You are using an out of date browser. It may not display this or other websites correctly.
You should upgrade or use an alternative browser.
You should upgrade or use an alternative browser.
Twin Vee
- Thread starter L Hall
- Start date
We will frequently discuss problems with manufacturers when the problem is accurately presented. In this case, there were a couple of red flags. One is that the guy said that he used to be a Twin Vee dealer and then they terminated him "for no reason." No boat company terminates a dealer for "no reason" - they have dealer agreements. Secondly, if the guy was a boat dealer, he knows full well the options available to him for recourse. Posting libelous statements in forums not before visited is not one of them for a professional. He's not asking for help, he's looking to injure. BoaterEd will not be a party to that sort of thing. He needs to pick one forum in which Twin Vee has the opportunity to respond.
There are a number of issues here that don't make sense to me. First of all, Foul says that he bought the boat in July of '04. Twin Vee was sold to new owners in early June of '04. Most knowledgable boaters, and certainly everyone in the industry, knows that there is no obligation of new owners to honor existing warranties if the sale was an asset only sale. That, in itself, would have caused me to do a thorough inspection of the boat before I took delivery. If Foul noticed the cracks within two or three days of taking delivery, they had to be there prior to delivery.
The most confusing part is the claim of 11 other boats with the same problem and then a comment, "Two weeks ago I call to find out if the material had come in yet and Roger said yes we are almost done with all of the boats."
In other words, they repaired all the other boats except for Foul's boat. It would also seem that none of this is in writing. A boat dealer knows that everything should be in writing just in case there is a dispute. However, the bottom line here is that there is all sorts of recourse if the facts presented are correct. Running around the internet posting slanted stories is a bit childish, in my opinion.
The most confusing part is the claim of 11 other boats with the same problem and then a comment, "Two weeks ago I call to find out if the material had come in yet and Roger said yes we are almost done with all of the boats."
In other words, they repaired all the other boats except for Foul's boat. It would also seem that none of this is in writing. A boat dealer knows that everything should be in writing just in case there is a dispute. However, the bottom line here is that there is all sorts of recourse if the facts presented are correct. Running around the internet posting slanted stories is a bit childish, in my opinion.
Sherry, that's my point exactly. You, even as a non-professional, knew enough to research the effect of the change of ownership prior to a purchase. However, this particular boat was manufactured in 2003, prior to the sale but delivery not made until after the sale.
Foul, if, in fact, they told you they were only going to honor warranties on '04 and later, you have legal recourse. They state on their site that they honor warranties from 2001 on. In any case, there are just too many illogical comments for me to just buy into this without more information. You didn't respond to my question about how these cracks appeared two days after delivery, assuming that you, as a professional, inspected the boat before you took delivery. Frankly, I, knowing that they only have a 90 day warranty on cosmetic defects, would not have waited nearly two years to start making an issue of this. It's just that we've been down this road many times before, having some disgruntled boat owner post very one-sided and slanted complaints. The majority of these turn out to be bogus when the "rest of the story" is revealed.
In that regard, I took a minute to call Dan McCarthy at Twin Vee. Guess what? The other side of the story is 180 degrees from yours. Dan said that he called you last week and stated that they intend to correct the problem but needed a little more time. He also stated that they intend to correct this relatively minor problem even though it is a result of a slightly too-thick application of gelcoat and insufficiently countersunk screws. The cracks, small as they are, are simply cosmetic and do not affect the structural integrity of the boat. Speaking of integrity, I was also told that there were some very valid reasons for terminating your relationship with them. It would seem that you jumped the gun a bit with your internet posting. Let's hope that, once the problem is corrected, you are man enough to repost that fact on all the sites that you have visited.
In that regard, I took a minute to call Dan McCarthy at Twin Vee. Guess what? The other side of the story is 180 degrees from yours. Dan said that he called you last week and stated that they intend to correct the problem but needed a little more time. He also stated that they intend to correct this relatively minor problem even though it is a result of a slightly too-thick application of gelcoat and insufficiently countersunk screws. The cracks, small as they are, are simply cosmetic and do not affect the structural integrity of the boat. Speaking of integrity, I was also told that there were some very valid reasons for terminating your relationship with them. It would seem that you jumped the gun a bit with your internet posting. Let's hope that, once the problem is corrected, you are man enough to repost that fact on all the sites that you have visited.
Don't bother, Foul. Other than an apology to Twin Vee, I have read I want to read about this problem. There is no doubt in my mind that, had not Twin Vee's facility in Ft. Pierce been damaged in the hurricanes of late 2004, your problem would have been resolved by now.
First of all, Foul, you won't find a more experienced group of boaters on the internet, bar none. However, because of that experience, no one here is just going to jump on your bandwagon when your very first post is a series of libelous statements against Twin Vee, especially when several them conflict. Your only goal was to pressure Twin Vee into fixing your boat, which they had already agreed to do, without regard to the number of people you hurt in the process. There are people working for that company who feed their families and pay their mortgages with their paychecks. There are others who have invested in that company. You don't care how much you damage that company and its employees - you just want your silly little cracks fixed. Towards that goal, you are apparently willing to say anything that makes them look bad, true or not. That is not professional, in my opinion. I'll bet that Twin Vee could probably provide me with a few names of your old customers who were less than happy. Every company has a few unhappy customers - there are some who you can't make happy no matter how hard you try. However, there is a right way and a wrong way to resolve those problems. This is the wrong way.
Sortie, you are right. I absolutely love it up here but, unfortunately, don't have the hassles of SoFla living to grump me up. However, the guy does have a problem that has taken far too long to resolve, with fault on both sides. But it is getting resolved and there was absolutly no need for this type of slanted, one sided presentation to be posted all over the web.
Dixie, it's probably not smart to end your very first post here with "So has anybody on this site ever seen Saltwater?" Especially when most of our members are big boat owners with many holding masters licenses. A few are CG, some law enforcement and some Navy.
Now, before this goes any further and more folks get summoned by Foul, let me say that we don't do personal attacks on this site. If you want to discuss the Twin Vee problem, do so. If not, go back where you came from. And guys, let's not stoop to their level ourselves.
Now, before this goes any further and more folks get summoned by Foul, let me say that we don't do personal attacks on this site. If you want to discuss the Twin Vee problem, do so. If not, go back where you came from. And guys, let's not stoop to their level ourselves.
Dixie, perhaps you should stick around for a bit before you start judging the moderator's actions. If you look at Hogan's RO number, you'll see he is under 4K - he's been around here for years. I know him, I know his character and I know he speaks only the truth. I don't know Foul from a hole in the wall and, based on his first post and only topic in which he has participated, I'd just as soon keep it that way. And I think you'll find that your experience is not so "vast" when compared to many here. We also have a few blowboaters here as well. I owned a Cal 25 for a number of years until I got wiser.
Seems like locking this thread is the best thing to do. Foul presented his side of the story and I reported what Twin Vee said. Anything else is pure speculation. However, there are those who don't want the truth, they just enjoy the bash. We don't do business like that here. There's a reason why BoaterEd isn't the "busiest" forum on the web. It's the same reason why Lexus sells fewer cars than Chevy. We prefer to present a quality forum where people can post without being attacked and berated. We have a very low tolerance for braggarts, blowhards and bashers. This is not Sesame Street for Boaters.