another boat sunk

[Nut]

just seen this on farcebook  very sad

 

https://www.facebook.com/groups/NarrowboatOwnersGroup/?fref=nf

[Athy]

It must have happened overnight or, as suggested in the FB comments, the staff of Midland Swindlers would have come to its rescue.

[roland elsdon]

Interesting assumptions that staff at midland swindlers would have the knowledge or facilities to do anything. Whilst i am sure they are boaty people and  care, they are after all purveyors of boat equipment  and tied to their employers, not at liberty to do other things in working hours.

they have no salvage equipment available on site.

its a funny spot there i have had serious abuse from fishing persons there while waiting to go up the lock.

[Athy]

2 minutes ago, roland elsdon said:

Interesting assumptions that staff at midland swindlers would have the knowledge or facilities to do anything. Whilst i am sure they are boaty people and  care, they are after all purveyors of boat equipment  and tied to their employers, not at liberty to do other things in working hours.

 

Interesting assumption that the fact that they were at work would prevent them from helping in an emergency.

[roland elsdon]

No the real point i am making is that they are purveyors of boating equipment not a boatyard. Locking up the shop to help someone saucepan out a boat might not be seen as important to their managers. Swindlers is part of quite a large group (arleigh i think) not individual business establishments. So essentialy they are shop assistants. 

As i said im sure on a human level they would care but they were at work and its not their business.

[Ex Brummie]

Can't see where this was without signing away my life to farcebook.

[roland elsdon]

Staffs and worcester below midland swindlers penkridge branch

[Guest]

I saw an incident a few years ago where a hire boat was clearly heading for trouble in a lock. Lock in question was alongside a boat chandlers and boatyard, no names etc.
The guy from the boat yard did intervene, but as soon as we came along he asked us if we would assist them, which of course we did. He then explained that if they got too involved and something had gone seriously wrong, they could find themselves legally in the mire (modern Britain.) I  believe that he would have helped them had we not come along though.
I am not judging the guy either way, but I can see his point.

[Alan de Enfield]

30 minutes ago, catweasel said:

I saw an incident a few years ago where a hire boat was clearly heading for trouble in a lock. Lock in question was alongside a boat chandlers and boatyard, no names etc.
The guy from the boat yard did intervene, but as soon as we came along he asked us if we would assist them, which of course we did. He then explained that if they got too involved and something had gone seriously wrong, they could find themselves legally in the mire (modern Britain.) I  believe that he would have helped them had we not come along though.
I am not judging the guy either way, but I can see his point.

My wife used to use our Farm as a satellite to the local college to teach 'Equestrian Studies NVQs'. we both had to be 'vetted' and have CRB checks done because even tho' I wasn't directly involved - I was 'on the premises'

 

One of the instructions we both received was that if a 'child' (that is anyone under the age of 18) fell off the horse we were not allowed to 'touch' them, or give them a hug or wipe away their tears - we had to leave them lying in the mud until they 'sorted themselves out'.

SWMBO was, but I wasn't, allowed to touch their leg and give them 'a leg up' to mount, or to touch their leg to show them the correct riding position.

 

It really is a sad state of affairs when there has to be two of us on site to vouch for the good conduct of the other one in the event of a claim 'he touched me'.

[tree monkey]

57 minutes ago, Alan de Enfield said:

My wife used to use our Farm as a satellite to the local college to teach 'Equestrian Studies NVQs'. we both had to be 'vetted' and have CRB checks done because even tho' I wasn't directly involved - I was 'on the premises'

 

One of the instructions we both received was that if a 'child' (that is anyone under the age of 18) fell off the horse we were not allowed to 'touch' them, or give them a hug or wipe away their tears - we had to leave them lying in the mud until they 'sorted themselves out'.

SWMBO was, but I wasn't, allowed to touch their leg and give them 'a leg up' to mount, or to touch their leg to show them the correct riding position.

 

It really is a sad state of affairs when there has to be two of us on site to vouch for the good conduct of the other one in the event of a claim 'he touched me'.

On the other hand, I once worked at a school where someone was found being very inappropriate with a couple of the children and someone else was falsely accused, it was only good working practices that got the false accusation lifted

[Alan de Enfield]

1 minute ago, tree monkey said:

On the other hand, I once worked at a school where someone was found being very inappropriate with a couple of the children and someone else was falsely accused, it was only good working practices that got the false accusation lifted

I know the reasons why (from both sides) but it seems to be a sad state we are in when it is needed, - a child can ruin a persons life with false accusations, and is either 'crying out for attention' or needs some mental health support.

[tree monkey]

8 minutes ago, Alan de Enfield said:

I know the reasons why (from both sides) but it seems to be a sad state we are in when it is needed, - a child can ruin a persons life with false accusations, and is either 'crying out for attention' or needs some mental health support.

I know, it's the sick sods who force the rest of us to act in this way

[Mike Todd]

2 hours ago, Alan de Enfield said:

My wife used to use our Farm as a satellite to the local college to teach 'Equestrian Studies NVQs'. we both had to be 'vetted' and have CRB checks done because even tho' I wasn't directly involved - I was 'on the premises'

 

One of the instructions we both received was that if a 'child' (that is anyone under the age of 18) fell off the horse we were not allowed to 'touch' them, or give them a hug or wipe away their tears - we had to leave them lying in the mud until they 'sorted themselves out'.

SWMBO was, but I wasn't, allowed to touch their leg and give them 'a leg up' to mount, or to touch their leg to show them the correct riding position.

 

It really is a sad state of affairs when there has to be two of us on site to vouch for the good conduct of the other one in the event of a claim 'he touched me'.

That, like many of the H&S stories, is not quite how I understand the present safeguarding framework. Such rules will have been adopted by particular organisations who may, for whatever reason, go well beyond the statutory requirements.

 

Overall, the aim is to provide a safe (in the context of potential abuse) environment  - mitigating the risks of falling off a horse is a different matter - and on its own does not specify what you may or may not do, other legislation deals with what is abuse.

 

The main protection is to ensure that there is always another person at hand if at all possible and never do something that might be misinterpreted. "When in doubt, don't" is not the same as "don't" Also, documenting what has happened is also an important preventative measure, at least preventative against malicious or mistaken accusations.

 

Gender is also a complex matter as an organisation also has to have regard to equality legislation - it cannot, for example, assume that women are 'safe' whilst men are 'suspect'.

[Paul C]

3 hours ago, Alan de Enfield said:

My wife used to use our Farm as a satellite to the local college to teach 'Equestrian Studies NVQs'. we both had to be 'vetted' and have CRB checks done because even tho' I wasn't directly involved - I was 'on the premises'

 

One of the instructions we both received was that if a 'child' (that is anyone under the age of 18) fell off the horse we were not allowed to 'touch' them, or give them a hug or wipe away their tears - we had to leave them lying in the mud until they 'sorted themselves out'.

SWMBO was, but I wasn't, allowed to touch their leg and give them 'a leg up' to mount, or to touch their leg to show them the correct riding position.

 

It really is a sad state of affairs when there has to be two of us on site to vouch for the good conduct of the other one in the event of a claim 'he touched me'.

Its probably a good example of how some organisations have completely misinterpreted Child Protection guidelines, made a shambolic dog's breakfast of it, added 2 + 2 and come up with 17. It sounds like they don't know what day of the week it is.

[Alan de Enfield]

2 minutes ago, Paul C said:

Its probably a good example of how some organisations have completely misinterpreted Child Protection guidelines, made a shambolic dog's breakfast of it, added 2 + 2 and come up with 17. It sounds like they don't know what day of the week it is.

When we had the Golf Course - the manual we got for Child Protection, issued by the Sport Governing Body (the EGU - English Golf Union) stated :

 

If an adult is in the shower, and a Junior comes into the changing room, then the adult must vacate the shower and wait outside (of the building) until the child has left the changing room.

 

116 page manual on Child Protection in Golf. Madness.

 

I think the instruction was updated (amended) after we sold the golf-course.

[matty40s]

1 hour ago, Alan de Enfield said:

 

 

If an adult is in the shower, and a Junior comes into the changing room, then the adult must vacate the shower and wait outside (of the building) until the child has left the changing room

Was the adult allowed to grab a towel first...

[Alan de Enfield]

23 minutes ago, matty40s said:

Was the adult allowed to grab a towel first...

Yes.

[MHS]

I think there’s been some unfair comments about the staff at Midland chandlers at Penkridge. 

We stopped there a year or so back and they couldn’t have been more helpful. We had badly damaged a skin fitting on a exposed bolt arriving at a mooring in Brum. They spent ages working out the combination of fittings required to fix our problem. 

 

Im sure if they had known of this boat’s problem, they like any of us would have tried to prevent its sinking. 

[The Bearwood Boster]

Have to agree that the staff there really are boaty people & I reckon they would have tried to help.

[cuthound]

10 hours ago, MHS said:

I think there’s been some unfair comments about the staff at Midland chandlers at Penkridge. 

We stopped there a year or so back and they couldn’t have been more helpful. We had badly damaged a skin fitting on a exposed bolt arriving at a mooring in Brum. They spent ages working out the combination of fittings required to fix our problem. 

 

Im sure if they had known of this boat’s problem, they like any of us would have tried to prevent its sinking. 

 

Indeed, from their location in the warehouse they wouldn't be able to see the sunken boat until they crossed the bridge at the tail of the lock. By the time they crossed the bridge to go to or from work the boat may already have been sunk and there wodnt be anything they could do.

[roland elsdon]

Could not agree more. Everyone i have ever met at m/c have been lovely people .

However taking a battery , a bilge pump wires, hoses and abandoning their retail customers to go and try and save a strangers boat is a big ask. Especially if in failing or making a mistake they could have been sued.

 

i smashed the back doors in on a boat at batchworth on my way to work  many years ago and threw 2 buckets of water to put out the smouldering logs ‘drying ‘ round the fire.

i heard from a third party that they complained about the mess...

[RLWP]

11 hours ago, MHS said:

I think there’s been some unfair comments about the staff at Midland chandlers at Penkridge. 

We stopped there a year or so back and they couldn’t have been more helpful. We had badly damaged a skin fitting on a exposed bolt arriving at a mooring in Brum. They spent ages working out the combination of fittings required to fix our problem. 

 

Im sure if they had known of this boat’s problem, they like any of us would have tried to prevent its sinking. 

Reading carefully, I think one of the people contributing to the FB conversation is from MC