mayalld

Indeed so. Of course, "sound business and commercial practice" could just see CRT deciding that they don't want that additional reservoir capacity, and putting in the stop planks. That is how business works. You may think that what you have to sell is worth money, but unless somebody wants to buy it, it isn't worth a penny. Equally, you may feel that what CRT is selling (access to the network) isn't worth what they charge for it. However, that just means that you don't want to buy what they are selling, and you can exercise your option not to buy it. Of course, if you do that, in go the planks. Perhaps you should go to the pub tonight, and demand to be paid for testing their beer, rather than paying them for it. Make sure you get a taxi home, and charge the driver for your services as a companion.

Oddly enough, it looks like they have completely deleted the stoppage notice now. I can see the 2016 and 2017 notices, but not this year's Are they perhaps deleting the evidence that they said they would effect a permanent repair eventually?

I notice that the promised update on the stoppage notice didn't happen. Do they really not understand that if you say you will update on a particular day, you should update on that day (even if you only say, we are still working on it and will update in 2 days

I rather suspect that a system that rewards non-compliant CCers would could as a shot in the foot!

And do you feel that this means that your share of maintenance should be less?

Indeed they do, and everybody pays towards that. Except you seem to feel that your share of the ANNUAL cost is less than others, because you are in a marina for 6 months.

What DonCorleone, Higgs and co habitually ignore is that no matter how hard they argue that this charge by CRT or that charge by CRT is wrong, and we shouldn't pay it, in the final analysis, CRT can't just say "fair enough" if half their boater income vanishes. All that would happen is that they would increase the licence fee to get that income back. The impact on boaters overall would be nil. The impact on individual boaters might not be nil.

According to CRT, boats in such marinas are not entitled to short term licences.

Basically, a temporary repair involves fixing the immediate canal bed with clay. It is a sticking plaster. A permanent repair recognises that the clay is failing because it isn't supported from below. Some of the material (that isn't itself) waterproof that supports the waterproof clay layer has been washed away, and that is letting the clay fail. How you fix it is to replace the underlying rubble and smaller stone etc, by digging a long way into the embankment, and adding new stone (there is something of a science around interlocking stone by using appropriate sizes), then relining. That is VERY expensive (pretty much as expensive as fixing a breach). It may be possible to dig out less spoil, and stabilise the embankment by pressure grouting (basically pumping in a cement slurry that will fill all the voids and cavities deep within the embankment). Whichever way, its a big, protracted, job, and a job that you don't want to be doing when loads of people want to go boating

I read all of it. They will plan a permanent solution to be carried out at "a later date". This winter, they will say "It's OK for now, we will look to do it next winter". Next Summer it will leak again, and they will make a temporary repair, and next winter they won't do the permanent repair, because the temporary repair is holding. This will continue until it breaches (because they are patching an increasingly destabilised embankment), and the plans that they have for a permanent repair will be a waste of effort, because they will need a new plan. This is the THIRD year running that they have had to put stop planks in there, and the third year running that they have done running repairs; 2016: https://canalrivertrust.org.uk/notice/8033/macclesfield-canal-between-bridges-26-and-27 2017: https://canalrivertrust.org.uk/notice/11063/macclesfield-canal-between-bridges-26-and-27

What is a considerable worry is that as the water is exiting at one side and emerging at the other, it is scouring under the invert, and this brings a huge risk of a breach.

They do come round. Back in the day when I had no TV, and was feeling bloody minded, I ignored all the letters that I had no duty to respond to. In due course, they turned up, and I declined to let them in. "If you don't let us in, we will get a warrant" "OK, that's fine" "Do you use a TV" "Goodbye, see you when you get the warrant" They never returned.

It's a catch-all. The person who uses a TV isn't necessarily the one who is using it. So, if they come in and catch me watching a TV without a licence, I can't get off by saying "Ah, but I didn't install it" Likewise, if the come round and get evidence that the TV was set up for use, but nobody was actually using it, they can get somebody on the installing front.

Those are NOT expensive inverters! Expensive inverters are 3kVA and come in at over £2,000 As these are considerably cheaper than many 12 volt fridges, they look like a snip. The one thing to look at is what is the instantaneous startup power on the fridge. This will be MUCH more than the running power and you need to ensure that the inverter will cope with that short term surge.

A large number of boaters use their boats for only 6 months of the year. For the other 6 months, only (say) 10% of boats actually use the canals. The vast majority of boaters, whether CCers, moored on-line or in an NAA marina pay a licence all year round. This reflects the fact that the licence fee simply distributes the annual contribution that all boaters make to the running of the canals amongst boaters. The position of marinas with no NAA is an anomaly, which enables a small number of boaters to financially benefit, which can only have one of two effects; 1) The shortfall is reflected in a slightly higher licence fee for all. 2) CRT have less money to spend on fixing things (or to waste on rebranding if you will) So, let us consider a brave new world where nobody needs a licence in a marina. That's going to mean lots of people saving money isn't it? Well, clearly it isn't, because CRT will need to make up that shortfall, which they will do by increasing the licence fee to compensate for the hordes now getting 6 month licences. Of course, the CCers and on-line moorers will still need to buy a 12 month licence, so they will be paying lots more, and I guess that even after the fee rise, a 6 month licence for a marina dweller will be slightly less than a 12 month licence is now. So, there you have it, I could benefit (a little bit) from this, whilst others would lose (a lot). On the whole, I think that I prefer the current system as it's more equitable. Each of us wants CRT to continue to maintain the canal even when we aren't using it, so paying all year round seems fair to me.