Jump to content

Noise pollution


CompairHolman

Featured Posts

23 minutes ago, Mike Todd said:

But you would have to persuade a judge that they are indeed ultra vires. Until then no sign, no licence?

I never mentioned not signing your licence application because it is irrelevant whether you sign it or not, your agreement to it has the worth of signing bus ticket, the issue and revocation of licences is purely statutory ,no one is required to agree in writing to follow the law. 

 

When you apply for or renew your licence and you are asked to agree to the " licence terms and conditions" , verbally over the phone, tick a box on a form or any other way it is ultra vires, ( but not illegal ) irrelevant and just empty words with no legal standing, saying yes doesn't bind you to anything at all . 

 

In my opinion.

 

 

 

 

 

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

31 minutes ago, CompairHolman said:

I never mentioned not signing your licence application because it is irrelevant whether you sign it or not, your agreement to it has the worth of signing bus ticket, the issue and revocation of licences is purely statutory ,no one is required to agree in writing to follow the law. 

 

When you apply for or renew your licence and you are asked to agree to the " licence terms and conditions" , verbally over the phone, tick a box on a form or any other way it is ultra vires, ( but not illegal ) irrelevant and just empty words with no legal standing, saying yes doesn't bind you to anything at all . 

 

In my opinion.

Why is it so many boaters desperately try to tie CRT's hands in any attempt they make to impose reasonable behaviour on those to whom it doesn't come naturally?

  • Greenie 3
Link to comment
Share on other sites

9 hours ago, Arthur Marshall said:

Whether it's a "rule" or not, whether you have to obey the T&Cs or not, if you actually use them as guidelines for decent behaviour you're probably on a winner and likely to make friends.  Barrack room lawyers tend to be unpopular, especially if they argue passionately that anti-social behaviour is perfectly legitimate.  It aint.  Running generators and engines for long periods and especially late in the evening, polluting both one's ears and the atmosphere, where sound travels so well and so far over water, basically screws it up for everyone else because it causes perfectly justifiable complaints from residents and other users.  All that happens is that tougher rules start to be made legally enforceable, like some of the new mooring restrictions run by car park companies.

The increase in that attitude explains a lot.

Indeed, and any reasonable person would not even need 'guidelines' to determine what is considerate behaviour.

  • Greenie 2
Link to comment
Share on other sites

17 hours ago, Jerra said:

Why is it so many boaters desperately try to tie CRT's hands in any attempt they make to impose reasonable behaviour on those to whom it doesn't come naturally?

Are you saying you agree to be bound by ultra vires rules if you think those rules are reasonable ?

 

That is bizarre and can only lead to huge problems.

 

( remember that I started this thread about restricting noise pollution so I have no wish to tie anyone's hands, in fact I'm arguing for the opposite )

 

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

17 minutes ago, CompairHolman said:

Are you saying you agree to be bound by ultra vires rules if you think those rules are reasonable ?

 

That is bizarre and can only lead to huge problems.

 

 

 

 

What is bizarre about accepting rules which you find reasonable? Don't most people do that?

Your Latin knowledge exceeds mine (O level pass many years ago), I had never heard of "ultra vires" until today, so thank you for that.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

47 minutes ago, Athy said:

What is bizarre about accepting rules which you find reasonable? Don't most people do that?

Your Latin knowledge exceeds mine (O level pass many years ago), I had never heard of "ultra vires" until today, so thank you for that.

I'm hard pushed with English but I know what considerate means 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 hour ago, CompairHolman said:

Are you saying you agree to be bound by ultra vires rules if you think those rules are reasonable ?

Unless you lead an extremely sheltered life you are probably accepting all sorts of rules which aren't backed by law.

 

So far non of the T&Cs have done anything other than encourage considerate use of the canal, I don't see why anyone should argue to prevent them, particularly when inconsiderate behaviour seems to be so much on the rise.

 

To me if "rules" for considerate behaviour don't exist anti social/inconsiderate behaviour will increase this is definitely not in the best interests of reasonable sensible boaters, yet so many argue in favour of fighting them.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

38 minutes ago, Jerra said:

Unless you lead an extremely sheltered life you are probably accepting all sorts of rules which aren't backed by law.

 

So far non of the T&Cs have done anything other than encourage considerate use of the canal, I don't see why anyone should argue to prevent them, particularly when inconsiderate behaviour seems to be so much on the rise.

 

To me if "rules" for considerate behaviour don't exist anti social/inconsiderate behaviour will increase this is definitely not in the best interests of reasonable sensible boaters, yet so many argue in favour of fighting them.

I haven't argued to prevent them I have just pointed out that some are unenforceable and have no lawful penalty attached to them . To be in favour of them means you support rules that no one can enforce, which in my opinion is pointless because you can't do anything about anyone not following them , and I would like noise nuisance to be enforced.

 

The licence terms and conditions should clearly define the law from the added " code of conduct " ideas it contains, not doing so is misrepresentation. 

 

I have heard the 8am to 8pm generator " rule" many times over the years and lots of boaters think its some kind of law, it's not it's purely advisory.

 

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 minute ago, CompairHolman said:

I haven't argued to prevent them I have just pointed out that some are unenforceable and have no lawful penalty attached to them . To be in favour of them means you support rules that no one can enforce, which in my opinion is pointless because you can't do anything about anyone not following them , and I would like noise nuisance to be enforced.

 

The licence terms and conditions should clearly define the law from the added " code of conduct " ideas it contains, not doing so is misrepresentation. 

 

I have heard the 8am to 8pm generator " rule" many times over the years and lots of boaters think its some kind of law, it's not it's purely advisory.

 

 

Which brings me back to my original point.  Use the 8 to 8 rule as an example.   Merely courteous, why go round in effect telling people they can be as bloody minded as they like and run their engine until 3 in the morning if they like.

 

To publicise that a rule is unenforceable and not backed by law gives the growing number of antisocial inconsiderate people carte blanche to do what they like and verbally abuse (hopefully nothing worse) those who ask them to be reasonable.

 

Daft or even in itself a little antisocial IMO (other opinions are available).

  • Greenie 2
Link to comment
Share on other sites

On 03/11/2019 at 16:01, CompairHolman said:

Why are we still allowing a minority of selfish ignorant boaters to run noisy open frame generators on their boats while they are moored on visitor moorings and around other boats, especially in peaceful rural moorings that people specifically choose and pay for to enjoy the quiet ?

 

You can guess what my Sunday has been like .

 

 

 

 

 

Because there is no law preventing it, silly. 

 

 

 

 

 

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 hour ago, Jerra said:

Which brings me back to my original point.  Use the 8 to 8 rule as an example.   Merely courteous, why go round in effect telling people they can be as bloody minded as they like and run their engine until 3 in the morning if they like.

 

To publicise that a rule is unenforceable and not backed by law gives the growing number of antisocial inconsiderate people carte blanche to do what they like and verbally abuse (hopefully nothing worse) those who ask them to be reasonable.

 

Daft or even in itself a little antisocial IMO (other opinions are available).

Well I don't personally ask people to obey rules that I know are false, its dishonest, at some point in the conversation a person doing that is going to have to lie, like when the other person says " turn it off or else what ". 

39 minutes ago, Mike the Boilerman said:

 

 

Because there is no law preventing it, silly. 

 

 

 

 

 

 

There is. 

 

Its already been posted on this thread. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

50 minutes ago, CompairHolman said:

 

There is. 

 

Its already been posted on this thread. 

 

Apparently not, according to post 133.

 

 

2 hours ago, CompairHolman said:

I have heard the 8am to 8pm generator " rule" many times over the years and lots of boaters think its some kind of law, it's not it's purely advisory.

 

  • Greenie 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

The concept of being inconsiderate interests me.

 

We live on a residential mooring in a marina, so are gunnel to gunnel with the next boats.  Each side are on leisure, one genuinely the other guy lives there half the week.  The marina themselves, try to space out resi, so we don’t disturb each other.  Now I have to get up at 6am to go to work and of course flush the macerator, boil the kettle, run the water pump, clank some bowels around &c.  I don’t do this to annoy anyone, and try to minimise the sound, but I expect I annoy him.  Am I being inconsiderate, or just doing what I need to, and am entitled to, to get by in life?

 

I expect generator guy thought the same...  

Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 hour ago, The Dreamer said:

 Am I being inconsiderate,

No.

1 hour ago, The Dreamer said:

or just doing what I need to, and am entitled to, to get by in life?

 

.  

Yes.

A narrowboat with doors and windows closed is reasonably soundproof, so it's quite likely that the only sound which your co-moorers will hear is the front door gently closing as you leave the boat, and your footsteps as you walk away from it - not exactly noise pollution!

Link to comment
Share on other sites

2 hours ago, The Dreamer said:

Am I being inconsiderate, or just doing what I need to, and am entitled to, to get by in life?

 

I expect generator guy thought the same...  

If you got up at six, ran the engine to get hot water and practised the drums for half an hour before going to work, then yes. 

As it is, you're just living a life, which, while it can't be done silently, it would appear that you're being as careful of your neighbours as you can. I hope they are as considerate to you . 

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

16 hours ago, Mike the Boilerman said:

 

Apparently not, according to post 133.

 

 

 

I already showed it you in post 115 !

14 hours ago, Arthur Marshall said:

It doesn't matter much whether a stated rule is legally binding or not. Most laws are unenforceable - for example, it's actually against the law to stab people, but you can't stop people doing it. You can punish them afterwards if you can find them, but that doesn't actually stop the nuisance in the first place. 

A law which is neither going to be obeyed or possible to enforce is pointless. That's why the t&c's are worth having as a guideline. They're simple to understand and cheap,and largely enforced by peer pressure. 

If you want noise nuisance to be controlled and policed, you have first to define it, then hire a million noise coppers to crack down on it. I think the licence fee might have to go up. 

That is ridiculous.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

20 hours ago, CompairHolman said:

Well I don't personally ask people to obey rules that I know are false, its dishonest, at some point in the conversation a person doing that is going to have to lie, like when the other person says " turn it off or else what ". 

There is. 

 

Its already been posted on this thread. 

How is the term/condition of the licence that you should only run your engine between 8 and 8 "false"? It's no a law, sure, but it's not false either. It's a condition of your licence that you agree upon when you pay for your licence. As is "bona fide" for us continuous cruisers. And given we have plenty of examples of where boats have been removed from the waterway for not abiding to that particular condition, I'd suggest it's not false either.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

14 minutes ago, NB Caelmiri said:

As is "bona fide" for us continuous cruisers. And given we have plenty of examples of where boats have been removed from the waterway for not abiding to that particular condition,

 

The difference is that 'bona fide navigating for the duration of the licence" is a legal requirement in the 1995 Waterways Act of Parliament.

There is no Act of Parliament stating that engines / generators must not be run between 8:00am and 8:00pm

 

Part III Section 17 3(c) (ii) of the British Waterways Act 1995

 

the applicant for the relevant consent satisfies the Board that the vessel to which the application relates will be used bona fide for navigation throughout the period for which the consent is valid without remaining continuously in any one place for more than 14 days or such longer period as is reasonable in the circumstances.

  • Greenie 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

12 minutes ago, NB Caelmiri said:

It's no a law, sure, but it's not false either. It's a condition of your licence that you agree upon when you pay for your licence.

I think the point that is trying to be made is that regardless of it being a law or a condition, there is a reality that it can only be enforced if:

 

  1. the vast majority abide by it.
  2. that people are really that vexed by it being broken.
  3. that the organisation responsible for upholding it has a desire and resources to do so.

I suspect that most boaters have broken the odd “rule” from time to time, overstaying on moorings, nudging lock gates with the bow, or whatever, and as such, for the most part, we all tolerate others short comings.  Otherwise the CRT would be arbiter to all sorts, and would be spending all of their boater revenue on court fees and legal counsel!

Link to comment
Share on other sites

7 minutes ago, The Dreamer said:

I think the point that is trying to be made is that regardless of it being a law or a condition, there is a reality that it can only be enforced if:

 

  1. the vast majority abide by it.
  2. that people are really that vexed by it being broken.
  3. that the organisation responsible for upholding it has a desire and resources to do so.

I suspect that most boaters have broken the odd “rule” from time to time, overstaying on moorings, nudging lock gates with the bow, or whatever, and as such, for the most part, we all tolerate others short comings.  Otherwise the CRT would be arbiter to all sorts, and would be spending all of their boater revenue on court fees and legal counsel!

 

Part of the problem is that some of C&RTs T&C's actually conflict with the laws of the land (thinking of boarding a boat without permission and making available your personal details to anyone they think fit to have them)

 

It was highlighted by the Law Lords that T&Cs cannot override the law :

 

HOUSE OF LORDS

  Lord Slynn of Hadley   Lord Jauncey of Tullichettle   Lord Hoffmann
  Lord Hope of Craighead   Lord Hobhouse of Wood-borough

OPINIONS OF THE LORDS OF APPEAL FOR JUDGMENT IN THE CAUSE

BRUTON (A.P.)
(APPELLANT)

v.

 

LONDON AND QUADRANT HOUSING TRUST
(RESPONDENTS)

ON 24 JUNE 1999

 

 

 

There are 100's of pages but the relevant decision of the Law Lords was :

 

Mr. Bruton's agreement is irrelevant because one cannot contract out of the statute.

 

The T&Cs of a 'contract' cannot be implemented if they go against the law.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

6 minutes ago, Alan de Enfield said:

Part of the problem is that some of C&RTs T&C's actually conflict with the laws of the land (thinking of boarding a boat without permission and making available your personal details to anyone they think fit to have them)

 

It was highlighted by the Law Lords that T&Cs cannot override the law :

 

Which law are you holding that the "no gennies between 8pm and 8am" T&C contravenes? 

 

 

If there isn't one, then in what way is this 'part of the problem'?

 

 

 

On reflection, I'm not even sure I know what the problem is, any more!!

 

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!

Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.

Sign In Now
  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    • No registered users viewing this page.
×
×
  • 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.