Leaderboard

Why does everyone of your postings have to be a criticism of CaRT?

You'll just have to carry on pontificating then, won't you.

What I'm saying is precisely what I've previously posted in this thread. So, you can both unconfuse yourselves by reading back through it all. Everything you need, or are entitled, to know is already there, so I've no intention of wasting any more time by posting any of it again.

I loathe the Steve Wright show.....especially I detest the self promoting " love the show" comments that he constantly reads out. Many years ago I had a part time broadcasting job on a local commercial station, during which I acquired recordings of a prominent folk singer who later suffered an horrific car crash. Years later, I made these available to a BBC sound engineer who was compiling material to put out a double CD to help the victim. He worked as a technical operator to most of the " names" on the station and opined that Mr Wright was his least favourite presenter to work with. Mind you, I'm not much of a fan of the " Whine hour" either....too contrived by half. Sorry for sidetracking the OP Dave

Yes, some are more like objects.

That is certainly true with regards to road speed limits, cyclists can go as fast as they like.. Casp' By "own" you mean stole from the rest of us... Casp'

Why? The Royal Family own a lot of property which is made freely available for the public to use for their leisure. Wheb i lived in London we regularly used the Royal Parks as do thousands of people every day. I wouild have thought that paying for a few Police Officers to ensure that people use it sensibly without danger to others is a pretty good deal.

Damn - I read the title as kicked! He deserves kicking for that godawful show he does on R2 at lunchtime

One more thing, I know quite a lot of people (including myself) that started their boat adventure on a narrowboat and move to widebeam but I haven't met a single person who would change wb for nb.

Sorry I seem to have missed the part of the Legislation that mentions Place Boundaries, to save me looking through all the legislation do you have a link? Thank you in advance

Quote Sounds like a Bollinger

We had a early Springer at Bridgewater Boats, the bow and stern were 1/4" and the "straight" sides were 3/16". Some of the earlier ones with a ply top were 3/16" and 1/8".

IMO (novice & a WB owner) there are very few disadvantages once you get your head around you aren't able to cruise the entire system. But there are things that need to be considered..... We travel slower than narrow boats due to the amount of wash we cause Doing locks takes us longer as all 4 gates need to be opened and closed and we can't share locks on the canal system Some marina's charge more for a pump out if your a WB Our insurance costs more as the value & size of the boat is greater (in most instances) than a same length narrow boat A Thames visitor license costs substantially more as it is charged by sq footage Painting & blackening cost more - crane in & outs are limited to yards able to do it and cost more Mooring spots can be a bit more limited in certain areas, as we need to ensure we aren't making it difficult for other boats to navigate past us you need to be prepared to pull over to let narrow boats past as they can travel faster than you - well we do anyway & of course you need to have a rather thick skin to deal with the few "miserable ol gits" who will happily share their distaste with you & their negative comments about WB's on some discussion forums. However, in real life out on the cut, you very rarely actually receive any negativity about having a WB Enjoy your space & proper bed

Our boat was freshly blacked when we bought her, reblacked (properly) 5 months later when she was lifted out for a repair, then again a year later as routine, and yet again when she was taken out for a repaint, so that's 4 blackings in 5 years ...... hull should be in good nick I reckon. Next time she is out though, I'll be looking to use something better than bitumen, as even though most of the blackings were only a year apart, I was not impressed with it's lastability at the waterline as per Neil2 and think 3 years is too long between reblackings

I wonder how many boats dog house has actually commissioned since he's such expert on the boat building process ??? My bet ? None ! He possibly bought "of the shelf" boat !

This post is in response to Staarek's original post of 12th Dec 2013 and Nimrod's of Aug 2014. It is notoriously difficult to authenticate anything you read on the internet, so a certain scepticism like that exhibited by “The doghouse”, is, no doubt, both healthy and wise. I do find it curious, however, that the same scepticism is conspicuously never applied to the positive posts. Surely it is just as possible that those praising certain boat builders could be posted by the builders themselves or friends and relatives and such false posts could be quite damaging to a genuine buyer if taken at face value. When this thread was started by “Lady Muck” on 22nd November 2009, it was clearly stated that this forum was not for naming and shaming so I have refrained from posting the honest advice that I would like to offer, but seeing the way “Staarek” has been treated, I feel obliged to join the fray in his support. Our experience of dealing with Bluewater Boats Ltd (run by David and Sharon Warner) was frustrating and deeply unpleasant and, for us, everything Staarek has to say has the ring of truth. “The Doghouse” has admonished Staarek that this is not a game and that people’s livelihoods are at stake. Sadly, the other side of that coin is that very often, or perhaps usually, people’s life-savings are at stake in the purchase of a boat. The Doghouse has assured us that he has no connection with Bluewater and we must accept that assurance at face value, even though his posts seem to read as though he does. We should also do Staarek the courtesy of accepting what he has to say at face value, especially given his assurance that he has documentary evidence to back him up. He would be foolish indeed to write what he has without evidence. In this industry, where bullsh*t seems to be the lingua franca and serial bankruptcy is considered a normal financial management tool for getting out of a problem and then starting again with a clean sheet, negative stories should at least be given fair consideration. It is very easy to stand on the sidelines with the 20/20 vision of hindsight as some members have done and suggest his research was inadequate; they ”saw him coming” and so on. (This incidentally is uncomfortably reminiscent of the “If she dresses like that she’s asking for it” defence in a rape case. It doesn’t make either of them any less a victim.) The oft suggested “talk to previous customers” is not actually as useful a research tool as some would like to suggest. You can be sure that Bluewater Boats Ltd are not going to give a prospective customer mine or Staarek’s address, so, as some members of this forum would like to see here, you only get positive feedback. We have been running our own business for 39 years and the sailaway boat in question was our third self-fitout in 6 years. We know the pitfalls and can both write and understand a contract. We supplied a very detailed written specification and a 10:1 scale drawing and this formed the basis of the contract, but it failed to protect us. Having “right on our side” was not enough. Bluewater Boats Ltd were happy to quote on the basis of the specification, but not quite so keen to deliver on the same basis. The words specify and specification have crystal clear meanings in the dictionary and in law. A specification is not a “wish list” nor is it a request for their recommendations. It would be impossible in an internet post such as this to go into lists and explanations of all the problems. It cost us several thousands of pounds and many weeks of extra work to bring the boat closer to the specification in the contract (and remember we had only ordered a sailaway). One example that we could not realistically correct was the stern. Our drawing clearly showed a semi-circular stern. When, at the pre-delivery inspection, we asked why our boat had an elliptical stern, David Warner’s casual answer was “That’s the shape we do”. So much for the “truly bespoke” boast in their advertising! Obviously this would cost a fortune to change and by then we were anxious to get the boat out of their yard, so we have to live with it, but it is not what we wanted. Disagreeing with someone who, like Lewis Carroll’s Humpty Dumpty, chooses their own meanings for words instead of sticking with the accepted definition is endlessly frustrating and in the end we complained to the British Marine Federation. After many week’s delay and conversations with Sharon Warner, they told us that, as it was a contractual dispute, they could not get involved but assured us that Bluewater Boats were committed to resolving this dispute. They recommended their associated mediation service to us and to Bluewater so we got in touch with them. We explained the situation to the mediators and told them of the reams of documentation we had on the case, mostly e-mails. They said it seemed clear enough and they would be able to help if Bluewater agreed to mediation. For simplicity and clarity I will now include extracts from e-mails: Us to Bluewater: “If you are committed, as we are, to finding a way forward, we would now urge you to contact the BMF’s Dispute Resolution Service. We have already done so. It would be fast, cheap and a proper resolution for both parties.” Bluewater’s reply: “Obviously it is yourselves who want the mediation and compromise as it is you who will once again be getting a cheaper price and we will be losing out….. We do not wish to fall out over this issue as we have a very good relationship with all of our customers so I hope you can understand why I don’t want to bother with mediation as we will not change our minds.” They also told us that if we held up the build any longer with this dispute we would be invoiced for the storage of the work so far. Bullying tactics or what? Next stop, obviously, was our solicitor who, after some research into Bluewater’s financial situation, advised us not to waste any more time or money but to get our boat out of their yard as soon as possible. Sound, pragmatic advice, no doubt, but a bitter pill to swallow, nonetheless. I can envisage members responding that a financial check before placing the order might have saved us this, but the sad fact is that in the prevailing economic climate at the time this had ruled out almost all boat builders. Which of them wasn’t on a knife edge after the credit crunch? We had put all this behind us and it would have stayed there but I do feel Staarek has been treated harshly on this forum and we had to speak up. One member has said that “if this was your (Staarek’s) first foray into the boat building world then you might have some sympathy but it isn’t. In fact you have full experience of having a boat built from scratch.” I simply cannot understand why Staarek’s previous good experiences should disbar him from reporting on this bad one. If anything, his previous experience makes him more qualified to report that Bluewater’s performance is below an acceptable industry standard. 1) Neither Staarek nor I are asking for sympathy- merely offering a public-spirited warning. 2) No matter how detailed your contract is, nothing can protect you from the other party distorting the meanings of words or even changing a few. Yes, even when they are there in writing! 3) When you have built a number of boats before, and most likely spoken with dozens of builders in the process, you develop a knowledge of what it is reasonable to expect, and this is particularly relevant when it comes to discussing variations and alternatives which you know should have no cost implications, but then get turned into an excuse to charge as extras. Someone on this thread mentioned Bluewater taking legal action, but I assure you that all we have said (and Staarek gave the same assurance) is very thoroughly supported by the e-mails we exchanged at the time and which are stored safely. Remember, it is only libellous if it is untrue. After we finally got our boat out of their yard and into ours, there were a small number of rather major items to put right and a large number of very small niggles which crop up in any build. All have been put right, some with time and effort, some with money, and it is worth noting that the small niggles which we had always taken in our stride in the past, in both boat fitting and property development, and simply dealt with, were rendered significantly more irritating by Bluewater’s intransigent and belligerent attitude and approach to dispute resolution and warranty issues. I have been tempted to reel out page after page of corroborating detail on our problems with Bluewater, but for what? I daresay it would only be construed as a more elaborate version of the same mischief that Staarek stands accused of. In conclusion, we have ended up with a very beautiful boat with elegant and sound steelwork, the envy of everyone in the marina, but at an unacceptable financial and mental cost. She attracts admiring looks whenever we are out and about on the waterways and the frequently asked question “Who built your shell?” is always answered, but with a health warning! There are plenty of good boat builders who will not give you this aggravation, but in future we will take the view that only those who do not require stage payments (like Cheshire Narrowboats at Lymm and one or two others) and consequently do not have you “over a barrel” are going to get our business. Perhaps buying secondhand does have its attractions after all. That way what you see is what you get. P.S. Since drafting this post, we notice that “Nimrod” also on this forum has had similar problems with Bluewater. Whatever protestations Bluewater care to make on Facebook, and their efforts to blame their customers, their claim, as noted in the e-mail extract above, to have a good relationship with all their customers is looking less credible. A different picture is now beginning to emerge.

But you only see that if you are looking backwards, 9 times out of 10 they are watching their lock crew draw the paddles so don't see the notice. When I worked at a camp site in my youth we wouldn't allow all single sex parties because of the trouble they caused. Its probably against the law to have a discriminatory rule like that today.