Draft and depth of Counter

[David Mack]

8 minutes ago, Alan de Enfield said:

100% in agreement. To much autonomy left with the builder to the detriment of the buyer.

 

Non compliance with legal requirents imposed from above maybe, but is there really much detriment to the buyers? Our narrowboats are very different craft to the mainstream more mass produced leisure craft that the RCD was aiming to regulate (primarily on grounds of equal access to the whole EU market, and not on consumer or public safety grounds). I haven't seen much evidence of consumer harm that has resulted from incorrectly formatted WIN numbers, fuel tanks without inspection hatches, or low level door thresholds opening onto open-scuppered well decks and the like.

Edited November 6, 2021 by David Mack

[Alan de Enfield]

14 minutes ago, David Mack said:

 

Non compliance with legal requirents imposed from above maybe, but is there really much detriment to the buyers? Our narrowboats are very different craft to the mainstream more mass produced leisure craft that the RCD was aiming to regulate (primarily on grounds of equal access to the whole EU market, and not on consumer or public safety grounds). I haven't seen much evidence of consumer harm that has resulted from incorrectly formatted WIN numbers, fuel tanks without inspection hatches, or low level door thresholds opening onto open-scuppered well decks and the like.

 

In principle I agree, but you start to get onto sticky-ground when you decide which laws or parts of laws you wish to accept and which you decide to ignore - where do you draw the line ?

Is your 'line' the same as someone elses 'line ?

 

NBs do cross the wash, they go up and down the Severn, they take the link to Lancaster, etc.

If the relevant regulations for (say) stability and down-flooding have been ignored because it is 'just a canal boat' and one sinks & someone drowns do you think the builder will get a lighter sentence because he thought it would never 'go to sea' because its a canal boat ?

 

We either follow the law, or we pay the penalties for not doing so, it is not up to us to cherry pick what we consider relevant.

Edited November 6, 2021 by Alan de Enfield

[MtB]

10 minutes ago, David Mack said:

 

Non compliance with legal requirents imposed from above maybe, but is there really much detriment to the buyers? Our narrowboats are very different craft to the mainstream more mass produced leisure craft that the RCD was aiming to regulate (primarily on grounds of equal access to the whole EU market, and not on consumer or public safety grounds). I haven't seen much evidence of consumer harm that has resulted from incorrectly formatted WIN numbers, fuel tanks without inspection hatches, or low level door thresholds opening onto open-scuppered well decks and the like.

 

Surely the harm members of the public on here suffer from is near-terminal boredom from constantly reading about this "need" for narrowboats to comply with the RCR. This is just grievous pedantry the regulations pointlessly try to impose on builders drafted by government lawyers who inhabit warm offices wearing suits and who have never in their lives tried to master a practical skill, say vertical welds.  

[Guest]

5 minutes ago, MtB said:

 

Surely the harm members of the public on here suffer from is near-terminal boredom from constantly reading about this "need" for narrowboats to comply with the RCR. This is just grievous pedantry the regulations pointlessly try to impose on builders drafted by government lawyers who inhabit warm offices wearing suits and who have never in their lives tried to master a practical skill, say vertical welds.  

 

Surely nobody is actually forced to read anything on here that bores them?

 

It would be somebody a bit daft if they forced themselves to read something that really didn’t interest them.

[Alan de Enfield]

1 minute ago, The Happy Nomad said:

 

Surely nobody is actually forced to read anything on here that bores them?

 

It would be somebody a bit daft if they forced themselves to read something that really didn’t interest them.

 

Some people have a thirst for knowledge, what may 'bore them' today, if read could be filed away and be very useful to them in a day / week / years time.

[Gregarious]

On 05/11/2021 at 10:28, MtB said:

 

I suspect we are not getting an answer because the OP is actually "the builder" going by the rules of the RCR, so neither the shell builder nor the fitter is responsible. The OP is. I suspect he has already been told this by both the hull builder and the boat fitter and there is no need to employ a surveyor to find this out. 

 

My reading of the situation is perhaps the shell builder actually built the shell and supplied it as a "sailaway" with engine fitted, ballast laid, floors down, spray foamed and lined, ready to launch. But then the OP then employed a boat fitter to fit it out before launch, which has turned out to be a Big Mistake and now he is looking for someone to "throw the book at".

 

All just a guess though, and would be interesting if the OP could clarify the details please. The board could then go on to explore some solutions.

 

Hello, MtB

 

To clarify: the boat builder bought the Hull as "sailaway", fitted it out and sold it to us.

[ditchcrawler]

3 minutes ago, Gregarious said:

Hello, MtB

 

To clarify: the boat builder bought the Hull as "sailaway", fitted it out and sold it to us.

In which case he is the builder and his responsibility, He is the one you bought it from

[dmr]

6 hours ago, David Mack said:

 

Non compliance with legal requirents imposed from above maybe, but is there really much detriment to the buyers? Our narrowboats are very different craft to the mainstream more mass produced leisure craft that the RCD was aiming to regulate (primarily on grounds of equal access to the whole EU market, and not on consumer or public safety grounds). I haven't seen much evidence of consumer harm that has resulted from incorrectly formatted WIN numbers, fuel tanks without inspection hatches, or low level door thresholds opening onto open-scuppered well decks and the like.

 

I am having sleepless nights over this. Our bote is a Colecraft and this thread now tells me they don't even use the correct numbering system, in fact its not even a proper plate, they just put the number onto the weedhatch in weld (yes, its a load of weld so have not got a clue what the font is, maybe its weldblob sans sarif?). My stress levels are so bad that I have started drinking strong cider again.

[ditchcrawler]

24 minutes ago, dmr said:

 

 I have started drinking strong cider again.

Nothing wrong with that

[MtB]

43 minutes ago, Gregarious said:

Hello, MtB

 

To clarify: the boat builder bought the Hull as "sailaway", fitted it out and sold it to us.

 

Thanks for clarifying. That pins responsibility (if there is any) on the fitter-outer as the notional "boat builder". 

 

Next, is the boat correctly certified under the RCR (Recreational Craft Regulations)? You will have a "boat manual" and a sheaf of paperwork if it is, telling you it is. If it isn't, the "boat builder" committed an offence selling it to you. Trading standards enforce these regulations so they would be the people to raise it with first, I would guess.

 

Alan de Enfield of this parish knows a lot more about it than me though! 

 

 

[MtB]

30 minutes ago, dmr said:

 

I am having sleepless nights over this. Our bote is a Colecraft and this thread now tells me they don't even use the correct numbering system, in fact its not even a proper plate, they just put the number onto the weedhatch in weld (yes, its a load of weld so have not got a clue what the font is, maybe its weldblob sans sarif?). My stress levels are so bad that I have started drinking strong cider again.

 

Forgive me for wondering, but might your stress levels have escalated due to unwisely stopping drinking the strong cider in the first place, rather than the incorrect font in which your WIN is weld-spattered?