George ward eviction taking place

[Tonka]

2 minutes ago, magnetman said:

If we take this back to basics quite a lot of it revolves around living on a boat on a random piece of towpath mooring and establishing use. I am not sure how it all works but this Ward character did say the CRT were taking the boat by "adverse possession". 

 

i don't know if this term applies to goods and chattels but it is a term used for claiming ownership of land after certain time periods. 

 

It seems to me that there will be others who are interested in having their own bits of towpath. 

 

I don't find it implausible that this is quite organised. 

 

Not an expert on it by any means but him using that phrase did pique my interest slightly. 

 

As for advice it seems rather unwise to take it from someone who has already successfully lost at least one boat to the CRT section 8 process. Tony Dunkley lost his boat. He is fixated by the idea that he still owns it. Immovable attitude. Be careful with this type of person as their inflexibility can be quite a detrimental characteristic.

 

 

There are a load of Boaters encamped on the towpath between Molesey and Walton on Thames trying to claim the towpath

[magnetman]

6 minutes ago, Tonka said:

There are a load of Boaters encamped on the towpath between Molesey and Walton on Thames trying to claim the towpath

Yes they are doing quite well there. The EA put in an adverse possession claim before the boaters did but several have fenced sections off and been there for quite a number of yars. 

 

I guess on the K&A it is different as the CRT presumably own the land whereas the molesey moorings were unregistered land.

 

Having said that the K&A may be interesting as it was at one stage closed as I understand it. This may have legal implications around land ownership after the canal was restored.

 

 

 

I think there is a chance that the boaters who have been staying a long time at Molesey may end up with possession of their mooring plots. 

 

Certainly interesting to see what happens. They have been there about 15 yars. I used to moor there quite often before they turned up. There was a scout base there with a Russell Newbery generator. 

Edited April 20, 2023 by magnetman
Typo

[MtB]

29 minutes ago, magnetman said:

If we take this back to basics quite a lot of it revolves around living on a boat on a random piece of towpath mooring and establishing use. I am not sure how it all works but this Ward character did say the CRT were taking the boat by "adverse possession". 

 

i don't know if this term applies to goods and chattels but it is a term used for claiming ownership of land after certain time periods. 

 

It seems to me that there will be others who are interested in having their own bits of towpath. 

 

I don't find it implausible that this is quite organised. 

 

Not an expert on it by any means but him using that phrase did pique my interest slightly. 

 

As for advice it seems rather unwise to take it from someone who has already successfully lost at least one boat to the CRT section 8 process. Tony Dunkley lost his boat. He is fixated by the idea that he still owns it. Immovable attitude. Be careful with this type of person as their inflexibility can be quite a detrimental characteristic.

 

Isn't "adverse possession" one of the terms used in the world of squatting in properties? The world from which the NBTA sprang from? If so it's no great surprise Mr Ward uses the term, given who is advising him.

 

Nowadays it applies to obtaining title to an unused piece of land AIUI. One starts to use a piece of land as if it were one's own (including maintaining fences/boundaries AIUI) and after 12 years of this with no objection raised from anyone claiming to own it, one can apply to the LR to have it registered as one's own. I don't think this can possibly apply to grabbing bits of towpath but possibly this is the bigger picture being fought over, with Mr Ward being used as the Patsy.

 

Property law experts here will know more than me. 

 

 

 

 

 

Edited April 20, 2023 by MtB
Add a bit.

[David Mack]

CRT were there 'evicting' George from 9.30 until 5.30.

At 1.49: Asked if the team looking to evict George Ward will do say today 'one way or another' a spokesman said yes.

At 4.59: We have been told the CRT are insisting that the boat has to be removed today.

And at 5.30 they all went home, and George and his boat are still there!

So what did the 'eviction' achieve, and what options do CRT have left?

 

[john.k]

Yes,adverse possession..........police sargeant here sussing out houses owned by deceased or incapable aged owners ,paying the rates and charges after transferring the notification to himself .........sacked from the force for misuse of the database ......but has refused to return any monies made from sales ...as is his right.

[haggis]

I think the term "adverse possession" probably came from Dunkley . It sounds like one of his terms. I find it amusing that he is advising George after losing two boats of his own 🙂 

[Mike Todd]

12 hours ago, LadyG said:

I'm just giving an opinion, I don't think anyone would want to get involved in this affair .

To be clear, I was not commenting on this particular case but on the oft misunderstood basis of BSS. However, you are right that BSS examiners are not obliged to take on a specific client. Also, the economics of testing are pretty marginal for straightforward cases.

11 hours ago, DandV said:

Given that George has very limited resources, and very limited powers, what are his alternatives to improve his housing situation.?

 

Given that CART has very limited resources in relation to what it is entrusted to maintain, and limited powers, what are their alternatives, to improve the situation on just a very limited section of the many many miles of their waterways, what are their alternatives to improve the situation here?

 

Given that territorial housing authorities are facing increasing demands against reducing already inadequate funding, and requirements to operate within their limited powers, what are their alternatives to improve the situation here?

 

I really don't  know.

But I think that increasing the resourcing of provision of social services  is probably more cost effective then increasing enforcement, and custody provisions.

 

It is the fundemental constraints we accept  in the societies we live in, that disabled, severly disadvantaged and some  just b awkward people,  provide really almost unresolvable challenges. Constraints that most of us accept as a cost of limiting the disadvantage that these people are already suffering.

Moving the challenge elsewhere is rarely resolution, or even an improvement. 

 

 

Well said!

[magnetman]

I know someone on a boat who appears to all intents and purposes to be homeless living in a floating shed. This is is an assumption easily made.

The fact he has a council flat for his sole occupation which is not sublet is sometimes a point which surprises people. He just prefers the boat, which is understandable. 

 

Also there was a bloke living in a derelict building by a main road with owners permission then when they pulled it down he moved back to his million pound house which he had been renting out.  

 

Things are not always as they seem.

 

I'm not saying this is the case with the geyser on the K&A but stranger things have happened.

 

I'm not at all sure how easy these things are to establish and also it is not public information.

 

If one did have somewhere other than the boat to live it would make this sort of slightly risky behaviour much more manageable as the outcome is not sleeping under a bridge. 

 

It probably isn't the case so hopefully social services can provide assistance and help with a positive outcome.

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

[Bod]

It's interesting that the C&RT position appears to have changed once Tony Dunkley's ideas have been aired.

Whether this change of position is due to humanity or legal reasons, is open to guess work.

But in all realty are George and his boat capable of making the 300 mile journey to Lincoln in sensible time?

I hope his supporters are able and willing to help him all the way.

 

Bod.

Ps. If Tony Dunkley has discovered that C&RT are using powers wrongly then it is to all our advantage that the correct system is used in future.

 

[Mike Todd]

10 hours ago, Ianws said:

If he had played the game he might have been able to access benefits support for his licence and possibly even a mooring, if he had one. Perhaps that wasn't something he could do. 

 

It has been well established that the licence and mooring can be included in applications for housing benefit but not insurance or BSS. Of course, the sequence is BSS -> insurance -> licence and a failure with any one prevents the next in line. Hence, anyone who wishes to be on CaRT waters must first obtain (and pay for) a BSS exam and any remedial works needed to achieve that - not always as easy as it sounds!

1 hour ago, anchored said:

Almost all of George's supporters do have a CRT license, BSS etc.. .so while they fight his corner they pay into the system he's opposing. They wouldn't dare put themselves in George's position! The Julian House lot just do it to make themselves feel useful, under the guise of 'charity'...

That is not a fair accusation.

[David Schweizer]

1 hour ago, magnetman said:

Yes they are doing quite well there. The EA put in an adverse possession claim before the boaters did but several have fenced sections off and been there for quite a number of yars. 

 

I guess on the K&A it is different as the CRT presumably own the land whereas the molesey moorings were unregistered land.

 

Having said that the K&A may be interesting as it was at one stage closed as I understand it. This may have legal implications around land ownership after the canal was restored.

 

 

 

I think there is a chance that the boaters who have been staying a long time at Molesey may end up with possession of their mooring plots. 

 

Certainly interesting to see what happens. They have been there about 15 yars. I used to moor there quite often before they turned up. There was a scout base there with a Russell Newbery generator. 

 

The Canal towpath where George Ward is moored remained in the ownership of BW for the period when the waterway was not operational, it was also a registered Public Footpath. When all Public Footpaths were closed during the Foot and Mouth epidemic Parish Councils were required to formally close them and post notices to that effect. I was Parish Clerk at the time and was responsible for organizing the closures. When I contacted BW to arrange this for the towpath, they advised me that they would be arranging the closure themselves under powers already issued by the Government to all public bodies with public footpaths on their land.

[MtB]

19 minutes ago, magnetman said:

Also there was a bloke living in a derelict building by a main road with owners permission then when they pulled it down he moved back to his million pound house which he had been renting out.  

 

 

Presumably he evicted his tenant, thereby making them homeless.

 

But I agree with your point. If Mr Ward happens to have a property empire then his brinksmanship with CRT looks a lot less risky than it first appears. 

 

"Where you live" can be a fluid and hard-to-define thing.

 

 

 

[Paul Biddy]

Mr George Ward is a good man. Don't confuse his frustration and anger for violence. I can not believe that he has hurt any CRT staff and it seems to me that he threatened to damage his own property withno evidence of assault. In a situation where an individual and supporters are resisting enforced homelessness, the presence of armed police, in truth, is not helpful. CRT can not always be trusted to manage the waterways in ways that are fair or equitable. Unclear guidelines and 'rules' designed by CRT to push vulnerable people around the canal network are brutish, and are routinely challenged by boaties and boating organisations across the country. For example, the 'old continous cruisong' guidelines were found to be Ultra Virus in Law and cancelled. Evictions are sometimes successfully resisted and always non-violently. Negotiation between boaties and CRT are often difficult 1. because individuals lack trust in the relevant authorities 2. vulnerable individuals lack the representation they need. George is a seasoned traveller and his identity is rooted within the landscapes within which he lives and he loves. George is a good human being. Care for all without prejudice. Biddy.

Edited April 20, 2023 by Paul Biddy

[Nightwatch]

1 minute ago, Paul Biddy said:

Mr George Ward is a good man. Don't confuse his frustration and anger for violence. I can not believe that he has hurt any CRT staff and it seems to me that he threatened to damage his own property withno evidence of assault. In a situation where an individual and supporters are resisting enforced homelessness, the presence of armed police, in truth, is not helpful. CRT can not always be trusted to manage the waterways in ways that are fair or equitable. Guidelines designed by CRT to push vulnerable people around the canal network are brutish, and are routinely challenged by boaties and boating organisations across the country. For example, the 'old continous cruisong' guidelines were found to be Ultra Virus in Law and cancelled. Evictions are sometimes successfully resisted and always non-violently. Negotiation between boaties and CRT are often difficult 1. because individuals lack trust in the relevant authorities 2. vulnerable individuals lack the representation they need. George is a seasoned traveller and his identity is rooted within the landscapes within which he lives and he loves. George is a good human being. Care for all without prejudice. Biddy.

That’s all well and good. Perhaps if he played by the rules, agreements and whatever the rest of us do, then maybe ‘George’ may not be in the situation he finds himself in.

[magnetman]

I've lived on boats all my adult life (29 yars) so can I do the same thing? 

 

No alternative to the boat and I have a registered disability. 

 

Does this mean I can also pile stuff up on the towpath? 

 

 

 

 

[Paul Biddy]

2 minutes ago, magnetman said:

I've lived on boats all my adult life (29 yars) so can I do the same thing? 

 

No alternative to the boat and I have a registered disability. 

 

Does this mean I can also pile stuff up on the towpath? 

 

 

 

 

...having possessions is not a good reason to enforce homelessness upon a person. That does seem prejudice.

[Victor Vectis]

He might be a 'good human being' but that does not stop him from taking the piss.

Edited April 20, 2023 by Victor Vectis

[Paul Biddy]

Just now, Victor Vectis said:

He mifht be a 'good human being' but that does not stop him from taking the piss.

'taking the piss' is not a good reason to enforce homelessness on a person. That does seem prejudice.

[Victor Vectis]

Just now, Paul Biddy said:

...having possessions is not a good reason to enforce homelessness upon a person. < snip >

Doesn't that rather depend on where he chooses to dump them?

[MtB]

6 minutes ago, Paul Biddy said:

Mr George Ward is a good man. Don't confuse his frustration and anger for violence. I can not believe that he has hurt any CRT staff and it seems to me that he threatened to damage his own property withno evidence of assault. In a situation where an individual and supporters are resisting enforced homelessness, the presence of armed police, in truth, is not helpful. CRT can not always be trusted to manage the waterways in ways that are fair or equitable. Guidelines designed by CRT to push vulnerable people around the canal network are brutish, and are routinely challenged by boaties and boating organisations across the country. For example, the 'old continous cruisong' guidelines were found to be Ultra Virus in Law and cancelled. Evictions are sometimes successfully resisted and always non-violently. Negotiation between boaties and CRT are often difficult 1. because individuals lack trust in the relevant authorities 2. vulnerable individuals lack the representation they need. George is a seasoned traveller and his identity is rooted within the landscapes within which he lives and he loves. George is a good human being. Care for all without prejudice. Biddy.

 

 

So you hold that being "a good man" and not injuring CRT staff excuses boaters from having a BSS, insurance, a license and complying with the movement rules the rest of us voluntarily abide by to prevent the waterways becoming a linear housing estate? 

 

 

 

 

[Victor Vectis]

I would contend that by his actions, or lack of them, he has forced homelessness upon himself

[magnetman]

Just now, Paul Biddy said:

...having possessions is not a good reason to enforce homelessness upon a person. That does seem prejudice.

 

It is an interesting one. I genuinely would quite like to do this. Much better than paying for a mooring. 

 

I can see problems if this sort of thing becomes normal and acceptable.

 

Slums are not usually tolerated for long.

 

Maybe the CRT need to add to the t&c for licence that you confirm you don't live on the boat. 

[MtB]

1 minute ago, Victor Vectis said:

I would contend that by his actions, or lack of them, he has forced homelessness upon himself

 

He wouldn't even be homeless if his boat was removed from the canal. He could carry on living in it wherever it is. 

 

 

[anchored]

42 minutes ago, Mike Todd said:

 

That is not a fair accusation.

Well..... George has said similar words to me regarding Julian House busybodies, so yes it is!!

[MtB]

Just now, magnetman said:

Maybe the CRT need to add to the t&c for licence that you confirm you don't live on the boat. 

 

That would be easily swerved as Mr Ward demonstrates, by not buying a licence in the first place.