A former couple in B.C. had to attend a small claims tribunal to settle a dispute regarding their boat's shared expenses.
There are some common things boaters squabble about -- the weather report, who's handling the dock lines, and who owes who gas money. It's part of boating culture, albeit an occasionally annoying part.
But even with occasional dockside bickering, boaters are by nature a loving community who safeguard their fellow boaters, always striving to make sure everyone has an enjoyable time on the water.
Until the love runs out.
A recent case in British Columbia, Canada has put two boaters in a unique situation that surprisingly resulted in a court intervention.
According to CTV News Vancouver, a former couple was in B.C.’s small claims tribunal last week to settle a dispute regarding their boat's shared expenses after their breakup.
The details are as follows:
Andrew Alexander Cook and Danisha Drury were in a relationship from March 2021 to October 2022. In June 2021, they purchased a 1999 Four Winns 278 Vista powerboat for $52,000 Cdn plus taxes and fees, as outlined in a Civil Resolution Tribunal (CRT) decision published last Friday.
Legal matters notwithstanding, the Vista 278 is a solid choice for coastal B.C. waters. Four Winns referred to the boat an "express cruiser" or "maxi cube pocket cruiser" that blended dayboating with overnight capability. The hull was designed by the renowned C. Raymond Hunt Associates and was produced until 1999 before making a brief reintroduction in 2006. The boat carries an LOA of 27'8" with a 9'4" beam (this is a relevant detail), and boasts a full-width master cabin below deck. She was typically powered with a Volvo Penta 4.3 I/O engine. In other words, a solid vessel, albeit one approaching 25 years old in this case.
Both Cook and Drury signed the purchase agreement for the boat. They also made a $15,000 deposit. The remaining $45,592.76 balance was financed through a bank. According to the CRT decision, the couple split the boat’s expenses evenly, with Cook covering the monthly loan payments while Drury reimbursed him via e-transfers.
However, after their relationship ended, Drury stopped making contributing payments in March 2023. In response, Cook filed a claim with the CRT seeking $2,654.80 in unpaid moorage and loan payments.
Drury's argument was that she had “gifted” the boat to Cook when the relationship ended, and was therefore no longer obligated to make payments.
In court, tribunal member Jeffrey Drozdiak dismissed this claim, explaining that a legally valid gift requires three elements: the intent to give without compensation, acceptance of the gift by the recipient, and a sufficient act of delivery, such as the transferring of ownership.
“I accept that the respondent intended to give the boat to Mr. Cook without receiving any compensation in return,” Drozdiak said in his decision, according to CTV. “However, I find the respondent has not satisfied the other two requirements for giving a gift.”
Cook told the tribunal that selling the boat wouldn’t cover the remaining loan, stating that the market had changed and the boat's valuation was lower. According to Tribunal member Drozdiak, this made it unlikely that someone would willingly accept ownership of the 278 Vista, given the debts attached to the boat.
There was also no evidence that Drury had formally transferred her ownership share to Cook, thus rendering the gift invalid and unenforceable.
One of Drury's other claims was that Cook had hindered efforts to sell the boat. In April 2023, the pair signed a broker agreement to market the vessel for 90 days. Drury said the broker was located at Sidney Marina, despite the fact the boat was moored at Brentwood Bay Marina. When Cook allegedly declined to move the boat to Sidney Marina to increase chances of a sale, no prospective buyers emerged. (Note: Generally speaking, any boat with a beam greater than 8'6" is not easily trailerable on Canadian highways and typically requires permits and specialty equipment.)
Drozdiak rejected this argument as well, citing a lack of evidence from the broker to support Drury’s claim.
“I find that evidence from the brokers is crucial in proving Mr. Cook’s actions prevented the parties from selling the boat,” Drozdiak wrote in his decision, according to CTV. "Without this evidence, I find the respondent has not proven Mr. Cook breached the broker agreement."
Ultimately, the tribunal found no evidence of a legally enforceable gift or breach of agreement. Cook was awarded $2,654.80 in unpaid expenses, along with $212.92 in pre-judgment interest and $125 in CRT fees, to be paid by Drury within 30 days.
Comments