Freetochat

But that is you covering risks. There are far to many people who take uneccessary risks that put themselves and others at risk. Just look at the number of whingers who are trying to get the tax payer to pick up their flood damage costs because they didn't insure themselves. Even some of the DIY revelations concerning repairs and building on this forum shows the need for inspections where it involves gas etc. Sensible precautions and testing can only be a good thing!

I'm afraid this is 'general behaviour' and is not special to the waterways. I have heard similar comments in a French village, where UK holiday makers are not liked but UK residents are welcomed. It is fairly obvious that many visitors do not have sufficient respect for what they are joining and what they are leaving behind, but this financial drive to increase holiday use of the system will only increase the problems.

As with all preventitive regulations, how can you possibly record it's effect. You can record injuries before and after, but this means nothing as the variables are too great. The same is often said of the MOT for cars. Testing requires a boat to be of a standard at a certain point and this surely keeps boats maintained and as the scheme evolves so it will improve to cover the main safety aspects. As to the actual test, there will always be some variation between examiners but they should always be strivving for a similar benchmark.

I agree with what has already been said, but would add that if it were me, I would be copying the letter of claim against the warranty to the builder just in case there were any partnership agreements in place. Secondly, if no written agreement is forthcoming to your claim photograph all faults and if the cost of correcting the problems is sufficiently high get a surveyor to carry out an inspection of your problems and prepare a report. Don't get involved in lengthy discussions, as recollections will always differ, and although frustrating, keep cool, businesslike and keep in mind the outcome that you want to achieve and don't waiver. Black and white is easily evidenced, grey is not.

I think carriage of freight by water is a romantic idea for the enthusiasts, but as has already been mentioned, you can't get beyond the original reason for the demise of canal freight and that is better efficiency on road or secondly rail. Rail cannot expand much more, without major investment in infrastructure, and in any case, passenger movements have the priority. In my view, it is more likely that we will see a reduction in goods transport. Currently, everything is being blamed on climate change, whether it is wet weather or the need for more taxation or higher energy or water bills. I believe that we are heading for extreme penalty taxation to reduce goods movement around the globe. Yes it will be done in the name of climate change, but is more likely to involve some national protectionism. Current political thinking will see more localised production.

Perhaps he still expects the horse and cart to do the pail closet run during the night?

I accept your points entirely. You are doing the right thing, and so should the others. Again good points, and I agree it is the responsibility ultimately of BW to ensure all boats are licensed. The unfortunate part often though is that the relevant regulations to enforce these things are so unworkable that it becomes a waste of time and money trying to do so.

Unfortunately it would appear that I am in the minority. I cannot understand why people consider what other people do is not their business. Are we saying that it is not our business when the 'little old lady' gets her handbag snatched, or the driver that hits a parked car in front of you is to be ignored. Surely it is looking after each other. That's how communities use to be a safer place to live. As to licences, I would not go checking to see if boats had them, but I wouldn't hesitate to offer information against those avoiding their responsibilities. The system is owned by 'the people', but the maintainence has to be funded by those using the system. Why should this be for free to some who choose not to pay. This is the same as those who make false insurance claims, or shop lift. They are not victimless crimes, because we all pay in the end. Except of course those that rip off the system!

Quality ply of all types is difficult to obtain at the moment, my supplier tells me that China is sucking much of the supplies.

Given this difficulty, is the standard advice to get the shell gritblasted and painted before fitout?

What would the cost be to grit blast ready for painting? If size matter, 57 ft.

This just fits in with the objective of BW, and that is to use the water network for leisure purposes and not for residential or work boats. Leisure and holiday boats are a greater source of income in return for little work. Perhaps when a change of boss at BW comes about, there will be a different vision or direction.

If it was my choice, I would avoid the ebay stoves based solely on only having a returns policy of 30 days. This seems limited given the product, installation time etc. From your comment, money has to be considered, but buy quality and spend a little more to get something that you can use in safety.

But wouldn't the carpets and curtains get wet?

The current flooding situation has brought a question to mind. If caught in a flood situation, what is the best way to moor to ensure that the boat doesn't get left on the towpath or tipping off the bank when th level returns to normal?