Tacet

I can't find the concept of a 'responsible person' in the RCR; where is it please? Broadly speaking, the manufacturer is required to ensure the Essential Requirements (reg 8 😎are met, to make the Declaration of Conformity ( reg 10) and undertake the Applicable Conformity Assessment Procedures (regulation 42). The last is within Schedule 15 which provides the manufacturer "ensures and declares on the manufacturer's sole responsibility that the product concerned meets the essential requirements that apply to it." There is no absolute requirement on a manufacturer to have outside checks from a surveyor. If it does so, it might have a partial defence of doing-its-best but there is nothing that provides that it's "sole responsibility" is automatically absolved by getting another to certify its defective work. Depending on the terms of the contract with the surveyor of course, it may have an action against it for negligence. It is also possible a purchaser of the vessel would also have an action against the surveyor. But where surveys are concerned, any claim is based on negligence - so if failing to identify the non-compliance was not negligent, then tough luck. Nothing to do with small print. In theory (but more difficult in practice) a manufacturer could obtain indemnity insurance for claims arising from its own defective work. But either way (surveyor or insurer), the liability lies with the manufacturer. It may have contractual recourse to the surveyor/ insurer - but it is still in the front line.

I remember it well. There would have been a saving of water if you had drawn off only the side pound immediately above the the intermediate pound. If that led to insufficient depth to pass that pound on your own ascent, drawing off only sufficient to allow passage as you go would minimise the draw from the summit (Welford excepted) pound. Ignoring leaks etc, the intermediate and side pounds will normalise themselves through use.

Under the RCR 2017 (which is what masters in the UK) there is no list of approved surveyors - only a list of approved bodies to which surveyors can belong; no doubt each body has its only admission criteria for individuals. A surveyor signing to say a boat is compliant does not absolve the builder of all liability. Only if the surveyor is negligent would it be held liable - either partly or wholly. If the non-compliance is such that a reasonably diligent surveyor would not identify the problem, it will not be liable. If the builder has, for example, put a dodgy gas connection in a place that cannot be seen by reasonable inspection etc, then it remains down to the builder.

Thanks. Meeting the International Standards as a means of compliance with the RCR is a rebuttable presumption rather than a deeming provision. See para 41. Put another way, just because you meet the ISOs does not (in law) automatically means that you comply with the RCR. But it is a good start!

Thanks. But, from what you say, the bottom line is that no one is required to comply with an EU Directive? It is only a direction to the member states to enact the principles contained within the directive; until the details have been enshrined in national law, it is not the law! That makes both good sense and simplifies matters. Essentially, in this context, in the home market one needs to comply with the UK Recreational Craft Regulations 2017. If you wish to trade etc overseas, including in the EU, you would need to meet the local laws. In the EU these are likely to be much the same as the RCR 2017 as all were founded on the same EU Directive. It would also mean that claims the some boat details do not comply with the RCD are neither here nor there - as there is no direct requirement to comply. Seems as though many of the 100s and 1000s of mysteriously unnamed RCD documents are unnecessary - and whether or not the RCD lives and changes with the wind is irrelevant.

The link provided takes one to the 2013/53 Directive that has been implemented UK law in the form of the RCR 2017 - a UK Statutory Instrument. And if you can't point to anything else, that reinforces the suggestion that the RCR 2017 is the legislative requirements pretty much in full. Talk of other mysterious RCDs (that you won't name) and living/changing requirements are unsupported.

I'm not, at this stage, interested in all the documents that are incorporated in the RCD - merely the full name of the Directives with which one is supposedly expected to comply. Two or three names would be a start. According to the EU Commission at https://commission.europa.eu/law/law-making-process/types-eu-law_en "Directives require EU countries to achieve a certain result, but leave them free to choose how to do so. EU countries must adopt measures to incorporate them into national law (transpose) in order to achieve the objectives set by the directive." So no EU Directives are law in themselves - even before Brexit - even in the EU. The aim of the Directives need to be made (transposed) into national laws. In the UK this is typically achieved by Statutory Instruments such as the Recreational Craft Regulations 2017. Whether or not the Withdrawal Act required the UK to implement fresh RCDs is a red herring; even if it is obliged to do so, it needs to pass legislation. SIs are commonly named XXX Regulations. So broadly speaking, if its formal name ends in "Directive" it is not law. If its formal name ends in "Regulations" then it is the law - at least when made, albeit possibly subject to subsequent revocation or amendment.

When we were part of the European Union, directives had to be adopted, usually by Statutory Instrument, to become UK legislation It beggars belief that post Brexit, EU Directives are automatically enshrined in UK legislation. I am quite sure The Recreational Craft Regulations 2017 are a complete, static work. They can, if course, be revoked and amended by subsequent legislation but they certainly don't float about freely. The RCR 2017 is a Statutory Instrument. It doesn't have a life of its own and cannot change itself. The two bodies you mention are incapable of making legislative changes. The ISO is a standards body - and the RSG is a consultation group which provides, inter alia, guidance on legislation. Neither create laws. Overall you're saying that: * the UK boating public and industry is subject to the RCD * the RCD is much the same as the RCR, but not entirely so (which seems a bit pointless in itself). * the RCD is comprised of numerous secretive documents - which you can't name and, in any event, live and change without any control on the part of the UK. It doesn't sound very probable. I am willing to be persuaded otherwise, but as it stands I can't see much that suggests the RCD forms part of UK legislation. If you want to operate in the EU maybe, but not if all remains at home.

Thanks for summarising what you believe the RCD obligation to comprise. The link provided by Upside Down refers to Directive 2013/53/EU. As I understand it (by no means as an expert) EU Directives had to be imported (usually by Statutory Instrument) into UK law to make them apply to that jurisdiction. According to this Government page https://www.gov.uk/government/publications/recreational-craft-regulations-2017/recreational-craft-regulations-2017-great-britain#legislative-background the RCR 2017 implemented 2013/53/EU. To my way of thinking, the EU RCD 2013/53 is therefore not directly UK law - but the very similar in content UK RCR 2017 is the law. So what is the RCD that makes further obligations beyond that of the 2017 RCR? My hypothesis is that the RCR is now (in this context) pretty much the complete work. If there is one or more RCDs that now apply in the UK, can you please let us have a note of the full title(s). Otherwise telling us that the RCD imposes requirements is without foundation.

I posted a link to the RCR. I do want to read the RCD (at least that part which imposes obligations - if not the obligations themselves. What is the full title of the RCD (so I can look it up) please. A link to the Government legislation site would be ideal.

I believe the RCR is this https://www.legislation.gov.uk/uksi/2017/737/contents But what is the full title of the much-mentioned RCD to which some boats are said to be subject, please? A link would be ideal.

Hmm. I can't see you can normally waste more than a lockful at Foxton.or Watford If the locks are full before you descend (i.e. the previous boat ascended) the pounds should be down by at least a lockful as the same was used filling the locks to carry the previous boat up - and thus the pounds have capacity for your journey down Essentially, both locks and pounds will not both be full at the same time. That is unless someone has deliberately drawn water from the summit to fill everything. In which case, it's their mistake

Does it smoke when the gearbox is in neutral?

Without becoming embroiled in the underlying safety of immersion heaters - the whole volume of water will only turn to steam if the water is at the critical temperature, which is about 374C. And that requires a pressure of around 3200 psi which will test your plumbing. The latent heat required for vaporisation has to come from somewhere.

Sounds reasonable to me. Assuming you have a home mooring on the Bridgewater Canal - and a licence for the Weaver - and a reciprocal licence to travel between the two. When on the Weaver, you're out and about. If you're there for three months, it might be viewed as a bit longer than usual for a visitor so may be wise not to invite CRT attention by staying the maximum periods on moorings, moving very little or repeatedly returning to the same spot. Or otherwise being annoying.

Thank you. When is convenient for you?

Were they Canadian greengrocer's?

It's fine with care - but with both top and middle paddles drawn, the levels will not equalise. You'll need to judge the correct time, drop the top paddles and allow the two locks to find a (hopefully) about suitable level. The weir on the lower lock should save you from too much embarrassment.

If there is sufficient height in the gas locker to allow the floor to be raised above routine water level and still accommodate gas bottles, it would be a good move. Removing ballast might gain an inch or so - but you need to be realistic about that approach. If you can't get the floor above water level, you don't have much choice other than keeping it in good condition as any holing will lead to a sinking.

7.5 litres is probably the coolant in the engine itself. If you are replacing all the coolant in the system, a much greater volume will be involved. Anybody's guess as to how much - but maybe 40 litres is a starting point.

Which tax is it you have to cover? I am not aware of any that are solely due from caravan sites. I don't have a particular problem - but the difference with most 'things' is that the customer cannot buy a caravan elsewhere and bring it to your site. A commission (not exceeding 10%) is usually taken on the sale of a sited mobile home too. This means there are at least four income streams.