Unlicenced Boats

[Jerra]

.

2 minutes ago, Athy said:

Is it surprising? They think that "their" has an apostrophe.

Have a virtual laughing with tears emoji.

Edited October 7, 2020 by Jerra

[Higgs]

29 minutes ago, Athy said:

Is it surprising? They think that "their" has an apostrophe.

 

It is a plural, being associated to several people. Their'.

 

 

27 minutes ago, Jerra said:

.

Have a virtual laughing with tears emoji.

 

I am no longer concerned with what could be classed as opposition to the idea. There hasn't been that much opposition. Nearly all of those opposing have at some point agreed indirectly and directly with what I've been saying, including you. 

 

 

 

 

Edited October 7, 2020 by Higgs

[Machpoint005]

9 minutes ago, Higgs said:

It is a plural, being associated to several people. Their'.

 

So what?

[Machpoint005]

On 06/10/2020 at 05:17, Higgs said:

>>CRT know it; CRT cannot use its own authority<<

You need to decide whether CRT is singular or plural.

[Higgs]

3 minutes ago, Machpoint005 said:

You need to decide whether CRT is singular or plural.

 

Petty points of grammar. This site is full of options. Pick on someone else. I don't care to be so fastidious.  

 

 

[Tracy D'arth]

There is the only one, thankfully.

5 minutes ago, Machpoint005 said:

You need to decide whether CRT is singular or plural.

There is only the one, thankfully.

[Machpoint005]

21 minutes ago, Higgs said:

 

It is a plural, being associated to several people. Their'.

 

11 minutes ago, Machpoint005 said:

 

So what?

 

1 minute ago, Higgs said:

 

Petty points of grammar. This site is full of options. Pick on someone else. I don't care to be so fastidious. 

 

 

Erm - it was you who brought up the topic.

 

It was also you who failed to answer the question.

[Higgs]

2 minutes ago, Machpoint005 said:

 

 

 

Erm - it was you who brought up the topic.

 

It was also you who failed to answer the question.

 

It was brought to my attention - I explained. 

 

 

[Machpoint005]

.. but did not answer the question.

[Higgs]

1 hour ago, Machpoint005 said:

.. but did not answer the question.

 

Which question?

 

 

[WotEver]

8 hours ago, Higgs said:

Which question?

“So what”. That question. 

[Athy]

15 hours ago, Higgs said:

 

It is a plural, being associated to several people. Their'.

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

Good try. Tell me, in what circumstances could "their" be singular?

[Higgs]

32 minutes ago, Athy said:

Good try. Tell me, in what circumstances could "their" be singular?

 

A group, a collection of individuals - their.  A person - their. 

 

 

1 hour ago, WotEver said:

“So what”. That question. 

 

It's a vague question, giving little context. 

 

 

 

 

Edited October 8, 2020 by Higgs

[Jess--]

On 06/10/2020 at 12:49, Jerra said:

What do you feel is unreasonable about requiring a boat in a marina with access to the canal to be "canal legal" I have seen car parks with just the same conditions for having a car there.

Forget car parks, a lot of housing associations (which bought up all the council housing) have restrictions that you cannot have an untaxed vehicle parked on your driveway (even with sorn)

A friend was threatened with eviction for breaking 2 of the tenancy agreement rules at the same time, untaxed car (but with a valid sorn) and working on the vehicle in the driveway (changing brake pads for MOT before it could be taxed).

 

with my friend being who he is he later decided to park the remains of a 1930s Singer car on the driveway (which due to it's age was MOT and Tax exempt) 

[Higgs]

27 minutes ago, Jess-- said:

Forget car parks, a lot of housing associations (which bought up all the council housing) have restrictions that you cannot have an untaxed vehicle parked on your driveway (even with sorn)

A friend was threatened with eviction for breaking 2 of the tenancy agreement rules at the same time, untaxed car (but with a valid sorn) and working on the vehicle in the driveway (changing brake pads for MOT before it could be taxed).

 

with my friend being who he is he later decided to park the remains of a 1930s Singer car on the driveway (which due to it's age was MOT and Tax exempt) 

 

With the housing association - did the licensing authority make it a stipulation? Or did the association itself decide? It obviously had its reasons, but it wasn't by the vehicle licensing authority's insistence. 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

Edited October 8, 2020 by Higgs

[Arthur Marshall]

28 minutes ago, Higgs said:

 

With the housing association - did the licensing authority make it a stipulation? Or did the association itself decide? It obviously had its reasons, but it wasn't by the vehicle licensing authority's insistence. 

 

It would have been the association, to stop tenants filling up the drives with rusting wrecks, or running illicit car dealing.

[Sea Dog]

1 hour ago, Jess-- said:

with my friend being who he is he later decided to park the remains of a 1930s Singer car on the driveway (which due to it's age was MOT and Tax exempt) 

Sounds like he might have "previous" and perhaps that is the likely reason for the apparently heavy handed earlier action...?

[Paul Gwilliams]

Housing associations make rules far more onerous than the old local authorities.

 

They are less accountable for their actions and being usually a charity they are not subject to FOI requests

[Higgs]

1 hour ago, Arthur Marshall said:

It would have been the association, to stop tenants filling up the drives with rusting wrecks, or running illicit car dealing.

 

Could be. 

 

 

[Jess--]

16 hours ago, Arthur Marshall said:

It would have been the association, to stop tenants filling up the drives with rusting wrecks, or running illicit car dealing.

That was our thoughts too. but the association gave no leeway regardless of the state of the vehicle, in my friends case the car was a 3 year (and one month) old vauxhall omega which had failed it's first mot because the brake warning light flickered (meaning the pads were getting thin).

15 hours ago, Sea Dog said:

Sounds like he might have "previous" and perhaps that is the likely reason for the apparently heavy handed earlier action...?

His only previous run ins with the association were for having his bins out on a day they weren't being emptied, bins emptied tuesdays but as he worked away mon & tues he used to put the bins out monday morning and take them in on weds morning, his repeated violation of this rule may have made him a target.

 

Other people got caught with the same rule while trimming their hedges and having their garden waste bin out for the clippings.

A neighbour got a warning about working on vehicles for changing an indicator bulb

 

It wasn't so much the association more a couple of busybodies who reported every single thing that broke the rules