Alan de Enfield

It is things like this make boating less than pleasurable - things do break and need replacing but you can soon tell which boats are built by people with boat knowledge and those who are just 'fabricators'. Add this to you check list for when you buy your next boat.

Now the boat has been winched upt to the bridge you can see how close the breech is to the lift bridge - it is about 1.3 boat lengths. The 'arm' is just the other side of the bridge, off to the left.

But Delaney doesn't appear to be employed by C&RT

If this is the boat from where you intend to conduct your business (as per your other thread) then the licencing may not be as simple as the above answers suggest. On C&RT waters, for example, you will need commercial insurance, a commercial Safety certificate (as you have paying customers coming aboard) and a commercial boat licence. I do not know what requirements for 'commercial operations' licencing the other navigation authorities will have. If you are intending to operate the business from within a marina, you will need to check if they allow business to be run from the boat - many do not ! (car parking issues, 'strangers' wandering around the marina etc etc)

Which, if you read it more carefully you would have seen that it was for Scotland, and is enschrined in law. Failing to comply, and meet your legal obligations, would give the insurers the 'wriggle room' to (potentially) not pay out.

I'm pretty sure I quoted from the BSS web pages where they say that the MAIB have reported boater being affected by CO from adjacent boats.

Wasn't he a good friend of Val Doonican ?

What a great Christmas present to yourself enjoy.

I think you may be refering to the 1971 act where if BW (now C&RT) do not have the funds to maintain a certain canal it can be closed or sold off or given away. Research needed ! Or, maybe you are refering to the clause in the consitution of C&RT where if the go bankrupt the Government can take back the canals id give then to another charity with similar aims 12 DISSOLUTION 12.1 Subject to obtaining the prior written consent of the Settlor, the Trustee may at any time decide by resolution that this Settlement is to be dissolved. The Trustee will then be responsible for the orderly winding up of this Settlement's affairs. 12.2 After making provision for all outstanding liabilities of this Settlement, the Trustee must apply the remaining property and funds in one or more of the following ways: (1) by transfer to one or more other bodies established for exclusively charitable purposes within, the same as or similar to the Objects provided that the Infrastructure Property continues to be held non-expendably for the Objects; (2) directly for the Objects or charitable purposes within or similar to the Objects; or (3) in such other manner consistent with charitable status as the Settlor and the Commission shall approve in writing in advance. 12.3 A final report and statement of account relating to this Settlement must be sent to the Settlor and the Commission. It should also be noted that C&RT are required to have insurance .......... "to insure the property subject to this Settlement against any foreseeable risk and take out such other insurance policies as may be required"

So you are saying that the laws of negligence can only be enforced if you can afford to pay the fines ? If you recognise that something is a bit 'iffy' and rope it off, but do nothing about remedial work for 2 (or more) years, then someone is hurt/killed that must surely be negligence ? Negligence (Lat. negligentia)[1] is a failure to exercise appropriate care expected to be exercised in similar circumstances.[2] Within the scope of tort law, negligence pertains to harm caused by the violation of a duty of care through a negligent act or failure to act.

In which case there is maybe the oppotunity to highlight more 'subjects' as Advisory rather than Required depending on the boat type/use. But, as highlighted the fundamental problem is the lack of education or sanctions of the actual examiners who argue that 'advisory' means the boat must comply. There is little wrong with the actual BSS, it is the incompetent way it is managed and enforced - that is what needs attention. Are you sure it as actually an RCD that tripped ? RCDs do not trip because of 'over current' usage. An RCD works by constantly monitoring the electrical current flowing through a circuit. If it detects an imbalance, such as electricity escaping from thecircuit (which can be caused by various factors such as faulty appliances, damaged wiring, or moisture ingress) it automatically disconnects the circuit to prevent electric shock or fire hazards.

You confirm and reinforce my point. You should not have to hunt around to find an examiner that does the job properly. But, that would be almost the same thing- you don't pay up so you don't get the certificate until every 'demand' has been met, irrespective of the need for it. But this time he has 'wasted' his time and travelling expenses if you don't pay. You then need to find and book another examiner. No doubt there is a BSS examiners 'whatsapp group' and your name would be circulated as a 'non-payer / time waster' and youd find it difficult to find another examiner. The BSS is just a 'job for the old boys'.

But it currently is - there is no guarantee that either the examiner actually did a thorough examination of the boat, or, correctly assessed its compliance.

I agree - but to do that the BSS must be accountable and the consistent application of the rules must be adhered to. Currently the examiners appear to be able to adapt, bend, or ignore the rules and there appears to be no sanctions on the examiner., the boater is just left pick up the unnecessary costs.