Jump to content
Strawberry Orange Banana Lime Leaf Slate Sky Blueberry Grape Watermelon Chocolate Marble
Strawberry Orange Banana Lime Leaf Slate Sky Blueberry Grape Watermelon Chocolate Marble

tats

Member
  • Content Count

    21
  • Joined

  • Last visited

Community Reputation

1 Neutral

Profile Information

  • Gender
    Male

Recent Profile Visitors

634 profile views
  1. Tree monkey. Of course that is not what want. You know this. I realize it is a massive problem for CRT. The least they can do is get somewhere pronto when they have been alerted......BUT they are not. That is the problem. It should be a top priority. They should be geared up better. Fast action teams to quickly no fuss sort it......when it really is dangerous. Of course, all the trees. But that is the nature of their business, not just the water channel. Trees are a big part of it. To just have a policy of not taking responsibility and then waiting for em to fall down and just clear 'em. Not good enough. I don't expect perfection. I'm reasonable and pragmatic. But they should at least do what they can, the obvious ones......but they are going too far shirking even these. Could it be......could it be....wait for it......dare I say it.......that something which should cost (if set up right) £100 is costing £1,000? Could that be the problem? Maybe the quality and cost of all works should be objectively checked and audited. But this is not my place. I shouldn't have to be the one to suggest this. It's not my job. All I can say is that summat ain't right to dodge a knowingly dangerous tree which can kill.
  2. Wellllllllll........let's just have a beer now and think about tomorrow tomorrow. It's just another one of them things. There's olas summat
  3. Tree monkey. I informed them. They agreed it was dangerous. It subsequently dropped a branch weighing tons into the canal. So CRT allowed their customers to be put in grave danger. They should either have done it of closed the canal.
  4. Tree monkey, CRT can ask for permission. It's not a problem. This whole business s cheap and shabby. Can they run a canal safely or can't they? 'It's not my job it's their job. No t's their job not my job; no it isn't it's their job; no it isn't.........'. Unprofessional. Dangerous. Over the water. We'll come and sort it. Next Wednesday ok? That is what i would be if I was CRT. Things like this need doing quickly and land owners are not geared up for that. But f their is a dispute, should then CRT say that no boats should pass the tree until it is sorted because it s dangerous? If not then they are putting their customers' lives at risk. They should either sort it one way or another or shut the canal at that point. It fell into the canal halfway across, the branch weighed tons. So they should have shut the canal until the tree was made safe. Well that is not practical. CRT are better placed to sort it swiftly, and they take mooring money for it. I can't say anymore. It is black and white, but I still do not know for certain who's responsibility is it?
  5. Mark, why not contact CRT. CRT are geared up for it, or should be?. CRT take mooring money.....for what? It was over the canal, over their water. They have a responsibility to canal customers' safety. CRT should be professional and take care of it. I would if I was them. Safety comes first. I would want to take care of it. It would be my pride to get it sorted simple and swift. No this or that. It's just not good enough by a long chalk.
  6. There is an ash tree, an old and massive thing right beside my private mooring and only a foot from the canal water, and opposite the towpath. I have always been concerned, especially as I could see that big branches had broken off in years before my time there. I hangs not just over my boat, but also the canal. It's a mighty big old thing with high branches weighing tons and tons. Serious stuff of the first order, obvious to anyone. In fact it is chilling. I try to move the boat in gale season. Anyway, a couple of years ago a branch came down. Massive. Missed my boat as it came from the other side of the tree's canopy, and missed my mate's boat by 6 inches and blocked the canal, and we cleared it. I decided to try and get it sorted. I saw two tree surgeons engaged on CRT work. They told me to inform CRT and to be sure to tell them that it is dangerous, then the work will be done quickly. So I rang CRT and told them. They took a note of my call to pass it on to the appropriate department. The appropriate department got back to me saying it had been looked at and needed doing and that they would contact the landowner for permission to do the work, and that everything was in process. The next I heard was from another department, the moorings department, and they said that it wasn't down to CRT and I would have to ask the landowner to do the work. I said that it was dangerous for me and also boaters travelling by as it hung well over half way over the water. To that they said that if I insisted than they would make moves to shut down the whole mooring. So I just left it and wondered how else I could do something. CRT just washed their hands of it and threatened me away. A year later a massive branch fell and hit my mooring and smashed a hole in my boat and broke windows and blocked the canal, which we cleared. So I ask you, is CRT a professional responsible organization, and remember they take a mooring fee of hundreds to moor against private land, and when they have already charged a licence fee for the boat to be on the water. As an aside, I asked CRT about why they charge a mooring fee when I've already paid to be on the water, and was told that it was like having a car where you have your MOT and insurance and road tax, but then if you want to park you have to pay a car parking fee. I replied that I would if I was on a fee-charging car park, but not if I parked on the road because I'd already paid to be on the public highway. The reply was to forget that car analogy, and would I like the number of another department who might be able to answer. If they would sort dangerous trees I wouldn't mind paying a mooring fee to them, but they don't do anything for the money. It is wrong and unprofessional. Thing is, ok, CRT is relatively new and finding their feet, that's fair enough, BUT it isn't good enough where damage and danger to life is concerned. That tree was dangerous. I told them. They couldn't sort it. Not good enough, no where near. That worries me. Do they know what they are doing? Do they know how to know if work being done is up to scratch and to cost? Do they know the business they are in? Who are they, what is their qualification and experience? I mean, if you can't get that right, it makes you think. I don't have confidence in them. You pay a bill and then they ask you again, and then you tell them you've pad and they say, 'Oh, yes, I can see that now'. And not the first time, in fact it is actually expected. Believe me, I am not a grumbler. I'm too much the opposite for my own good. It takes a lot for me to speak out. It's shocking. Really bad. Needs to change. There is something wrong in the system. Danger should be taken seriously and taken care of...and it wasn't. THAT IS NOT GOOD, NOT GOOD AT ALL.
  7. Who's responsibility is the safe maintenance of trees with foliage overhanging the canal?
  8. I live my life on the basis of knowing right from wrong. I just don't like being involved with what feels like a cheat; I don't do it and so I expect the same. This has a great affect on me because my principles matter. If CRT want the mooring money from me then simply put the cost onto the licence I pay to be on the water, at least be honest about it. The fact that they try to fiddle the money this way must mean that if it was all on the licence then it would be obviously overpriced and people would start thinking in different ways and people would leave the canal. So much in life is done this sneaky way and has to be forced to stand by unreasonable stern harsh measures because there isn't a reasonable arguement. For me, the future of the canal is not good. It will become too gentrified and 'sterile'. The life blood will move away to new pastures, then the others will lose interest. I believe that there is a certain limit to how much can be charged, and this is dependent on what ordinary people can afford and feel is reasonable. Also, the authority overseeing its running should be human. Personally, I love boating, but I don't need it and can have a better time elsewhere if I want. It just doesn't sit comfortably with me, pricewise and the sneakiness of it. It makes me think. I'm falling out of love. CRT is not the person I thought she was. Not my type of person. Better to just move on. Leave it as friends and move on.
  9. Thank you for your comments. It still seems unjustified as to how they can charge. I suppose this is an old chestnut, and I have a very strong case, and it involves a lot of money owed back, and so it would be expensive to pursue. Clearly it is wrong. All I can say is that I will be moving on because I do not want to be involved with such an organisation. I was misled. Thought they were ok. Another one of those. I'm gonna move on. It's only a bit of watter...............silly money. I suppose it could be used to introduce people without imagination but with money to develop an imagination, perhaps, but I already have one, and I don't need this fleecing and frankly it is not anything I want to belong to. So lets all leave and so all they will be able to sell is a load of stiffs to a load of stiffs. They are using us and charging us to use us. Don't need this at all. What an age to be living in, eh. All the best, folks. Doug x
  10. I understand that there is the CRT licence for a boat to have the run of their waterways, for a boat to be on the water. Fine, I get that. But then there is a mooring licence, which if the mooring was a CRT mooring then fair enough, I get that because the boat is using their mooring. But what if the mooring is not CRT owned, if it is privately owned, land at the other side from the towpath? Does the CRT still ask for a mooring fee even though the boat owner is not using a CRT mooring? If so, how can such a fee be justified when the boat owner has paid to be on the water? If there is such a mooring fee to be paid, then does this fee entitle the boat owner to particular service for the fee? I am very puzzled. It just doesn't make sense to me.
  11. It is not a pleasant idea that this is happening.
  12. This is a great thread, some superb jobs. I've tried a few jobs. I had a spell as a tv cameraman, roving. I remember very clearly thinking that it would all be very nice if it wasn't for the work load and, alas, not all, but enough, for the people I had to work/live with. I made up my mind to travel about like that but without the work and with someone who i wanted to be with. I started with a caravan, and now want to try a boat. But it did show me how life can be very enjoyable, and i'm thankful for that.
  13. I agree with that sex drive dimminishes with age, but not too much. This is exactly what I am on about. As I've got older I realised that for me to 'stay younger' it had to be hotter. Now I HAVE to totally have the hots for a woman, then it is just like I was young again. To be perfectly honest, we're all grown up, I thought at one time that i had developed a problem. The solution was to choose the right women and concentrate a lot lot more on foreplay and that sort of thing rather than intercourse. Well, it worked for me. I had to up my game. I mean, I had to lose weight that had crept on and eat so that it didn't return. I had to pay a lot more attention to self grooming......who wants nostril hairs, etc. And cloths that fit and were generally clean, and a very very clean house. So maybe it dimminishes not so much due to the aging process, but us taking our eye off the ball. It was a bit difficult at first to get back into the swing (I don't) because of confidence being low, but that all comes back as well in time, and then it is all there nice and easy and happy. As to what i think about canal users......I like them a lot. I think they are sound. Exactly.
  14. I agree. Trouble is that the novelty wears back on again in a couple of days!
  15. It was mentioned on the teapots code thread. I am interested in the subject of orgy. I mean, you can't ignore where you stand on the subject......it is a consideration, I suppose I am asking what do other people think about the idea of an orgy.....how do they stand on the matter? In a way i wish it was for me. People who enjoy an orgy must be having a great time, a really great time. So, lonewolf, would you enjoy an orgy? blink once for yes or twice for no.
×
×
  • 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.