Boat going boating on its own on the Trent...

[Tumshie]

4 minutes ago, magnetman said:

Did you know that some people were banned from using the forum? 

 

Can you understand how someone might feel about this ? To be later told "oh you can come back if you like" might be taken to be offensive. 

 

I am perfectly aware but 4 years is a long time and most people have moved on, CWDF is not the beginning and the end of the universe and as most (though obviously not all) mix quite smoothly between both forums or have happily made their home on one or other forum then it seems little counter productive to rake over old coal. 

 

[magnetman]

Fair point

[matty40s]

#scaredemoji#

 

JohnV was a sound chap, and like many others, Bassplayer..etc , was culled, some perhaps for overstepping the mark, but lots just for disagreeing with the policies or moderators..and Dan,  at the time. 

I almost got the chop too, only surviving as I managed to out the rogue moderator in a way that showed them up for what they were. I still have screenshots of that evening and read it occasionally, its a laugh out loud post.?

I never joined TB as I just dont have time for more than one canal forum.

[Naughty Cal]

2 hours ago, Alway Swilby said:

Apparently you are correct!

So what was the story?

 

And more to the point is it adequately insured by its owner for the damage it has caused on its little jaunt?

[Alan de Enfield]

Just now, Naughty Cal said:

So what was the story?

 

And more to the point is it adequately insured by its owner for the damage it has caused on its little jaunt?

One would hope that the claim will be against those who moved it and didn't put all of the mooring lines back on.

[Naughty Cal]

1 minute ago, Alan de Enfield said:

One would hope that the claim will be against those who moved it and didn't put all of the mooring lines back on.

I dont believe it works like that.

 

The claims for the damage caused to other property will be against the insurance of the Selby Michael. It will be up to Selby Michael's insurers to claim that back from any third parties involved, if indeed there are third parties involved.

[Alway Swilby]

4 minutes ago, Naughty Cal said:

So what was the story?

 

And more to the point is it adequately insured by its owner for the damage it has caused on its little jaunt?

Something along the lines of CRT allow Selby Michael to moor above Hazleford Lock on the understanding that they (CRT) can move it if it's in the way. They did move it to below the lock and didn't tie it up properly apparently.

[Alan de Enfield]

Just now, Naughty Cal said:

I dont believe it works like that.

 

The claims for the damage caused to other property will be against the insurance of the Selby Michael. It will be up to Selby Michael's insurers to claim that back from any third parties involved, if indeed there are third parties involved.

Just suppose that the £30,000+ of damage caused was to the property of the company who moved the boat.

Could get complicated.

[Naughty Cal]

Just now, Alan de Enfield said:

Just suppose that the £30,000+ of damage caused was to the property of the company who moved the boat.

Could get complicated.

Could get very complicated indeed but why would Farndon Marina and a number of private landowners and boat owners move it in the first place?

[magnetman]

Referring to the tugs presumably. 

[Naughty Cal]

They are CRT and Newark Marina tugs that moved it back upstream.

 

It is Farndon Marina that has suffered pontoon damage.

As it has now been established who owns the boat. 

 

How has he managed to keep hold of it through bankruptcy?

 

It has survived asset stripping and if I'm not mistaken (although the rules could have changed of course) I didn't think that a bankrupt could be a company owner or director?

[Jim Riley]

36 minutes ago, Naughty Cal said:

Could get very complicated indeed but why would Farndon Marina and a number of private landowners and boat owners move it in the first place?

Perhaps you need to go and read up on it yourself. Then apologise for your naughty calumnies. All the facts are there. 

Edited January 30, 2020 by Jim Riley

[Guest]

As I understand it.

 

CRT moved the boat using contractors.

 

Boat wasn't made secure and came adrift and caused damage.

 

Legal teams will work out who is responsible.

[frangar]

4 minutes ago, Jim Riley said:

Perhaps you need to go and read up on it yourself. Then apologise for your naughty calumnies. All the facts are there. 

Does TD pull all your strings or just a chosen few?? 

[Jim Riley]

7 minutes ago, frangar said:

Does TD pull all your strings or just a chosen few?? 

I don't like to see someone insulted with lies and unfair assertions, especially when the poster knows her victim can't answer back and is too idle to check out the facts. 

[Guest]

Once upon a time I was a scruffy local comp kid who got into Oxbridge by being sh1t hot at maths. I thought I was there to study. 

 

How the flip wrong was I? 

 

'Light Sides', 'Dark Sides', two children's literature societies at war with each other (what happened to the cuddly penguin is, probably, better than what happen to the King's goat after the UCL rugby team decided to avenge the insult to Jeremy Bentham's preserved  head and a sign of the intrinsic innocence of the public school/Oxbridge types, but still...) 

 

Baffled; pleased you're not stabbing each other; slightly unsure what to do with a semi-colon... 

Edited January 30, 2020 by TheMenagerieAfloat
Grammar. Not the kind of school I went to...

[Guest]

1 hour ago, Naughty Cal said:

I dont believe it works like that.

 

The claims for the damage caused to other property will be against the insurance of the Selby Michael. It will be up to Selby Michael's insurers to claim that back from any third parties involved, if indeed there are third parties involved.

It doesn't with ponies*, certainly. Or even cars (in some circs). The owner is f***ed. Boats may be different. 

 

* I did acquire some privileged knowledge, albeit late in life... 

[Jerra]

2 hours ago, Tumshie said:

As seven eighths of CWDF members are also members over there I'm not sure why you think anybody needs to be brave. Not to mention the whole stramash happened 4 years ago so I doubt anybody cares who's on which forum anymore. Hardly the great giggle that 4 emojis would suggest. 

 

I am one of the eight who haven't an account over in the other place but read it about three or four times a year.    However  I find it strange that after 4 years they still aren't independent and confident enough to not need a special section for discussing CWDF.

[Tumshie]

Just now, Jerra said:

I find it strange that after 4 years they still aren't independent and confident enough to not need a special section for discussing CWDF.

I'm sure they are doing just fine and don't need any help from us. 

 

[Jerra]

2 minutes ago, Tumshie said:

I'm sure they are doing just fine and don't need any help from us. 

 

I never suggest they needed help I was commenting on the need to have a section for discussThunderboat.ing another forum.   Have you ever come across any forum any where that has had a section for discussing other forums, other of course than 

[Jim Riley]

2 minutes ago, Jerra said:

I never suggest they needed help I was commenting on the need to have a section for discussThunderboat.ing another forum.   Have you ever come across any forum any where that has had a section for discussing other forums, other of course than 

Is it any wonder, the way some were unfairly treated? 

[tree monkey]

5 minutes ago, Jim Riley said:

Is it any wonder, the way some were unfairly treated? 

Genuine question but isn't it time to just let it all go, it happened, it was unpleasant but we are where we are, to keep bringing it up is unproductive and just rakes up bad feeling for no reason 

[Tumshie]

19 minutes ago, Jerra said:

I never suggest they needed help I was commenting...........

No but you also didn't need to take a poke either, it was childish and doesn't help anything - not to mention what other people think of us is none of our business. 

 

 

 

Edited January 30, 2020 by Tumshie

[magnetman]

26 minutes ago, tree monkey said:

Genuine question but isn't it time to just let it all go, it happened, it was unpleasant but we are where we are, to keep bringing it up is unproductive and just rakes up bad feeling for no reason 

Here you go

 

 

[Jim Riley]

27 minutes ago, tree monkey said:

Genuine question but isn't it time to just let it all go, it happened, it was unpleasant but we are where we are, to keep bringing it up is unproductive and just rakes up bad feeling for no reason 

Don't ask me, I've just been replying to the Frangipani covered Naughty Calumnies posted here.