Jump to content

Steilsteven

Member
  • Posts

    1265
  • Joined

  • Last visited

  • Days Won

    1

Steilsteven last won the day on August 31 2011

Steilsteven had the most liked content!

2 Followers

Profile Information

  • Gender
    Male
  • Location
    Aat and Abaat

Previous Fields

  • Occupation
    Retired
  • Boat Name
    Petra
  • Boat Location
    South of England

Recent Profile Visitors

6141 profile views

Steilsteven's Achievements

167

Reputation

  1. Shows how long it is since I stopped by there. Still, some of us like to eat out at restaurants so no reason not to mention it that I can see. Keith
  2. The licence allows a person to place a vessel on the water, the person pays a fee for this privilege, the fee isn't rent for space it is merely permission for the person to place a vessel on the water and is to provide funds for the navigation authority. In the, admittedly unlikely, event that every boat measured 18 feet in length then every boat owner would pay the same amount and everyone would say that was fair. If someone decided to have their 18 foot boat stretched to 19 feet would it be fair to charge them more and if so why? Location is irrelevant as I have already pointed out. If an obese person joins a golf club should their membership fee be greater than an under weight person? You're mistaken if you think I ever go away ''with a flea in my ear'' over this subject btw. Keith
  3. I wasn't even aware that it was open when I passed through there yesterday so I can't imagine how it would catch anyone out. Keith
  4. The 25% discount for boats on disconnected waterways makes a mockery of the size based licensing system. On the one hand a discount is given due to not being able to access the main network, on the other hand a boat that is unable to access a vast chunk of the main network due to it's size is charged more. We are also told that the fee is charged merely for keeping the boat on the water and doesn't guarantee the ability to travel. Keith
  5. I'm surprised that no-one has mentioned The Great Western Arms at Aynho. I used to always make a point of adding it into the schedule when boating the Oxford. Keith
  6. There are enough ''undesirables'' in Reading already and some of them are known to us boaters who have had items stolen in the past. Keith
  7. https://www.getreading.co.uk/news/reading-berkshire-news/arsonists-destroy-houseboat-attack-man-21422991
  8. Yes that's because they plan to widen all those little canals so that proper boats can use them. 😉 Keith
  9. On the Thames I've seen large cruisers taking up all the moorings leaving spaces that were just less than enough to fit another one between each of them. Had they moored closer I could have got Petra in with no bother. Luckily a friend was moored against the opposite bank and invited us to moor against him. Soon after we were safely moored another large cruiser turned up with the skipper talking on his phone and magically the other cruisers all moved up and let him in. Keith
  10. All I know is, if I installed a long water tank in someone's loft to replace a shorter one, even though the volume of water had been increased due to the extra length there would be no increase in pressure. But if I raised the existing tank there would be. Keith
  11. So have I and I'll fight anyone who says different! Keith
  12. Obviously no-one on here has encountered a boat on the K&A called Sulis whose owner runs his engine from about 10 pm until well into the early hours every night. He has been doing this for years since he was told to leave Thames and Kennet Marina and set up home at Tesco moorings. Keith
  13. Here it is: From Moore vs British Waterways 63. The second point I wish to make is that in considering whether Mr Moore's vessel is moored "without lawful authority" it is important to be clear about the perspective from which the question is asked. In some of the cases to which we were referred the question arose as between neighbouring riparian owners. In Original Hartlepool Collieries Company v Gibb (1877) 5 Ch D 713 a colliery company owned a wharf abutting the River Thames. It was 125 feet long. One of their vessels was 175 feet long, with the consequence that when it was brought alongside the wharf to unload its cargo it overlapped Mr Gibb's adjoining wharf. In order to prevent the overlapping Mr Gibb moored large wooden obstructions to his own wharf which prevented the colliery company's vessel from coming alongside their wharf. Sir George Jessel MR granted an injunction to prevent that obstruction. He held that as a riparian owner the colliery company had a right to access their wharf from the river. That right had to be exercised reasonably, but it was not necessarily unreasonable to access the wharf with a vessel that was longer than the wharf itself. He continued: "In ascertaining, however, the reasonableness of the acts of the Plaintiffs, one consideration must not be overlooked. Besides a reasonable right of access, they have a reasonable right of stopping, as well as of going and returning in the use of the highway. But what is a reasonable right of stopping? That must depend upon circumstances. You cannot lay down à priori what is reasonable. You must know all the circumstances. It would be clearly reasonable, for instance, if a wheel came off an omnibus in the middle of a highway, for a blacksmith to be sent for to put the wheel on the omnibus if that were the easiest mode of moving it out of the way, and the omnibus might lawfully stop there until the wheel was put on in order to take it out of the way, if that were the best mode of taking it out of the way and a reasonable and usual mode. Nobody would deny that if the blacksmith chose to carry on his trade of repairing omnibuses immediately opposite his own house, and for that purpose, not keeping any one omnibus more than a reasonable time for his work, he kept omnibuses opposite his house or shop, or smithy-door for that purpose, that would be an obstruction of the highway, and would be a nuisance. You must look at the circumstances. So, again, it is perfectly reasonable that A. shall put his carriage before his house door, even although it may overlap his neighbour's door. For instance, take the houses which have been divided—houses in Portland Place —that is a familiar instance to me, and I dare say to most of us—where two doors immediately adjoin. It is impossible to draw up a carriage to the one without overlapping the other. There is no doubt that it is quite a reasonable thing to stop a carriage there for the purpose of taking up and setting down, or even for the purpose of waiting there a reasonable time." Keith
  14. I bought a pair for this very purpose and things were fine until one day I called my wife ( who was inside alone ) and a stranger's voice said ''hello who is that?'' I found out later that it was Bonny, the lady who operates African Queen on the Thames with her husband Andy. That was years ago and the walkie-talkies have remained in the draw ever since. 😁 Keith
×
×
  • 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.