Leaderboard

First off. WTH! Most of you were having a tantrum last time I was here. Second, if I'd have listened to all the advice given on this thread I'd have wasted a large amount of money on jobs that didn't need doing, I'm sure that most of the people that posted 'Advice' we're just fluffing there own ego. I don't need to run my batteries for hours on end at high revs and have never had to I don't need a whole new pipe and plumbing set up and my cauliflower isn't to high/ low/ in the wrong location To get the engine heating the water didn't need hundreds of pounds, a whole tool set and a human sacrifice I don't need a over indulgent electric system (mine suits my needs) CRT have never chased me out of Skipton (they are rather understanding to my hospital visits) Don't need to change my lighting system or risk living in darkness surrounded by creatures from the dark side. Yes I have ignored a heck of a lot of advice given by this forum and in person. Don't need to be a person who proclaims to be a boaty expert to know something doesn't sound right. Out of the five visitors from this place the only good thing was having the header tanks, the diesel water trap and the Rev button explained, all the other stuff ended up being a total pitta Some people seem to think that if one is polite perky and looks as if they are impressed with their ramblings about there skills with engines or boats that they can keep harping on. Has no one ever heard of 'Smile and Nod' rolls eyes. I gave NW a free pass when he acted like a pollock and said I was upset with the forums post. My reply was not the first draft (or even sixth draft. I would have been so banned) I did give him a free pass for showing the tanks and what nots and for helping empty the boat. No more free passes as he is taking it upon himself to act like one of those princess Di fan girls. Out of the herd of so called experts found when I got back to it that it was flooding One ended up trashing my fuses One ended up making damn sure my heating stopped working (how the fu@@ diddid they manage that) One went off in a strop because they were under the illusion is drop my trolleys for them The majority of folk who pounce on the commen sense minority don't arf talk a load of tosh

Of course if having slowed down to tick over to pass a moored boat you still receive a bellowing of 'slow down' from the side hatch, you could simply respond ' I have, I'm not in a rush would you like me to stop and show you how to moor your boat correctly'.

Hi Max, good to read that everything is fine on your boat, and even more that you took the time to give us a sign of life. It's really too bad that the five people that came to help you left your boat (or turned your boat) in such a mess, and that while everything was perfect before. If you'd known what they were going to do, you wouldn't have let them set foot on board, but those are things you'll have to get used to. Just do everything you want done yourself, and never let anyone get further then the outside of the doors, this to avoid possible damage they're likely to do. Maybe by now you've discovered that many forummembers are pretty useless, you could have noticed that by everything they've been trying to (very badly) help you with from a distance, and without seeing what it was all about, and supply you with their useless advises. With all the experience you've gained in the meantime, you'll have understood that there's little to no point in letting them have a try on this again. What I really missed in your 2 postings was some news about the lovely pup and your cats. Maybe, if you ever feel like writing a few more lines, tell us how they are doing. Thanks, Peter.

There is nothing magic about passing at tick over, it's polite to pass at a speed that would not cause a well moored boat to bang about. Depending on conditions that may or may not require dropping to tick over often it doesn't. Most of the people who demand passing boats do so at tick over are sad gits who don't have anything better to do than abuse passers by. If they spent a tiny fraction of the effort tying their boat up properly there wouldn't be an issue. You can go past my boat at any speed you like it's tied properly with 4 ropes at 45 degrees to the boat. Top Cat

If everyone abided by the rules then there would be no problem but they don't, however tightening the rules only affects those that obey, the idiots that don't will continue. Have sensible rules and enforcing them is far more effective than ever tightened rules which get ignored. A classic example is the blood alcohol limit for driving, most who are caught are well over the limit, reducing the limit wouldn't affect their behavior. Top Cat

I don't really go for those naff little metal tiller pins so I'm working on an alternative: Admittedly, the training is not going very well so far but I'm working on it!!

Some illnesses do not allow you to control your feelings very well. Cut her some slack I say. See my comment above.

I am guessing (and that's all it is) that Max's woes have caught up with her and the 'fools rush in where Angels fear to tread' may have finally 'hit home'. Max may be in a 'bad place' at the moment but hopefully she can get thru' it and back to her 'bubbly self' when she may look back and regret 'that post'. Now we know she is still alive & kicking, lets give her some space and hopefully she will come out of it (and back on the forum) with her totally crazy outlook. Max - we will still be here, if and when, you decide to rejoin the forum (or even start answering the phone &/or emails)

What size, and in what manner?

Max is such a lovely person. I'm really sad that the comments that have been made have been. I would still help a damsel in distress. (Or should that be Damson in this dress) Martyn.

I'm not going back to read all that useless advice given by a bunch of selfish people, that only gave their so called advices to show off what they knew about boats. Why o why didn't anyone tell poor Max to take all that was said with a huge pile of bags of salt, as now she took some of the advices transformed and adapted by herself to what she really needed, and it still didn't what it was supposed to do. The five forum-members that abused her hospitality and disturbed everything that was fine, to stop it from properly working after they left. They should be ashamed of themselfs. Peter.

yes

the bane of modern civilisation and the end of personal privacy - don't

Basically, it is a clause that gives them enormous latitude, and unless struck down under unfair contract terms legislation means that they actually CAN tow it away by sea (they will claim that they towed it away to the only place that they use to sell boats of this size). I suspect that they might actually succeed in arguing that it is a valid contract, and that the vessel owner should have been more aware of what he was agreeing to. However, I would have to agree that it is not proportionate, and that I am not happy that they are using such onerous contracts. I also think that the response regarding removal of goods it out of order. I can see that they would not wish the owner to come on board (They probably think he will try to occupy the boat), but they can't reasonably charge for recovering the goods, particularly the chef's tools (suspect retaining these is illegal)

Did you notice that the users of that forum had voted the post you quote down to a '4' and the post that says "spread it all over" scores a '7' and was accepted by the questioner as the 'correct' answer? "when it gets hot it likes to run. This can cause the grease to penetrate between connections" How? If I clamp two terminals together there is no space for anything to penetrate between them. If they're loose enough for anything to penetrate then runny vaseline is the last of my problems. Sorry, but I think that guy's talking rubbish and has no practical experience of the matter.

I have looked up the Berthing Agreement relating to the lightship. The section upon which CaRT are relying for removing themselves from any provisions of the Torts Act is: - The pertinent bit seems to be the wording in 10.1.2: “shall be entitled” . . . “to sell the Licensee’s property at such time and in such manner as the Estate Owner may in its sole discretion determine . . .” [my bold] Even so, I am struggling to see how any interpretation of this clause can justify towing the vessel out to sea and up the coast at a cost in excess of £50,000. I would consider that an entirely unwarranted interference with goods that was not only wholly unnecessary, but was far beyond what could be claimed as something agreed to under the contract. It does have the complexion of a "do as you see fit" clause, akin to their interpretation of the infamous s.43(3), but I would personally tremble to think of needing to justify such actions on such a basis before an impartial court of law. It could be, of course, that they are confident no such thing really exists.

It may not be generally realised just how good a position a boatyard/moorings operator is in these situations. Not that any would wish the aggravation of recalcitrant and persistent late payers and troublemakers, but the legal tools for dealing with them are straightforward. I have commented previously on the implied restrictions imposed by the Torts Act, but the positive thrust of the Act is to provide a legal means of dealing with goods left on your property when you no longer wish them to be there, and no longer wish the burden of the legal responsibilities involved in keeping them; seizing the boat is not involved, because the boat is already in your 'possession' as in on your premises: - http://www.legislation.gov.uk/ukpga/1977/32 Uncollected goods 12 Bailee’s power of sale. (1) This section applies to goods in the possession or under the control of a bailee where— ( a ) the bailor is in breach of an obligation to take delivery of the goods or, if the terms of the bailment so provide, to give directions as to their delivery, or . . . (2) In the cases of Part I of Schedule 1 to this Act a bailee may, for the purposes of subsection (1), impose an obligation on the bailor to take delivery of the goods, or as the case may be to give directions as to their delivery, and in those cases the said Part I sets out the method of notification. (3) If the bailee— ( a ) has in accordance with Part II of Schedule 1 to this Act given notice to the bailor of his intention to sell the goods under this subsection, or . . . and is reasonably satisfied that the bailor owns the goods, he shall be entitled, as against the bailor, to sell the goods. . . . (5) A bailee exercising his powers under subsection (3) shall be liable to account to the bailor for the proceeds of sale, less any costs of sale, and — ( a ) the account shall be taken on the footing that the bailee should have adopted the best method of sale reasonably available in the circumstances, and ( b ) where subsection (3)(a) applies, any sum payable in respect of the goods by the bailor to the bailee which accrued due before the bailee gave notice of intention to sell the goods shall be deductible from the proceeds of sale. [my emphasis] This all means that CaRT having given due Notice in the format specified, that they wished the owner to remove his boat, and having given due Notice in the format specified that if the boat was not removed they would take steps to sell the boat – they could proceed to do so, adopting the “best method of sale reasonably available in the circumstances”, and upon selling the boat could deduct from the proceeds the costs of the sale and any sums due for the berthing fees up to the point they took the decision to cut their losses respecting allowing the boat to remain as a customer. Several points of interest arise – The best method of sale reasonably available must be adopted. That would have entailed advertising the boat for sale where it was, still within their premises. There is an obligation to deal with the goods as responsibly as possible, selling the boat for the best sum reasonably obtainable at least cost. Having given notice of intent to sell, no sums accruing in respect of the berthing fees post the date of the notice may be deducted from the proceeds of sale. That in itself ought to focus the bailee’s mind upon accomplishing the sale as swiftly and economically as possible. There is NO provision for deducting costs of relocating the goods elsewhere prior to sale, which could not possibly be accounted as costs of sale, whether reasonable or not.. There is likewise NO provision for refusing access to the boat, let alone charging for third parties to collect and hand over goods from it.

I would moor near a bridge so that the Fire service has easy access, In my opinion plastic boats and solid fuel stoves do not go together. I have done many disposals because of such fires.

Dave showed me around his boat which was nice. But it isn't the only boat I saw and he did express his feelings on the cost of up keep and problems with winter. His boat is not the only boat I looked at and being a big grown independent person I don't have to get a clone of his boat, his style, and needs are not my cup of tea and if he could show me where I said I was angry with the vents or electric system or is this polishing your mod badge in public? All texts to NW have been light hearted banter like talking about finding a mouse on the boat and him saying post about it on the forum. I said 'they already think I'm a weirdo' next thing I know he's turning into Paul Brunell. Even though he aleady told a member that 'My boat needed painting' when the member questioned why I was doing he's acting like its a blooming surprise! He also misses out on having a tantrum because I said he wore Lycra and said he's pretty instead of handsome Lord love a duck the majority of you have some serious issues

An ejector fitted to the engines exhaust pipe will make a good vacuum, very simple, no moving parts. Also a vacuum hose could be connected to the engines air inlet manifold, incorporating a vacuum draught diverter to prevent the dust entering the engine. The diverter might not be reliable though, dust is very searching, plus all the Mites in it tend to act as marshals and direct the dust out and back from whence it came to effect their escape and save their lives, as they're not keen on the risk of entering into a hot engine and getting bounced about on the pistons and the compression squeezing would make them very ill before getting blasted out of the exhaust pipe in a terribly dizzy and stunned condition. The ejector would be more efficient in that respect and kinder to natures little blighters. Also a bicycle pump will create a small vacuum if the handle is pulled out sharply. A small bore extension tube screwed into the connector hole to make it more useful for sucking up the odd grain of dust. Your coal stove would also make quite a powerful vacuum cleaner, here's how. Remove the lower air knob completely and make an adapter to fit snugly over the hole left in the door. Fix a long vacuum pipe to the adapter. Attach your favourite attachment to the other end of the hose. Stoke the fire up until its roaring away like billyo. The fiercer it is the stronger the vacuum, no mess either and another form of ejector.

Seized nuts? https://www.amazon.co.uk/Silverline-PC70-Splitter-2-15-15-22/dp/B000LFXN94 This will destroy the nuts, but not the studs. New nuts, with Copper-slip grease job done. Bod

No boat should be moving at night i can give you the 1 and only reason why & its also a safty matter ready? Youll wake the wife and at night its the only times my ears stop hurting and i get peace.