Jump to content

Jenna Patel

Featured Posts

16 minutes ago, Alan de Enfield said:

 

If you are truly an itinerant (a person who travels from place to place) then this thread and the comments are not about you, if you truly are itinerant and have declared a 'no home mooring' on your licence application, then all respect, and all power to you and those like you.

 

This thread and postings relate to the Non-Itinerants (a person who does not travel from place to place) that are in the South / South West and could be said to have commited fraud (wrongful or criminal deception intended to result in financial or personal gain) by having signed to say they would be compliant but then no intention of complying with the laws required to obtain a boat licence.


no, what’s happened is the thread which begun with the OP presenting a simple questionnaire quickly developed in to yet another round of squatter bashing. 
 

 

  • Unimpressed 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

14 minutes ago, Goliath said:


no, what’s happened is the thread which begun with the OP presenting a simple questionnaire quickly developed in to yet another round of squatter bashing. 
 

 

And could that be in any way linked to Nick coming in and aggressively attacking anyone who dared to suggest that the "squatters" (your word) and the NBTA are in the wrong?

 

So here's a straight question for you -- do you believe that the Bath boaters, who are clearly not obeying the rules on CCing -- as set out in the license terms that they signed up to -- and have no intention of doing so in future, should be allowed to continue behaving like this?

 

Please, no waffle about travellers and itinerants and persecution and the NBTA -- should they have to obey the CC rules or not, yes or no?

Edited by IanD
  • Greenie 2
Link to comment
Share on other sites

12 minutes ago, Goliath said:


no, what’s happened is the thread which begun with the OP presenting a simple questionnaire quickly developed in to yet another round of squatter bashing. 
 

 

 

So, finally, you admit to the reality of the situation - if they were not squatting then there could be no "squatter bashing".

You either condone (accept behaviour that is considered morally wrong or offensive) the squatters or you don't, you either support the likes of Nick or you don't.

 

 

Edited by Alan de Enfield
Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 minute ago, Alan de Enfield said:

 

So, finally, you admit to the reality of the situation - if they were not squatting them there could be no "squatter bashing".

You either condone (accept behaviour that is considered morally wrong or offensive) the squatters or you don't, you either support the likes of Nick or you don't.

 

 


I’ve told you I am a supporter of the NBTA. 
 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 minute ago, Goliath said:


I’ve told you I am a supporter of the NBTA. 
 

Please answer my question -- do you think the Bath boaters should have to obey the CC rules like everyone else, yes or no?

Edited by IanD
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Just now, IanD said:

Please answer my question.


Why do you feel so entitled? I don’t have to answer any of your questions. 
 

I will state again I am a supporter of the NBTA. 

1 minute ago, Alan de Enfield said:

 

Then we can only assume that you accept their policies and condone (accept behaviour that is considered morally wrong or offensive) such behaviour.


I ain’t gonna enter a debate on morals. 

But yea, I accept their policies. 
 

  • Unimpressed 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 minute ago, Goliath said:


Why do you feel so entitled? I don’t have to answer any of your questions. 
 

I will state again I am a supporter of the NBTA. 

Nothing to do with being entitled, it's just that you're putting views forward -- and castigating others for disagreeing with you -- while refusing to be open about the reasons why, which is simply dishonest. It's what many Tory politicians are often doing, which is why many people no longer have any respect for them.

 

Do you think they should follow the rules like everyone else or not?

  • Greenie 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

I have sympathy for those that try to keep moving whilst trying to stay as close as possible for work, kids etc. It's a fine balancing act and allowing a range of 20 miles over a year sounds fair to me. 

 

However if you set up under a bridge etc and become the resident troll forever more all sympathy goes away. Boats need to move to keep the system moving and prevent encampments appearing at the towpath. However being forced to travel to areas you have no interest in does not come under 'navigation' for me.

 

It's a tricky one but if they do actually move every fortnight to the next bridge I honestly don't care personally.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Am I castigating? really?

If so then I apologise, that’s not my intention. 
I just get fed up of the one sided view on here. 
 

 

 

I’m not dishonest: I don’t know the individual circumstances of each boater in Bath, so I ain’t gonna judge. 

 

to add;


There’s enough armchair judges 

Edited by Goliath
  • Greenie 3
Link to comment
Share on other sites

19 minutes ago, Goliath said:

Am I castigating? really?

If so then I apologise, that’s not my intention. 
I just get fed up of the one sided view on here. 
 

 

 

I’m not dishonest: I don’t know the individual circumstances of each boater in Bath, so I ain’t gonna judge. 

 

to add;


There’s enough armchair judges 

 

You don't need to know the individual circumstances of each boater in Bath, because you know perfectly well what the situation is that we're talking about, it's been in the press and NBTA announcements often enough.

 

It's the boaters who have no home mooring (CC license) who have difficulty having their children attend local schools and holding down jobs while moving far enough to satisfy CART that they meet the CC requirements -- and are unwilling/unable to meet the "family cruising pattern" that CART suggested would meet the requirements, and don't even pretend to try and meet them.

 

I think they shouldn't be allowed to ignore the rules like this just because they don't like them or they're not convenient. I'm not judging them, that's simply my position -- the rules are there for a reason, and they're not following them because of personal choice, not an unfortunate personal circumstance like illness or accident for which CART would make allowance anyway.

 

If you want to call the view that boaters should obey the rules "one-sided" then that's up to you, of course people could say the same about any law they don't like obeying -- drink-driving, fraud, paying taxes, rape, you name it...

 

Last chance to answer -- do you think those boaters who are doing this should be allowed to carry on flouting the rules or not?

 

If you have the courage of your convictions, own them.

Edited by IanD
Link to comment
Share on other sites

12 minutes ago, Goliath said:

Am I castigating? really?

If so then I apologise, that’s not my intention. 
I just get fed up of the one sided view on here. 
 

 

 

I’m not dishonest: I don’t know the individual circumstances of each boater in Bath, so I ain’t gonna judge. 

 

to add;


There’s enough armchair judges 

 

OK, now tell me exactly where my summary of the laws and the contract relating to CCing and those who ignore the contract was in error. No waffle about schools, parents, nurses and so on. just stick to the law and contract.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

13 minutes ago, Tony Brooks said:

 

OK, now tell me exactly where my summary of the laws and the contract relating to CCing and those who ignore the contract was in error. No waffle about schools, parents, nurses and so on. just stick to the law and contract.


you said something along the lines of every member of the NBTA signs up to a contract and then ignores it. 
 

where do you get ideas like that?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

23 minutes ago, IanD said:

 

You don't need to know the individual circumstances of each boater in Bath, because you know perfectly well what the situation is that we're talking about, it's been in the press and NBTA announcements often enough.

 

It's the boaters who have no home mooring (CC license) who have difficulty having their children attend local schools and holding down jobs while moving far enough to satisfy CART that they meet the CC requirements -- and are unwilling/unable to meet the "family cruising pattern" that CART suggested would meet the requirements, and don't even pretend to try and meet them.

 

I think they shouldn't be allowed to ignore the rules like this just because they don't like them or they're not convenient. I'm not judging them, that's simply my position -- the rules are there for a reason, and they're not following them because of personal choice, not an unfortunate personal circumstance like illness or accident for which CART would make allowance anyway.

 

If you want to call the view that boaters should obey the rules "one-sided" then that's up to you, of course people could say the same about any law they don't like obeying -- drink-driving, fraud, paying taxes, rape, you name it...

 

Last chance to answer -- do you think those boaters who are doing this should be allowed to carry on flouting the rules or not?

 

If you have the courage of your convictions, own them.


Hang on there, I do have the courage of MY convictions and I’ll take no last chances from you. 

 

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

3 minutes ago, Goliath said:


you said something along the lines of every member of the NBTA signs up to a contract and then ignores it. 
 

where do you get ideas like that?

 

Where did the word "every" appear in my post that you took exception to? Answer - it did not. Now state that all  ALL NBTA members are fully intent and actually do adhere to the contract conditions they signed up to. Better still provide proof.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

3 hours ago, Tony Brooks said:

 

The law is the law  and if one law is at odds with another then one of them needs changing and that has not happened. It seems the NBTA members knowingly entered into a contract that is underpinned by law when they took their license out even though they have no intention of keeping to its terms. They should have the full force of the law thrown at them until HMG changes   one of the laws.

 

In any case how can they claim to be itinerant when it seems the reason for their existence is that the members do not wish to continually move as per their contract.


Here Tony ^^^

may not contain the word every but may as well. 

Edited by Goliath
Link to comment
Share on other sites

49 minutes ago, Goliath said:

Am I castigating? really?

If so then I apologise, that’s not my intention. 
I just get fed up of the one sided view on here. 
 

 

 

I’m not dishonest: I don’t know the individual circumstances of each boater in Bath, so I ain’t gonna judge. 

 

to add;


There’s enough armchair judges 

The problem I think is there is rarely anyone who argues the other side from experience which leads to the rather one sided view as you described, when someone does pop up it's someone full of bluster like the recent posts from "nick" which does the sum total of nothing to help the undecided.

Fair play for making your stand

  • Greenie 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 minute ago, tree monkey said:

The problem I think is there is rarely anyone who argues the other side from experience which leads to the rather one sided view as you described, when someone does pop up it's someone full of bluster like the recent posts from "nick" which does the sum total of nothing to help the undecided.

Fair play for making your stand

Cheers 👍

 

I do wonder: there must be people looking in on this that could offer their experience but realise there’d be no point. 
 

Seems the same issue gets talked about again and again by the same few. So it all goes around and around in circles. 

I want to hear some fresh slant on the whole debate. 

9 minutes ago, Tony Brooks said:

 

I see, can't or won't answer the question I asked so prefers to try to dodge it. I now know where you stand.


Is your question “ how can an NBTA member be an itinerant if they don’t move?”

Link to comment
Share on other sites

23 minutes ago, Goliath said:

Cheers 👍

 

I do wonder: there must be people looking in on this that could offer their experience but realise there’d be no point. 
 

Seems the same issue gets talked about again and again by the same few. So it all goes around and around in circles. 

I want to hear some fresh slant on the whole debate. 


Is your question “ how can an NBTA member be an itinerant if they don’t move?”

 

No, my question to you is how was my description of the law and licensing contract incorrect. You are trying to avoid answering that question buy trying to divert off into all sorts of side issues. It is the law and contract that are at the base of all this and unless you can show my commentary is incorrect then it calls the NBTA stand into question legally.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Here we go again, instead of the forum being used to cement relations in the boating community, every post just ends in venemous disagreement, with neither side ever going to move their position. 

Its obvious there is a fundamental problem, the CRT advise people before they buy a boat that it is very difficult to cc with children and limited resources, it must be obvious. 

 

Edited by LadyG
Link to comment
Share on other sites

11 minutes ago, Tony Brooks said:

 

No, my question to you is how was my description of the law and licensing contract incorrect. You are trying to avoid answering that question buy trying to divert off into all sorts of side issues. It is the law and contract that are at the base of all this and unless you can show my commentary is incorrect then it calls the NBTA stand into question legally.

I’m sure your description of the law and the licensing contract is correct.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 minute ago, LadyG said:

Here we go again, instead of the forum being used to cement relations in the boating community, every post just ends in venemous disagreement, with neither side ever going to move their position. 

Its obvious there is a fundamental problem, the CRT advise people before they buy a boat that it is very difficult to cc with children and limited resources, it must be obvious. 

 

It's obvious, but people ignore it because other people who are already ignoring it tell them they can ignore it too.

 

It's difficult to see how to bridge the gap between two camps, one of which thinks people should obey CART rules and one of which thinks they shouldn't... 😞

  • Greenie 2
Link to comment
Share on other sites

2 minutes ago, Goliath said:

I’m sure your description of the law and the licensing contract is correct.

 

So how can you support what appears to be the NBTA line that such things can and should be ignored - that is judging by what another of the members posted here and the bits of publicity the association gets from time to time?

 

I say by all means campaign to get the law and contract changed. By all means extend help to those who seem to need it, but support the law and contract until such time as it is changed and do not encourage others to break the law or contract.  I am addressing the NBTA in general, not you in particular.

 

 

  • Greenie 1
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.