Graham Davis

Thank you and welcome, RetiredLady for a most erudite and helpful posting. I hope you find somewhere to moor more genial.

The Train Operating Companies pay Network Rail to run their trains. If you want to build a private siding then Network rail will charge you for that access. So basically the same as CaRT asking for the NAA from a Marina Owner.

Those hours sound very high. Have they added an extra 0 by accident?

Rich, and others, There is a new thread entitled "CART Connection Charge", could you please continue your arguement there and not here?

What a surprise. Another NM diatribe against CaRT!!

Well done Rob!!

I see PL says on his FB page that the BBC were there an hour ago. I wonder what "story" he told them?

But if you read the document linked to earlier, it doesn't assure them of 100% occupancy. It just says that is what the aim is. And as has been said already, no rental business who wants to make a profit ever works on 100%, even a 75% occupancy figure is risky. The people at fault here are totally PLM because they used a very stupid and very inaccurate business model.

Or not, as the case may be!

http://www.ratsport.com/PBSCCatalog.asp?CatID=1594482 Several down the page. And lots on ebay: http://www.ebay.com/bhp/stainless-overflow-tank

Strikes me that any marina that builds it's business model on 100% mooring take-up, even with a rosy projection from BWB/CaRT, is either very naive, or very stupid. That is not the way to make a profit. Even 75% is probably being "hopeful".

Just remember that you should be putting a lump away each month for maintenance, such as the 2 or 3 yearly lift, clean and reblacking, plus the inevitable breakdowns!!

Are you sure about that? Navigation Authority (upstream of Gainsborough): Canal & River Trust The Kiln, Mather Lane, Newark, NG24 1FB T: 0303 040 4040 E: customer.services@canalrivertrust.org.uk www.canalrivertrust.org.uk

Corrected that for you!

Perhaps, Nigel, some of us are fed up with you using this Forum as the method for your diatribe against CaRT!!

Admit it Nigel, this is more grist to the mill for your continual diatribe against CaRT? And Dog House is right, you don't bother to answer many questions, because you know you can't answer them. Give it up!!

I'm still trying to work that one out!! Please explain?

As suspected, no amount of ‘read easy’ formatting can overcome failure to intelligently read and think. Thank you for being so rude! Well, the situation would doubtless have arrived at the point where the choice would have been to have the lady imprisoned, So now you want to make the person a liability on the State? Do you honestly think that would have done her any good? Taking the boat out of CaRT’s jurisdiction is all that is required to remove the situation from under their incompetence to deal with it. Perhaps an alternative waterways jurisdiction would possess more capability and/or relevant statutory powers. So you are going to transfer the non-payment problem onto someone else? Who is that going to be? No business is going to take on a situation that they know they aren't going to get paid for. Your responses to this thread are becoming more and more disjointed, and more to support your personal annamosity against CaRT.

1/ What good does that do? We already know in the "Maggie" case that she was making no response or recognition that there was a problem, and would accept no help. Going down this line prolongs the situation and potentially makes it worse. 2/ But she was unresponsive to ANYTHING, as has been said many times. Where are they going to tow the boat too? If you take it to a boatyard don't you think that they are going to want payment for storage, etc? Who is going to pay that? "Maggie" wouldn't pay her licence fee, so is she going to pay a boatyard? And to repeat the point, "Maggie" would not accept the position she was in, would not accept any help, so what is an Authority supposed to do? Only if the person approaches any Statute Authority can they do something. They cannot start the process.

But what are CaRT supposed to do? As has already been stated this person was totally refusing to accept help from any body, be they health, social services or even legal professionals. The process that CaRT has been through took at least 15 months to do, and even before that time they would have been writing to her. Mentally ill or not she buried her head in the sand. We've just gone through a similar thing with a friend of ours. She stopped paying her mortgage, refused to look at any letters the Building Society sent to her, refused to accept that they would take her to Court, refused to go to Court when the Hearing was undertaken, refused to talk to a Debt Councillor at any stage, and the first we knew was when my wife and friend went to feed her cats whilst she was away and were disturbed by the Baliff who'd come to change the locks. This case had been going on for over 18 months, but our friend had not ever mentioned it to us, her Doctor, or her Social Worker. Now she is a 62 year old woman living in a Refuge with no furniture and very little chance of being rehomed because of the "Bedroom Tax"

About 30 years ago I did just that at Holt Lock in a hire boat from the predecesors of Viking Afloat at Worcester. The next day they brought 2 of their boats down from Stourport and went straight over the weir instead. It wasn't that difficult, but the "fun" job was stemming the flow to get back into Diglis Canal lock!!