Builders with Ethics?

OK, let´s keep it to GOOD ethics this time...

I can just come up with two right now, Royal Huisman and Abeking & Rasmussen, eventhough they are not "manufacturers"...

Let me add Hinckley for production boats.

Nordhavn!

Ill add Tiara

In the interest of being predictable, I'll add Huckins.

I'll tip my hat to Oyster and Westport on the topic.

Viking

Bertram ?

Rather than just a bunch of names it would be interesting and relevent to hear what kind of bad situation happened and how it was handled to support the ethical claim. I've known many people who were very ethical until money was involved.

I was involved with a gelcoat problem with a Viking. This was one of the boats that got the bad batch of gelcoat several years ago. Viking payed to have this boat re-gelcoated once and the problem returned (they didn't know the gelcoat was the problem on the first round) the boat was brought back to the shop and all of the gelcoat ground off and then faired and painted. Viking payed for both procedures (lots of $$) Even with the loss of time and pain in the a-- factor the owner said that due to Vikings attention to the problem that he would never buy another brand.

Warranty coverage of a failed mechanical item which was incorrectly installed 30 years prior, and discovered when a pre-sale survey was being conducted. Can't prove the incorrect installation caused it to fail roughly 15 years into its life, but it was non-functioning for about 15 years, and replaced by the builder once they saw pictures of the needed item. The yard I mentioned stands behind their product, and does expert refits not only on their own builds but other makes of boat as well.

Seafarer & M2M, Those are statements that mean a lot. M2M, I haven't had any warranty problems that inolved Viking, but plenty of dealings with them. Aces.

That will be interesting thread and maybe we must start a thread on "who to avoid". I am currently sitting with a major problem that has been going on for nearly 2 years now. I would love to post the name but i have been advised not to do so yet until further notice.

There you go. This is how it should be done...
Expensive at first but pays off in the long run.
I think most companies understand this.
The question is if a companies management cares about the long run.....
or just about making next months numbers.

Well done Viking!

Good AND bad would fit this thread IF details are included and factual. I would hate to see it deteriorate into just a bashing place as we've seen elsewhere. Plus, it's such a pleasure to read good things especially if they aren't paid for with advertising dollars.

Graham F - you should consult an attorney before posting something negative. Otherwise you might not only imperil your standing with your claim but also open yourself to litigation. You [could possibly] make your point simply by posing a question " has anyone had or heard of ...".

For sure everyone is aganst them at the moment cause of the 630 Absolutely. BUT considering all (ie. pictures on the internet) they did handle the Certifiable 630 problem very well.

Totally agree with you.

So we got seven names before the thread derailed....

If he only posts the truth supported by facts and he has verifiable correspondence to back his statements I do not see where he would have any problems.

What would you suggest the company in question went after him for? Telling the truth?