Jump to content

Tam & Di

Member
  • Posts

    3,293
  • Joined

  • Last visited

  • Days Won

    4

Posts posted by Tam & Di

  1. 6 hours ago, MtB said:

    There is a regulation I CBA to cite right now that requires a boat to be "Suitable for the navigation", or some such term.

     

    Article 3 of the Canal Byelaws "As to Vessels to be used on Canals" reads "Fitness of Vessels: No person shall bring use or leave in any canal any vessel which is not in every respect fit for navigation on the canal or part thereof where it is intended to be used."

    I can imagine the argument that a boat too wide to use a canal with 7' locks might reasonably have a contract, say, to carry goods on a lock-free pound, but I don't think "I need a boat more than 62' to live on and family might visit" is a particularly strong argument against the obligation to engage in bona fide navigation.

     

    • Greenie 1
  2. 2 hours ago, MtB said:

     

    Use the search box to find the numerous threads on exactly this subject.

     In fact I believe the question was last asked just a few weeks ago. Even if you comply with all the safety and bureaucratic requirements it is still a risky thing to do if you hope to get your boat back in a similar condition to how  it is now - or at all, come to that, either because the occupant refuses to leave or because he has already sold it secretly to someone else.

  3. 2 hours ago, BoatinglifeupNorth said:

     

    Your going to sell up and live on this dream boat, can I ask your age and how much your prepared to spend on this dream boat? How much do think this dream boat will cost you with your quirky ideas?

     

    And how long do you think it would take to get such a vessel built and all its systems properly tested? Most of the options quoted are possible, but why would you have them? Boats cross the Channel without Cat B and C - it just takes careful choice of when. It's doubtlessly possible to design a boat with fully automatic controls that could run up and down the sytem with no-one on board if you really tried.

     

    People enjoy boats for any number of reasons - exploring canals, visiting pubs, widlife and bird watching - all perfectly reasonable. We had owners at our yard who visited their boat on the hard every weekend for years, and never had any realistic expectation of cruising. For some the dream of designing their perfect boat is their major hobby, and perhaps the OP gets more from this than ever he would if the project came to conclusion.

  4. 57 minutes ago, beerbeerbeerbeerbeer said:

    but I’m very much not a Southerner, it’s always felt like a different world to me down here,

    as if it’s someone else’s back yard 😃

    and with some owners having bits and pieces and their dog(s) etc on the bank it very much is effectively their back yard.

    • Greenie 1
  5. 10 hours ago, Ronaldo47 said:

    So the reference to three centuries of living afloat is arguably not entirely correct.

    The boating families lived on their boat because the boat was a working tool; they moved because that was the whole point of the work, not just in order to do the minimum they could get away with. Their 'travelling' was the real thing, but I'm sure the NBTA people don't seriously pay much mind to that - it's just part of the fable they use to get public sympathy with their self indulgent way of life.

    • Greenie 1
  6. 39 minutes ago, fanshaft said:

    Thus short boat 'Everton' (a more modern and better carrier) was converted into a tanker with an arrangement similar to the Claytons i.e. tight bulkheads each end of the hold and a centre bulkhead with a valve to allow for trimming when loading, and to discharge the forward area.  Again an on board diesel pump was very efficient, a payload at 56 tonnes excellent and a wheelhouse with wheel steering provided a degree of comfort for the crew.

    Not a tanker, but we fitted our 74' x 14' Trent barge Clinton, running grain from Tilbury to Weybridge, with water ballast for running light. Suitable pipework and stop cocks enabled it to be filled or emptied using a powerful pump driven off the main Gardner 5LW.

     

     

    Clinton.jpg

    • Greenie 3
  7. 22 hours ago, MtB said:

     

    Nope. But the initial drafts of the 1995 Act attempted to make it the case.

    Furious lobbying got the concession for CCing added at the last minute, IIRC. But you know this already. I type it out for other readers not necessarily aware.

    It never occurred to anyone back then that CMing would become a thing as a result.

     

    It did occur to me and Di 😃. We were petitioners against elements of the 1995 Act while it was at the discussion "Bill" stage. Arguments were made against a draft clause that made everyone have a home mooring, and the Lords committee accepted these. They told BW to come up with some alternative to the 'home mooring' clause. Duffy, the BW Solicitor, was so frightened that they might lose the whole Bill that he came up with the 'continuous cruising' idea more or less overnight. We pointed out to him that it didn't have anything to qualify or define 'continuous cruising', and Duffy said they would sort that out later - well, we know where that got him, don't we!  😧

    • Greenie 3
  8. 6 hours ago, LadyG said:

    When you pay someone, they give you a receipt, that's how business works.

    Records are kept for accounting purposes.

    Accounts are kept so tax is paid.

    The taxman uses that money to keep the economy running.

    When you pay someone in business you can ask for a receipt, certainly, and if appropriate these could be used to substantiate payments you've made in the personal accounts you present to HMRC. A 'statement of affairs' should show all the relevant transactions, but the figures shown there cannot be technically regarded as 'receipts' and used in the same way - they won't show any of the same detail.

     

    I don't think you'll get very far trying to convince HMRC that this company is acting dishonestly.

    • Greenie 1
  9. 1 hour ago, IanD said:

    <sigh> most reasonably people would say a lock is full when the water level inside is the same as the upper pound outside and you can open the gate -- which is of course what I meant... 😁

     

     I'd agree, though I do often talk of it 'making a level' which is effectively the same thing. That works in either direction, rather than having to use "empty" - on here it seems there are those who would query "empty" unless the lock had been physically pumped dry. 😁

    • Greenie 1
  10. 2 minutes ago, beerbeerbeerbeerbeer said:

    Watched it and thought 🤷‍♀️reasonable enough

    3 comparing live aboards to keeping the traditions of living like boating families of old, utter nonsense.

    That's what struck me too. I appreciate that it is aimed at the naive viewer, but they could at least have show some pictures of an actual working boat to give a better view of the life.

  11. 56 minutes ago, davidwheeler said:

    Well now, that is a lovely picture. A ketch rigged trow at the rear, then what looks to be a smack rigged trow, and another ketch, all being towed through the swing bridge. Is there by any chance a date on the back of the card?

     It's listed as about 1912.

×
×
  • 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.