Jump to content

MartinC

Member
  • Posts

    340
  • Joined

  • Last visited

Posts posted by MartinC

  1.  

    We chose Ventnor this summer and cannot praise the tthem highly enough for there friendly and pleasant attitude to moorers, nothing seems too much trouble and I'm sure it's the same at Wigrams as Steve - the Mgr, and some of his team work at both.

     

    Ventnor also has the advantage of a blacking service in their own dry dock.

  2. The article in narrowboatworld gives the name of the doctor so, I think, we should talk about things in general terms and not this specific case. Otherwise, it seems unfair to criticise her good intentions when she's not here to defend her opinions.

     

    No "Dr Alison Fells" comes up on a search of the GMC Register so, possibly , she is "not here"?

  3. Couple of years ago a guy banged on my boat and when I went out he asked for a cup of sugar. I told him no chance. Obviously a chancer looking for a boat to burgle.

     

    Not sure what the police can do, he's not committed a crime. I suppose if they find someone of similar description with stolen goods.....

     

    Might be reasonable grounds for "stop and search" (not asking for sugar but in some of the other incidents) and, if he had any implements on him, the charge would be "going equipped". https://www.gov.uk/police-powers-to-stop-and-search-your-rights

  4.  

    If I had a boat built, I would have a longer (but not wider) sliding hatch than the customary square shape. Having boated extensively with and without, it does allow a second person to stand in safety, particularly if they stand lower than the steerer's step. It also makes access to and from the counter much easier in a modern trad. Apart from a less-traditional look, there is little downside.

     

     

     

    Our boat has a square but wider hatch which, I understand, is a feature of a typical Paul Widdowson shell. Means Mrs C can stand in the rain alongside me and we are both clear of the tiller

  5. There is a particularly psycho who hangs around Sutton Cheney on the Ashby- we just call him the B&st&r swan! One chap who had obviously just had a rather shiny new paint job was under sustained and serious attack as B&st&r swan seemed convinced that his own reflection in the shiny cabin side was another B&st&r swan! This lasted for over 20 mins as the poor man tried to wind his boat.....

     

    Saw a similar thing at Coventry Basin a couple of years ago. The swan was attacking it's reflection in one of the (empty) shop windows. When it eventually stopped in was totally exausted.

  6.  

    I'm not sure that's true - I can't see why insurance would refuse to pay out. It might be that there's a clause in the insurance agreement, even so I'd expect the insurance company can't put a clause in to invalidate their 3rd party responsibility. For example if there's damage done to CRTs infrastructure, I'd hope CRT would make a claim against the relevant insurer, and that insurer would pay out. Otherwise it would become a long drawn out legal issue or another cost for CRT to bear.

     

    Most marine policies include a general exclusion of claims arising from reckless action. As this is a general exclusion it applies to all sections of the policy including the third party liability section. Was this a reckless action?

     

    Slightly off subject, but in the 1970s the only insurance company that was prepared to provide motor insurance for foreign armed forces members based in UK had a general exclusion which applied if the underwriters considered that the driver was under the influence of alcohol. This meant that the insurers would have to pay out for compulsory risks (at that time only third party personal injury) but would (and did!) reclaim any such payment from the insured.

     

    Although CaRT require all boaters to have insurance there is no compulsory liability of the type that applies to motor accidents. Possibly there should be?

  7.  

    I was just going to say to the OP when leaving your boat to go cruising ensure you take a meter reading in case another boater ...... ahem..... 'accidentally' plugs into your outlet by 'mistake'.

     

    That sounds like a good system.

    Good advice, which we now follow. We shared a pontoon with a liveaboard. Liveaboard departed just after we returned and we ended up with a big bill and no way of proving the fraud.

     

    One other point to watch out. VAT on the service charge is 20% but on unit charge is 5%.

  8. As said check the level markers (riverside of the locks) only go in green or phone the lock keeper, the first one you will come to on the river for advice.

     

    The Droitwich junction is not obvious when going down stream, the only clue is a pontoon and a large house, painted cream the last time I went down.

     

    It is a turn back on yourself so, be aware of being taken downstream when you turn broadside to the flow.

     

    Moorings from the junction, none at the junction, to Droitwich are rare and those that there are, are in reeds and the boat sitting on the bottom a plank will be required.

     

    I seem to remember that it took about four hours from the Severn to Droitwich but do not quote me on that.

     

    Good moorings in Droitwich, small basin on your left as you arrive.

     

    There are new moorings after second lock up from the Severn. I think these were added as "holding" moorings when the Severn is in flood, as one of the new warning lights is there.

  9. Here is the letter from British Cycling that triggered the recent discussions in the media on access rights:

     

    https://www.britishcycling.org.uk/zuvvi/media/bc_files/campaigning/MTB_ACCESS_LETTER_SECRETARY_OF_STATE.pdf

     

    Access to every path would be a complete nonsense and I'd hope no-one would ever expect that. However, I suspect there is scope for some increase in the total number of off-road routes available to cyclists. No idea how much though - it will no doubt need significant review and consultation to come to a full understanding of the situation.

     

     

    Two thoughts on this.

     

    There is a least one identifiable mistake in the letter, which is not surprising in view of the fact that it is part of sustained campaign which ignores the need to curb the activities of the wilder fringe of cyclists. If the writers of the letter think that everybody except them have unfettered access to Open Land they are obviously ignorant of the many exclusions relating to free use of Open Land.

     

    The New Forest which is Crown Land as well as a National Park has designated routes for cycling. These routes take into account both environmental factors and the relevant needs of horse riders and walkers. The cycle routes are well maintained and signed. However more cyclists use the prohibited routes than use the designated routes!

  10. I think what would be good in these circumstances is not to sit back and be victims is to take some positive action to improve things and the towpath environment.

     

    There is not much that can be done about policing the vagaries of city life (alcoholism, vandalism etc.) but often when something looks well looked after and tidy it helps with a lot of issues. So an action group from the boating community there to help tidy up the towpath get things looking more cared for will go a long way with the wider community and the City Council. Perhaps an organised group of boaters could meet the council representatives (and/or CRT) and work out where a volunteer group could do the most good. It may also be possible with the willingness of the boating community to draw up some voluntary code of conduct that through the group and peer pressure will be observed that go someway to address the wider communities concerns. Who knows after a while you may be able to involve some of the said wider community in activities that care for the waterway environment.

     

    All of the above may not work due to a number of reasons but it may well be worth a try and would show a willingness to create something better and no need for a PSPO. just being in opposition and defensive can just polarize the involved groups so that instead of coming together over common ground the gulf between them gets larger.

     

    just some thoughts in reaction to your post. Good luck

     

    Agreed, that is why (post13) I suggested that the council need to look at the Home Office guidance which lays emphasis on this type of approach, instead of going straight to a PSPO

×
×
  • Create New...

Important Information

We have placed cookies on your device to help make this website better. You can adjust your cookie settings, otherwise we'll assume you're okay to continue.