Another factor which may have been at work in Schawel v Reade was that the defendant, by the strength of his statement, actually dissuaded the plaintiff from making further checks himself with regard to the fitness of the horse for stud purposes. This can be contrasted with Ecay v Godfrey (1947) 80 Lloyd's Rep 286 where the seller of a boat stated that it was sound but advised the buyer to have it surveyed. This advice showed that the seller did not intend that his statement should be taken as a term of the contract and that the onus of verification of the soundness of the boat lay with the purchaser.