David Mack

Not necessarily. I assume that the settlement does not include any admission of liability on their part. Which means that the who-was-right-and-who-was-wrong of the matter remains unresolved legally. Most probably their lawyers have advised them that settling now for a known sum, avoids the risk of potentially higher costs if they continue to court to defend their position, probably because even if they win, they will still incur significant non-recoverable legal costs as well as the staff time involved, so better to cut their losses now. It also means that while you get a payout, you don't get the satisfaction of a court finding them wrong and you right.

No. But as you will only do it once, you might as well do a decent job. When a boat is at this stage, the amount of work to fitout can look a bit daunting, and you aren't looking for extra jobs, but just putting another coat of paint on is pretty straightforward and won't take that long. I would be minded to go for three coats - one primer from the builder, then two topcoats.

It's 32 years old! How much paperwork do you have from anything that age? Admittedly a single-owner boat is more likely to have its original paperwork than one that has changed hands multiple times, but not everyone is meticulous about filing stuff like that. Clean dry engine bay with only light rusting is a rarity. Most are much worse than this. The waterline rust doesn't look bad as far as I can see from the photos - fairly typical for a boat which hasn't been blacked for a while - presumably the current owner hasn't blacked it during his 2 years ownership. You should plan to black the boat within the next 12 months or so - better done in the summer unless you have access to indoor facilities.

Check your policy, but typically boat insurance does not cover you when the boat is under the control of boatyard staff and other paid professionals. I imagine the latter would include crane and transport operators.

You can't expect to wield supreme power just 'cause some watery tart threw a sword at you!

Nothing in the photographs in the ad to suggest that any part of this boat dates back to 1949, or incorporates part of any former working boat.

Depends whether his wish to find his boat outweighs his dislike of forums!

I think you are being oversensitive here. If the stretch was done over 20 years ago, any teething problems will have come to light years ago and been dealt with. The risk is no higher than buying a 20 year old boat. And plenty of those come with no paperwork either!

Perhaps @Steve Manc could suggest on Facebook that Paul Savage also posts here - he may not be aware of this forum and its reach.

You really are scraping the barrel! The guidelines were issued on 18 August - two weeks ago today. IWA have to allow a reasonable period for the guidelines to become known to the boating community, for people to respond with comments and suggestions, time for the working group to review the comments received, redraft the document as they think appropriate, then to get review and sign-off from the sponsoring organisations. That isn't going to happen in two weeks in August containing a bank holiday! And if they did turn round an update in that timescale I can see folk on here complaining that the process has been rushed and the opportunity for a thorough update had been squandered!

And an updated thread, if you want to read 17 pages of posts. Que Sera Sera is still missing as far as I am aware.

So did everyone else! Isn't this the same location we had another missing boat thread about a few years ago? As I recall the boat had been left unattended for months and the owner had no idea when it actually disappeared. I don't think there was any outcome posted to the forum.

You keep going on about Ian as if he is the sole person responsible for these guidelines. He is not. He is one member of a working group that came up with the document, working under the banner of two established boating organisations. Ian has simply notified the forum about the guidelines, and responded to subsequent questions. If you feel there are aspects of the process IWA and CA have gone through which concern you, why not contact the organisations directly and put your points to them?

So what, in your opinion, is the right way to go about bringing in new regulations, and in particular, how would you see boaters being involved in that process? I'm not here to defend IanD, I don't agree with everything he has said, but if there is to be any boater input it surely needs to be led and coordinated by organisations which represent boaters - lone voices chuntering away on the internet will have zero influence (unless you are going to engage on the scale of someone like Will Prowse). Such organisations inevitably rely on individuals who put themselves forward to be part of that effort. You and I could both have been part of this activity, as could any other interested forum member, or the thousands of other boaters out there, but as we haven't volunteered, it falls to those who have. So rather than sniping at individuals, may I suggest you read the document again with an open mind, set out your comments, positive and/or negative, and submit them to IWA/CA, so that they can be taken into account, along with all the other comments received, in the next iteration of the document.

Do make sure the pump discharges well above canal water level. If you just have a bilge pump with a hose on the outlet which you chuck over the side when pumping, do not let the end of the hose go below the canal water level. If you do, when the pump stops you will have a perfect syphon which will run water from the canal into the bilge indefinitely.

So we boaters should just sit back and accept whatever the powers that be throw at us, without having any input?? That seems to be what you are advocating. You obviously have no idea how anything from ISO standards to industry guidance documents to local/national/supranational government policy documents are actually developed. I have had a little professional involvement in these areas, and have worked alongside colleagues who have been much more involved. Technical standards and guidance are typically prepared by committees of people who are knowledgeable in the areas concerned, from industry businesses, academia and research organisations, with their time on committee duties often paid for by their employers. The standards organisation provides administrative support and may also commission research into specific areas from universities, trade organisations and consultants. As leisure boaters we have no employers to sponsor our input to any rules which may affect us, which is why it is down to volunteers. You really are trying to make something out of nothing!! Why should Ian's delivery mileage and return to the builder count any less as actual boating than boat movement for any other reason? We all boat for a variety of reasons - some working long hours to a timetable to get to a specific place by a specific time, whether that be to attend a rally or event, get beyond a work location before a stoppage starts, taking the boat to a boatyard where it is booked in for repair/maintenance/alteration, complete a waterway ring within their leave from work or the duration of their boat hire etc., while others may bimble for an hour or two a day, with no plan and no particular destination in mind. These are all equally valid boating styles and you can't discount one just because it suits your particular agenda.

Do you have any data on how much boating boat owners actually do? Liveaboards may spend 365 days a year on board, but many are noted for how little actual boat movement they really do. Many marinas and other moorings are filled with boats that never move from one month (or year) to the next. How much boating to their owners do? Hire boaters do more? How many folk hire boats for more than three weeks over a single year? Yes there are boaters who do much more, but considering the canal boating world as a whole, there is no way that 75 days boating in 3 years can be described as "very little".

Yes. Blacking done properly takes a full week, including allowing it to cure before reimmersion. That's why you would have to arrange this with the boatyard in advance of the survey.

I believe Ellie's stock came from the late Pete Dufficy of Brenmarl Engineering. Presumably he had patterns for the castings. Maybe worth finding out if they still exist and are available. @dave moore may be able to help. Are you thinking of offering complete stoves?

If you have a home mooring the law doesn't come into it. The 1995 Act lays down vaguely worded (and much argued over) requirements for CCer movement, but there are no corresponding legal obligations on home moorers. CRT have put into their licence terms and conditions, similar requirements for both CCers and home moorers away from their home mooring. The bar room lawyers will proclaim that the Ts and Cs are legally unenforceable for home moorers. But most HM boaters just broadly comply - the rules aren't onerous, CRT enforcement is flexible (if you are not a repeat offender), especially if you let them know of any problems which might impact your ability to move the boat.

It doesn't look too bad in the couple of exterior photos, although on looking again it is rusty around the water line. If you do have an out of water survey, try to agree with the yard/dock where the survey happens to get the hull blacked while it is out of the water - will save you a bit of cost overall, but of course does require a swift decision that you are going to buy.