Captain Pegg

Yes, that's density. I'm sure that's needed for some purpose for shipping any given cargo but it isn't an absolute property of the vessel. Weight of cargo on a ship (and indeed the weight of the ship itself) also varies with geography and time. JP

Volume not weight, both Alan and BruceinSanity have made that point. Generally it's not just the payload either it's the volume of the whole ship (hence it's gross rather than net). JP

Is it back pumped? Or extracted for some other purpose? JP

Are you sure? I just looked at the Wey & Arun Canal Trust site for confirmation and they show Loxwood and Brewhurst locks with the same direction of fall. I thought the canal was lowered under the road bridge by replacing most - but not all - of the fall of the original Brewhurst lock at the new Loxwood lock. I bet @mark99 will know for sure. JP

Not a sump pound, just 6' lower than it originally was. JP

It's not really any different to a fully artificial channel. What happens to the excess water at Warwick and Wolverton? It doesn't go uphill. JP

It would have been a sump pound from 1841 when the Walsall Junction Canal opened until 1844 when the Tame Valley Canal opened. Likewise the pound at Digbeth between the bottom of Ashted locks and the bottom of Camp Hill locks was a sump pound for 45 years between 1799 and 1844. And how about the Severn between Upper Lode and Gloucester? JP

Anyway, curly chips. Surely they are frozen things out of a packet that are meant to appeal to kids. Doesn't sound hopeful to me. JP

I saw your post and would have put a fiver on you mentioning Compton before I read it. I have had under cooked chips from BCLM too and the queuing can be a bit much. Even on a good day they may not be better than I used to get from Greystones Fish Bar just off the Ecclesall Road in Sheffield c1991/92. Not easily accessible from the canal though. The time travel might prove to be difficult too. JP

With a short boat there is no need to make contact with the gates and I find it best to keep clear of them. Sticking a boat in the middle of a Worcs & Bham lock is no problem whatsoever but do it in a T&M or Staffs & Worcs lock when going uphill and you might just get shunted into the top gate at a rate of knots. I once tried to stop that happening by riding the gate at Colwich but the front fender got stuck underneath a timber baulk on the cill. Not helped by being low in the water and being able to snag things that most boats stems would oversail. So I definitely agree with stick it in the middle and restrain it with a line round a bollard. I think the difference in people's practice can be explained in part by the particular characteristics of the locks they are used to operating. JP

I think it's good practice to have some means of controlling an unattended boat in a lock in any case but Arthur's boat is relatively short. There are even more reasons to take a line ashore when you have a short boat no matter what size of lock or whether you are sharing. JP

OK. So the OP could withdraw more than he proposes tax free providing his scheme allows such and it isn't more than 25% of the overall pot. So my calculation only holds if he wants any future income to be normally taxed. Indeed

I'm not clear as to whether you are disagreeing with me or adding to my comment. However, I don't believe you can draw out 25% of your total fund tax free while leaving the remainder in the fund. You only get 25% tax free of the amount you withdraw at the time. And that isn't once in a lifetime since you can make more than one drawdown with 25% of the drawdown tax free. That means you can only have the full 25% of your total fund tax free in one go if you withdraw the entire fund as a lump sum (if you have a scheme that allows such) or buy an annuity with the remainder. Company pensions have an equivalent option. JP

I think if your only income in a tax year is pension drawdown then £16,667 could be extracted tax free as of 6th April. £4,167 will be classed as the 25% tax free lump sum and the remainder will be classed as income and bring you to the personal allowance of £12,500. JP

So is it a pretty mooring in a town, or a mooring in a pretty town? Maybe it's a pretty mooring in a pretty town. Considering Nuneaton's neighbours are Atherstone and Bedworth maybe it wasn't such a duff call. Although there is a cluster of nice buildings close to the town moorings in Atherstone. How about Vines Park, Droitwich. That's a pretty mooring very close to a town centre. Plenty enough to see to kill a lunchtime. JP

It makes total sense. If CRT believe them not to be fit for purpose because they don’t comply with the specification then they can’t use them. To do so would be to accept they are fit for purpose. They could fit some temporary non-heritage ones while they resolve the issue but then you will have to pay for that so they have chosen not to because they know that will make you angry. JP

True, but 7' is the generally published dimension of narrow locks so perhaps you better address that to CRT. Off the top of my head I can't think of a BCN lock that is tight for width. They are all also fine for the published length of 70' but if you want to take an ex-GU boat on the BCN which is both longer and wider than the published dimensions then it will be necessary to use the extra inches above the 7' width - and the 7' 0.5" of the boat or whatever it is - to be able to transit through some locks. JP

I wondered where that was too because I didn't think I'd ever heard of it. I avoid Redditch. JP

I don't know about that, Richard. I like to see a shiny purple boat. They always make me smile. JP

Did they? Must admit I thought they bought a boat that was different from their criteria in one or two key ways. Didn't they also acknowledge the boat kind of 'found them' in the end?

Yep. It's Ivan&alice all over again. And guess what happened there? Still, he was a terribly nice chap. The OP would do well to research that episode. You won't succeed trying to buy a boat like this. JP