To set the record straight

[Naughty Cal]

Why knot? Seriously, what's the problem with using knots?

 

Should it knot be

 

Y-Knot -or- Wye Knot

[gaggle]

There is a statement in our insurance documents that states all claims must be lodged within 28 days of the incident occuring, this includes third party claims. When speaking to the claims assistant she confirmed that if no claims where at least notified to them by the end of the 28 days they could refuse payment.

 

 

Have the insurance company kept you as a policy holder , if so have they lumped up your premium.

[Naughty Cal]

Have the insurance company kept you as a policy holder , if so have they lumped up your premium.

 

Still a policy holder, no premium increase and they are aware of the incident.

[Nine of Hearts]

Spend a little less time looking at your GPS and worrying that your only achieving 3.3 mph and not 3.5 mph. Spend a little more time enjoying stress free cruising.

 

I don't think anyone's suggesting they're looking at their GPS and worrying about their low speed. I think that when you've got a dawdler (and by that I mean someone whose comfortable cruising speed is less than yours) in front you're forever having to watch if you're gaining. You are also having to watch for them stopping, turning or whatever. It's far more relaxing to not have this problem and have an empty canal in front of you. Which you could both enjoy if the slow boat let the faster one past. I like to enjoy what little cruising I get to do without having to worry about running up someone else's stern, or someone else running up mine.

[mayalld]

I don't think she has actually said that damage as a result of her actions would not be paid for. I think she just removed the 'self funding' option and said that any claims for damage would have to go via her insurers.

 

They will probably require a little more evidence than Phylis was prepared to accept.

 

In the end, it isn't actually down to what her insurers will accept.

 

Whilst insurance companies like to make out that they are in charge, the reality is that they attempt to manage the case to pretend that it is that way.

 

When it comes down to liability to a 3rd party, if the 3rd party doesn't accept what the insurer says, he always has the option to sue the person who caused the damage. If the court finds in their favour, then the person who caused the damage IS liable for that amount, and provided THEY obeyed THEIR insurers rules, the insurer will pay out.

 

The main question in this case is whether a court would find Phylis liable, and remember that this is a civil court, so the standard of proof is "balance of probabilities", not "beyond reasonable doubt".

 

• Anybody suing Phylis could prove that there was an incident of inconsiderate boating, and speeding, as a result of the criminal trial.
  
• They can testify that an offer to make good damage was made, which shows an acceptance by Phylis that her actions may have caused damage, and is an admission of liability
  
• They can testify that the offer was withdrawn as a result of the actions of other people, and that Phylis is (effectively) refusing to pay up based on the actions of others.
  

On the balance of probabilities, it is highly likely that a court would find Phylis liable. It is also highly that the court would take the view that whilst Phylis could possibly reasonably decline to make an offer to settle with the 5 extra boaters who came along later, it was unreasonable of her to rescind her offer to the first batch of boaters, and as such might award costs.

 

Phylis also needs to take into account that having offered to pay, she HAS admitted liability, and that it is a favourite of insurers to require that you do not admit liability. As such, because the admission of liability makes it more likely that a court would rule agains Phylis, they may very well decline liability to Phylis, and leave her to pay out of her own pocket.

[Naughty Cal]

Just sifting through the acres of paperwork i have for this case. The letters to Lincoln Marina and the insurers all state that the payments would be a a good will gesture. No admission of fault has been made. They also state that i would only pay for repairs which could be proven to be in relation to this case. Again no admission.

 

Proving what damage is caused by this incident is going to be difficult (especially three months on). After all we are talking boats. They are prone to damage everytime they move.

[mayalld]

Just sifting through the acres of paperwork i have for this case. The letters to Lincoln Marina and the insurers all state that the payments would be a a good will gesture. No admission of fault has been made. They also state that i would only pay for repairs which could be proven to be in relation to this case. Again no admission.

 

Proving what damage is caused by this incident is going to be difficult (especially three months on). After all we are talking boats. They are prone to damage everytime they move.

 

Just pay them what they asked for as a goodwill gesture.

 

Your name must be mud around those parts, and paying up would go a long way to getting people to change their view of you.

[RLWP]

Sorry, too silly.

 

My mistake

 

Richard

Edited August 25, 2009 by RLWP

[Guest]

Is the 4mph limit just that, or is it 4mph maximum? There are times when it is unsafe to navigate at 4mph. This to my mind means that one could be prosecuted for doing 3mph in certain situations. If excessive speed from a passing boat is clearly causing problems for other waterway users (boaters, anglers pedestrians etc.) then to my mind they should expect some sort of penalty.

[Proper Job]

I don't think anyone's suggesting they're looking at their GPS and worrying about their low speed. I think that when you've got a dawdler (and by that I mean someone whose comfortable cruising speed is less than yours) in front you're forever having to watch if you're gaining. You are also having to watch for them stopping, turning or whatever. It's far more relaxing to not have this problem and have an empty canal in front of you. Which you could both enjoy if the slow boat let the faster one past. I like to enjoy what little cruising I get to do without having to worry about running up someone else's stern, or someone else running up mine.

I generally find that locks naturally space boats out. Obviously there are times when a boat pulls pins in front of you (just as you come round the corner) and there are part of the canal network where there are long pounds with no locks for miles.

 

But cruising, "without having to worry about running up someone else's stern, or someone else running up mine". You need to learn to relax a little.

 

You make cruising sound like negotiating rush hour traffic

 

I quote from Alnwicks post in his cruise log yesterday:

"While navigating along the final stretch into Cropredy at just under 2 mph (there is always a long line of moored boats at this location) I could hear a boat behind me that seemed to be continually changing in and out of gear. When I looked back, the steerer was leaning first over to the left and then over to the right as if to see past me and he seemed to have great difficulty steering his boat in a straight line - when he eventually passed me at the winding hole, he accelerated significantly even though there were still more moored boats ahead. I don't know what his problem was - perhaps his boat was just not designed for cruising at sensible canal speeds? Or perhaps he didn't appreciate the need to proceed with caution past moored boats - not to mention all the children in canoes . . ."

 

Chill out

[alan_fincher]

After all we are talking boats. They are prone to damage everytime they move.

Well, based on track record of your trip reports, yours seems more so than most!

[Naughty Cal]

Well, based on track record of your trip reports, yours seems more so than most!

 

It hasnt had any damage for at least 3 months

 

Just pay them what they asked for as a goodwill gesture.

 

Your name must be mud around those parts, and paying up would go a long way to getting people to change their view of you.

 

Not so, there are a minority that are so hung up on the subject they cant accept people make mistakes (a little like on here) however the majority are willing to accept it was an error of judgement and get on with life. As i have said before we speak to some of them on a regular basis. The fossdyke/witham isnt a big navigation, you have to live and let live. Sometimes people will do something you dont like, sometimes they will make mistakes, sometimes they may well suprise you and be civil.

[mayalld]

Is the 4mph limit just that, or is it 4mph maximum? There are times when it is unsafe to navigate at 4mph. This to my mind means that one could be prosecuted for doing 3mph in certain situations. If excessive speed from a passing boat is clearly causing problems for other waterway users (boaters, anglers pedestrians etc.) then to my mind they should expect some sort of penalty.

 

4mph is an absolute limit (except for certain bits where the absolute limit is higher), and exceeding the limit can result in prosecution under Bye-Law 14

 

Regardless of absolute speed, you can also be prosecuted under bye-law 13;

 

Every vessel navigating on any canal shall at all times be

navigated with care and reasonable consideration for all persons

using the canal or being on the banks thereof and in particular in

such a manner as will not obstruct the passage of any other

vessel using the canal or involve risk of collision or endanger the

safety of other vessels or their moorings or cause damage

thereto or to the banks of the canal or to any part of the Board’s

property.

So;

if you are under 4mph, but still pulling out pins, you can be prosecuted under 13

if you are over 4mph, you can be prosecuted for BOTH (as Phylis was)

[Nine of Hearts]

Chill out

 

I am perfectly chilled, but at my usually sedate cruising speed I have come up behind slower moving boats. I have also had a faster vessel come up behind me. I seem to have led a charmed life, because they either pulled in or let me past, and I always let faster boats past. I don't see what the problem is??? Personally, I think that's a more relaxed attitude than "bugger them, they shouldn't be going faster than me anyway"...

[mayalld]

I am perfectly chilled, but at my usually sedate cruising speed I have come up behind slower moving boats. I have also had a faster vessel come up behind me. I seem to have led a charmed life, because they either pulled in or let me past, and I always let faster boats past. I don't see what the problem is??? Personally, I think that's a more relaxed attitude than "bugger them, they shouldn't be going faster than me anyway"...

 

Quite.

 

As I've said before, there are people who cruise around at a speed than some boats cannot hope to come down to.

[Naughty Cal]

Well as a fore warning. We are on holiday next week.............................................

[Guest steve jenkin]

hahahahahahahahaha, you hooligan!!!!! well, done it, paid for it, so all dusted now, apart from the morons on here who want to make an issue of it !!! prats

 

hahahahahahahahaha, you hooligan!!!!! well, done it, paid for it, so all dusted now, apart from the morons on here who want to make an issue of it !!! prats

oh, and naughty naughty girl, dont do it again!! lol

[Naughty Cal]

oh, and naughty naughty girl, dont do it again!! lol

 

It was Cal. Shes a Very Naughty Girl

[alan_fincher]

Perhaps those who feel that nobody should ever be upset by having to follow a very slow moving boat for large distances would like to state the slowest speed they are happy to be restricted to before even they get a bit bored ?

 

We do not have a powerful engine, nor a big prop, and our tick-over is set at the correct level for the engine, but I have repeatedly been put in the situation on perfectly deep canals with no obstruction or moored boats where I am forced to take the engine in and out of gear to stop me running down the boat in front.

 

The people involved know I am there, (although many play the game of ceasing to look back once they know you have caught up), and in my view their behaviour is as much bad manners as those who insist on going too fast for the conditions.

 

I guess what I don't understand is their motive. Do they think they are teaching the queue of boats behind patience ? Do they think they may find the next lock in their favour if they get there first, but not if they don't ? Are they just doing it because they can ?

 

I don't deny anybody the right to cruise at under 2mph if that's really their thing, but it has always in the past been accepted that if a faster boat catches up, and can pass safely, you allow that to happen as soon as possible. Unfortunately lately some people seem intent on not following that - although, to be fair, far more boats let us past without bother than decided to stay stuck mid channel experimenting with how slow they could actually go.

[Smudge]

Lots of people on here are debating whether Phyllis was exceeding 4mph but that is not even an issue when you've got a boat on the plane going through a marina. We know one woman was stood on the stern of her narrowboat when Phyllis passed and she was soaked up to the knees while shouting at her to slow down. Some of the boat owners were not aware of the damage as they were away (one that we know was in Norway) so would not have put the compaints in until their return.

The main concern here is care and consideration for other river users.

Oh and forget the helmsman course, how about anger management? We all have bad days but most of us don't damage other peoples property in the processs.

[Matthew Knowles]

It was Cal. Shes a Very Naughty Girl

 

A bad workman/woman always blames his/her tools! Come on Phylis, you've been naughty and I think I should pay you a visit to discipline you!

 

PS. Don't tell Mrs Knowles!

[Guest steve jenkin]

It was Cal. Shes a Very Naughty Girl

a good tradesperson never blames her toys . . . . . oops tools. hehehehe

[Graham Davis]

Strewth!!

 

Mayalld, be aware that Hearings in a Magistrates Court are criminal hearings. In fact they hear the initial Hearings on nearly every case in the country, from murder to drink driving. They may pass that Hearing on to a Higher Court.

 

Phyllis has had her day in Court and been found guilty and paid her dues. I do wonder whether some of the comments on this forum are now heading into illegal territory by making further accusations.

[Naughty Cal]

Lots of people on here are debating whether Phyllis was exceeding 4mph but that is not even an issue when you've got a boat on the plane going through a marina. We know one woman was stood on the stern of her narrowboat when Phyllis passed and she was soaked up to the knees while shouting at her to slow down. Some of the boat owners were not aware of the damage as they were away (one that we know was in Norway) so would not have put the compaints in until their return.

The main concern here is care and consideration for other river users.

We all have bad days but most of us don't damage other peoples property in the processs.

 

The boat wasnt on the plane as has already been proven. She cannot plane and has been unable to plane since easter. She was bow high not planing, there is a difference.

 

Some of the boat owners were not aware of the damage as they were away (one that we know was in Norway) so would not have put the compaints in until their return.

 

Funny though that the chap from Lincoln Marina, who assured me he inspects the boats on a daily basis, and knows each boat inside out, and can tell for sure what damage was caused, didnt find it. Someone is telling porkies somewhere.

 

Oh and forget the helmsman course, how about anger management?

Never done something you know you shouldnt have? There has never been a doubt that what was done shouldnt have happened. However without being there and witnessing the events from every aspect how can you say what you would and wouldnt have done. The allegations where blown out of all proportion and even the witness statements provided by BW didnt tie in together.

 

 

 

 

 

A bad workman/woman always blames his/her tools! Come on Phylis, you've been naughty and I think I should pay you a visit to discipline you!

 

PS. Don't tell Mrs Knowles!

 

The OH might have an issue with that

[David Schweizer]

Perhaps those who feel that nobody should ever be upset by having to follow a very slow moving boat for large distances would like to state the slowest speed they are happy to be restricted to before even they get a bit bored ?

 

We do not have a powerful engine, nor a big prop, and our tick-over is set at the correct level for the engine, but I have repeatedly been put in the situation on perfectly deep canals with no obstruction or moored boats where I am forced to take the engine in and out of gear to stop me running down the boat in front.

 

The people involved know I am there, (although many play the game of ceasing to look back once they know you have caught up), and in my view their behaviour is as much bad manners as those who insist on going too fast for the conditions.

 

I guess what I don't understand is their motive. Do they think they are teaching the queue of boats behind patience ? Do they think they may find the next lock in their favour if they get there first, but not if they don't ? Are they just doing it because they can ?

 

I don't deny anybody the right to cruise at under 2mph if that's really their thing, but it has always in the past been accepted that if a faster boat catches up, and can pass safely, you allow that to happen as soon as possible. Unfortunately lately some people seem intent on not following that - although, to be fair, far more boats let us past without bother than decided to stay stuck mid channel experimenting with how slow they could actually go.

 

I agre that the established protocol has been to allow faster boats to pass, as soon as it is safe to do so. However, in recent years a lot of people with little or no prior experience of the Canals have purchased boats and some of them seem to behave in exactly the same way that they do in their cars. They pootle along at a dribble round the bits where you cannot overtake, and then put their foot down when you get to a straight stretch, still not achieving the speed limit, but fast enough to prevent all but the fastest cars to overtake. Fortunately on the roads there is little that can compete with the 20 valve twin turbo engine in my car, but the BMC 1.5 in the boat is a bit less energetic.

 

The other issue which so few people seem unable to understand these days is that if you come up onto a slower boat and sit directly behind it, you draw several inches from under the stern and make the slow boat even slower. The working boatmen knew about this, and when working single motors always proceeded either at a good distance apart, or if seeking to overtake ran behind offset from the forward boat so as to not pull too much water from beneath the slower boat. The slower boat would also knock the power off as the faster boat overtook, so as to minimise the risk of running aground.

Edited August 25, 2009 by David Schweizer