lawyer attended a meeting with the F500 company. They had 12 lawyers at the meeting. They told him "We have a legal budget of $3.5 million. We decided we're going to spend it on you."

He knew then he was sunk. He did fight, but lost the case and all his millions.

His name is on a landmark case though, so there's that.

 

[Gdavid]

I misunderstood your location earlier, there is a Dorchester closer to me and hence the shop recommendations in my State.

Best of luck.

I do believe the posters here are offering up their best advice, whether you agree or not. Taking it to your insurance company and conveying the information you have is not fraudulent, they have more experience than you and lawyers on staff to chase these things, in the meantime, they might front the cost of the repairs and help you out. Perhaps you have already tried this route but it sounds like you haven't. Trying your case in the court of public opinion is unlikely to succeed in anything other than getting sued for libel.

Those boats do enjoy a good reputation and I am surprised how thin the hull appears, certainly not what I would have expected even for a trailerable boat it looks thin and complicates repairs but fiberglass is not rocket science and it can be repaired. I really hope your luck improves.

 

[Toki]

Taking it to your insurance company ...

Is the boat even insured? What insurance company would issue a policy with no survey? I'm guessing our friend is on his own with this one ...

 

[LakeMJim]

It just seems to me we are not getting the full story.

I'd be more empathetic if I didn't feel we are hearing a very one-sided version that's leaving out some important facts.

 

[LakeMJim]

hull repair costs?

Does anyone know how expensive repairing the hull could be? Even a very rough, worst case scenario?

In this hot market the OP could probably have just paid for the repairs and still re-sold the boat at a tiny loss or even a profit.

 

[Shrew]

Having been involved in hauling and blocking a number boats, here are some of my thoughts:

1) Cribbing should be along the keel and no more than 10 feet apart.

2) Cribbing should be doubled, and each tier alternating in direction.

3) Blocking and jack stands should be placed under the bulkheads and where the transom rounds to the side of the hull.

I've never seen blocking stove a boat if placed at the bulkhead. The pictures are difficult to tell, but the holes cut don't appear to be at a bulkhead.

Is there a bulkhead between the two sample hole?

If the boat wasn't blocked at a bulkhead I would expect the hull to stove in. That would be the fault of whomever blocked the boat or loaded the boat for hauling.

Now it comes to when possession was transferred an whether the trucking company was acting as a agent of the seller or the buyer.

Was the vessel inspected prior to loading?

Was the vessel inspected at the time of delivery?

Who paid the trucking company and what were the incoterms?

If the trucking company signed off during loading, and the buyer signed off during unloading, then there will be little recourse to the buyer.

The manufacturer is the wrong party to chase here.

 

[Porgy]

Cost? I don’t know but, purely anecdotal and as a juxtaposition, there was a 50’+ ketch at a marina where we visit that struck a submerged jetty. Towed in nearly sunk. On the hard you could see several large gashes along the keel and the skeg and rudder torn loose from the hull. Everything inside the boat was on deck drying out. Cabinetry removed and drying out. It was heartbreaking to look at and more so talking to the liveaboard owners. But they just put their heads down and got to work. We returned seven months later and the boat is back in the water like nothing happened. Guess anything is possible if one’s priorities are in order.

 

[Benthic2]

OK.....someone has to drop the subtlety and nuance.

Bucket, as outside observers we don't have all the facts so we have to make assumptions based on what we do know.

What do we know about Ranger Tugs ? They have been in business since 1958. They have been pretty successful, have built a lot of boats and have a very loyal following.

What do we know about you ? Not a lot. You bought a boat without a survey. You presumably want to get on the water but are not taking steps to get there. You are upset your boat has holes in it, so you put more holes in it, and you don't want to pay for the repair but you'll pay for all sorts of tests and expert consultations and continue to spend lots of time, money and effort to pursue everything but getting your boat in the water.

In other words, an outsiders choice comes down to whether to believe a company with 60+ years of history and a good reputation, or a guy who seems to be acting irrationally. I know it's not fair to judge you based on your actions in this one incident, but it's really all we have to go on.

You don't know me and can dismiss me as a troll if you like, but since your situation is destined for court your very next action, before you even respond to this post, should be to get a lawyer. If you can't find a lawyer to take your case, you should ask yourself why, and then take some time to re-evvaluate your plan. If you do get a lawyer, ask them if your attempt at a grassroots, negative publicity campaign is the best use of your resources.

Good Luck.

 

[BandB]

You don't know me and can dismiss me as a troll if you like, but since your situation is destined for court your very next action, before you even respond to this post, should be to get a lawyer. If you can't find a lawyer to take your case, you should ask yourself why, and then take some time to re-evvaluate your plan. If you do get a lawyer, ask them if your attempt at a grassroots, negative publicity campaign is the best use of your resources.

Good Luck.

He probably should have a lawyer always on call with his attitude and especially to defend the suits likely coming his way from others. I love that he had the audacity to says he'd done "no badmouthing." BS. He may honestly believe he's just reporting facts, but not at one point in this has that been true. He's reporting his perceptions, his beliefs of what might have happened but definitely not proven facts.

Now do you really think he'd listen to a lawyer? No way in heck would he. Not any more than listening here. In fact, he has only one purpose in posting on this forum and that it to try to make others look bad.

 

[bucketlist1]

Is the boat even insured? What insurance company would issue a policy with no survey? I'm guessing our friend is on his own with this one ...

Yes it was , and still insured . You don't need a survey for next to new boats ( with my company ) . I didn't want to try to stick the insurance company with someone else's problem . Other people don't see it that way . Guess I am too honest .

 

[bucketlist1]

Wow , everyone has been busy ! Had ( and still have ) the same Lawyer from the start . Dorchester Ontario ( Ah.... ) Law is a bit different here , No lemonade law . I can't understand why not many understand the value of the Lab tests on the two samples . It will tell the truth if it was blocking abuse or bad quality fiberglass that couldn't take being on a block . It doesn't get any more simple to understand .

Funny , I never had anyone use the words "" Dave Cook and Audacity '' in the same sentence .

If i can ask one favor , If you are really interested in ''the details '' see ''the story '' on my webpage , www.rangertugtruth.com

 

[ksanders]

It seems to me that the OP's total claim of damages would be the costs to repair the boat.

Why not repair the boat, and then determine if a legal fight is worth the trouble.