K&A Trust v Narrowboatworld

[Chris Pink]

You and I know that isn't the case.

 

NABO are wasting the members money on lawyers to argue that anything other than a 14 day limit is illegal, and are opposed to the CC guidelines.

 

Now you're being ridiculous.

 

The organisation makes a statement, that's all it does, make statements, so if it makes a statement X then for you to say "well it says X but means Y ' is absurd.

 

For many people, including me, boating is a leisure activity, not a lifestyle. We both work full time and regard our limited leisure time as precious. I make no excuses for not joining a waterways organisation. Where do you think I am, at school needing to excuse an absence? It is not that people are disinterested but they have limited available time. We already belong to a cruising club and the petty politics of that are more than enough without encountering more in some other organisation.

 

You appear to be agreeing with Sue, you can't be bothered. So where is your problem exactly?

[gaggle]

Am I suggesting that NABO listen to non-members? Yes I am. NABO aims to represent ALL boat owners, and if its agenda (whether set by all the members or by just the clique) differs from the agenda that the majority of boaters want, it can never achieve that aim. Yes, people could join and change the agenda, but that means dumping the aim of representing all boaters.

 

Do I think that the views of members differ from non-members? Yes, I do. I am satisfied that NABO's agenda means that people who disagree choose not to join, or leave. What remains is an unrepresentative cross section of boat owners driven by the agenda of the inner circle.

 

What is the "own agenda"; Top of the list is the fact that NABO council is, and has long been, a friend of the Continuous Moorer. Council seeks to oppose any move to regulate moorings, or to enforce the rules on people pretending to CC. They do this, oblivious to the fact that the vast majority of boaters obey the rules, and expect others to do likewise.

 

 

I dont see this on my cruises ,the vast majority i come across may talk the talk about about rules but dont walk the walk themselves , rules are for others.

I have come across boats breaking all manner of rules on lock landing , water points and time restricted mooring and the boats have displayed mooring licence papers on display so they are not continuous moorers , the majority of boaters only obey the rules when it suits them and some rules they dismiss altogether.

I have now joined this majority , i have left behind the days of being a minority new to boating and will obey the rules person .

The ones who can qoute the rules are often the worst offenders i find.

[mayalld]

Now you're being ridiculous.

 

The organisation makes a statement, that's all it does, make statements, so if it makes a statement X then for you to say "well it says X but means Y ' is absurd.

 

 

But that ISN'T all it does.

 

It makes statements saying that it is doing something, but it also writes letters to BW, and employs lawyers to do so, arguing for things that do not correspond to its statements.

[DaveC]

I thought this was about the K & A CT and NBW. Seems to have gone to knocking NABO now.

[mayalld]

Reading back over this thread it is apparent that past achievements of Nabo can be pointed to, some of them, like keeping joint-ownership boats out of the clutches of the MCA, very notable. Whereas the criticism here is all very arbitrary and unspecific, much of it based on speculation, past 'grudges' and personality dislikes.

 

As I have already stated, what I take from this thread is Nabo's poor record of PR outside of its own membership. This can be changed, hopefully.

 

 

As ever, your only response to criticism is to ignore it and try to talk about something else.

 

NABO has no problem whatsoever with PR. It does very well at pretending to be an organisation for all boat owners, whilst actually pursuing a narrow agenda in support of the overstayers, the unlicenced, the bridge hoppers etc.

 

There is, however, good news. As a result of this thread, and the input from yourself, Sue and Howard, I have realised the error of my ways. My present laisez faire attitude is deeply wrong, and if I think something is wrong, I should do something about it. So I have. It won't stop NABO promoting the interests of the rule breakers, using the money handed over by the gullible, but at least I will have another £15 to waste all by myself this year. The Standing Order has been cancelled.

[carlt]

 

The point remains. NABO pursues an agenda that benefits a small number of boat owners, and is detrimental to most boat owners.

Sorry Dave but you are wrong.

 

NABO's attempt to clarify this much argued, and never resolved, point of law is beneficial to all boat owners, whether they win or lose.

 

For years the law has been a fudge that BW have managed to fudge even further, with their constant 'redefining' of the law.

 

If it is established that BW cannot enforce anything other than 14 days then maybe they will actually start enforcing 14 days.

 

If it is established that BW can do what the hell they like then at least everyone will know where they stand, like it or not.

 

The only person who seems convinced of BW's absolute power is you. Even BW hum and aaah, nervously, about it, when quizzed on the matter.

 

Seems to have gone to knocking NABO now.

Not knocking, criticising.

 

I would love to join a national organisation that represents all boat owners...but I can't.

 

The only reason the subject has stretched out this long is because two sides are willing to discuss the issue.

 

I think, if you read through carefully, you will see that there has been very little "knocking" and a genuine desire for NABO's critics to see a positive change.

[mayalld]

Sorry Dave but you are wrong.

 

NABO's attempt to clarify this much argued, and never resolved, point of law is beneficial to all boat owners, whether they win or lose.

 

For years the law has been a fudge that BW have managed to fudge even further, with their constant 'redefining' of the law.

 

If it is established that BW cannot enforce anything other than 14 days then maybe they will actually start enforcing 14 days.

 

If it is established that BW can do what the hell they like then at least everyone will know where they stand, like it or not.

 

 

If it were established that BW cannot enforce anything other than 14 days, that would be detrimental to most boaters, as many currently restricted 48 hour moorings, available for leisure boaters would be permanently occupied by infrequent cruisers.

It it is established that BW is right, the law abiding boater gains little.

 

Either way, NABO has pissed a fair chunk of the money that it cons out of the gullible up the wall, and BW has been forced to do the same.

 

I may well do a FOI request to discover just how much has been spent by BW on dealing with NABO's vexatious anti-rules crusade.

[Neil TNC]

....The Standing Order has been cancelled.

 

My rules for joining / payment to clubs and societies:

Never become a life member.

Never pay by direct debit.

Be careful with PayPal as you may not be aware you have signed up to a rolling yearly payment.

[carlt]

If it were established that BW cannot enforce anything other than 14 days, that would be detrimental to most boaters, as many currently restricted 48 hour moorings, available for leisure boaters would be permanently occupied by infrequent cruisers.

 

On the contrary, it may inspire the government to produce legislation that does enable BW to establish and enforce different mooring periods, removing the grey area that exists, now.

[Chris Pink]

 

I may well do a FOI request to discover just how much has been spent by BW on dealing with NABO's vexatious anti-rules crusade.

 

Yes, like you were going to publish your findings on overstayers in Marple, you can talk the talk but...

 

If BW considered NABO's complaint to be vexatious then they could have legitimately refused to consider it. The fact that they didn't means that the complaint has validity, like Carlt says, for right or wrong,

 

I am not a member of NABO because I don't believe they represent my views so we can stand together on this one, Dave

[mayalld]

Yes, like you were going to publish your findings on overstayers in Marple, you can talk the talk but...

 

Indeed, just like that.

 

Unfortunately, the events of last year rather got in the way of collecting the necessary information.

 

You will be glad to know, however, that information gathering is now underway with results expected by the summer.

 

Oh, and it wasn't Marple...

[canaldrifter]

 

 

 

Not knocking, criticising.

 

 

 

 

Thesaurus

knock

verb

 

4 informal : I'm not knocking the company. See criticize .

 

Tone

Edited February 4, 2011 by canaldrifter

[carlt]

Thesaurus

knock

verb

 

4 informal : I'm not knocking the company. See criticize .

 

Tone

I really can't be bothered with playing dictionary corner, with you, but to "knock" something is generally regarded as negative.

 

I believe the vast bulk of the criticism, in this thread, has been positive, with a genuine desire to see an improvement.

Edited February 4, 2011 by carlt

[Chris Pink]

I believe the vast bulk of the criticism, in this thread, has been positive, with a genuine desire to see an improvement.

 

With the exception of one person. But then he enjoys being a victim of NABO

[mayalld]

With the exception of one person. But then he enjoys being a victim of NABO

 

I have expressed my views on the subject many times, in the hope that the oganisation might actually change, but it is apparent that it will not.

 

The clique are in denial, and I cannot be a victim of NABO any longer, because they aint getting another brass farthing from me.

[canaldrifter]

I really can't be bothered with playing dictionary corner, with you, but to "knock" something is generally regarded as negative.

 

 

 

I believe the vast bulk of the criticism, in this thread, has been positive, with a genuine desire to see an improvement.

 

criticize |ˈkritəˌsīz|

verb [ trans. ]

indicate the faults of (someone or something) in a disapproving way

 

I think you confuse criticism with constructive comment. Yourself excluded, the actual criticism here has been almost entirely negative and unsubstantiated.

 

Tone

[David Schweizer]

Reading back over this thread it is apparent that past achievements of Nabo can be pointed to, some of them, like keeping joint-ownership boats out of the clutches of the MCA, very notable. Whereas the criticism here is all very arbitrary and unspecific, much of it based on speculation, past 'grudges' and personality dislikes.

 

As I have already stated, what I take from this thread is Nabo's poor record of PR outside of its own membership. This can be changed, hopefully.

 

Beyond that, there is no point in repeating what has already been said a few times, so I'll withdraw from this thread now and let the Nabo knockers get on with it.

 

Anyway, I have a fair bit of clearing up to do here after the storm. Apart from anything less than heavy being scattered all over the island, the lock house Rayburn-fired cottage central heating boiled during the night and became a steam system!

 

I'm cool.

 

Tone

 

My principal concern about NABO is not just the individual issues being raised by several people (myself included), but why none of the NABO supporters on here will discuss looking at the structure of the Association so that it becomes more democratic and accountable.

 

The issue has been raised by Carl, DaveM, and myself, It is central to the success of any Representative Organization, yet the NABO's supporters are still behaving as if the subject has never been raised.

Edited February 4, 2011 by David Schweizer

[Allan(nb Albert)]

If BW considered NABO's complaint to be vexatious then they could have legitimately refused to consider it. The fact that they didn't means that the complaint has validity, like Carlt says, for right or wrong,

 

I seem to recall many moons ago our Dave saying he was going to make a complaint that I was making vexatious complaints.

 

If you do make a FoI request Dave, be prepared for a long wait -

 

BW could face court charge

[David Schweizer]

criticize |ˈkritəˌsīz|

verb [ trans. ]

indicate the faults of (someone or something) in a disapproving way

 

I think you confuse criticism with constructive comment. Yourself excluded, the actual criticism here has been almost entirely negative and unsubstantiated.

 

Tone

Excuse me Tony,are you suggesting that the examples which several of us have outlined (including an explanation in my response to your PM) are figments of our imagination. If you cannot provide any responses apart from your own unsubstantiated allegations, I suggest you adhere to your earlier promise to "withdraw from this thread now and let the Nabo knockers get on with it."

[Chris Pink]

 

I think you confuse criticism with constructive comment. Yourself excluded, the actual criticism here has been almost entirely negative and unsubstantiated.

 

 

Gosh. That is so far in left field as to, almost, rival Mr Mayall's absurdity.

[canaldrifter]

Excuse me Tony,are you suggesting that the examples which several of us have outlined (including an explanation in my response to your PM) are figments of our imagination. If you cannot provide any responses apart from your own unsubstantiated allegations, I suggest you adhere to your earlier promise to "withdraw from this thread now and let the Nabo knockers get on with it."

 

I'm not going to reveal the contents of your PM, David, but there was nothing substantial in it beyond you feeling miffed and a vague hint about a past accusation against two council members.

 

I wasn't that impressed.

 

I don't see how Nabo could become much more democratic than it is, in that all council members are voted in annually, or co-opted if willing. You think every issue on council agenda should be taken back to the entire membership for a vote? That is unworkable. As Sue pointed out council do poll members for their opinions and they do act on them. They can't poll non-members can they?

 

And yes, having gathered up forty plastic bins from various parts of the island, only to have them scattered again in another gust, I am now waiting for the floor to dry before I try to fix the central heating.

 

Please continue with the 'constructive comment'.

 

Tone

[mayalld]

 

I don't see how Nabo could become much more democratic than it is, in that all council members are voted in annually, or co-opted if willing. You think every issue on council agenda should be taken back to the entire membership for a vote? That is unworkable. As Sue pointed out council do poll members for their opinions and they do act on them. They can't poll non-members can they?

 

 

There is, and has always been whilst I was a member, a culture of trying to marginalise anybody who disagrees with the current council (much as Stuart Sampson did when I first criticised NABO).

 

Do you honestly expect that people who find their objections rubbished in this way are going to go to the trouble of attending in person for a bit of the same?

 

As a result, the orthodoxy becomes self perpetuating.

[Allan(nb Albert)]

My principal concern about NABO is not just the individual issues being raised by several people (myself included), but why none of the NABO supporters on here will discuss looking at the structure of the Association so that it becomes more democratic and accountable.

 

The issue has been raised by Carl, DaveM, and myself, It is central to the success of any Representative Organization, yet the NABO's supporters are still behaving as if the subject has never been raised.

 

Perhaps it is now seen as a non-issue. Certainly the post from Haggis would suggest a problem in that area in the past now resolved (to her satisfaction at least).

Edited February 4, 2011 by Allan(nb Albert)

[Sir Nibble]

On the contrary, it may inspire the government to produce legislation that does enable BW to establish and enforce different mooring periods, removing the grey area that exists, now.

Given the pressures upon parliamentary time I think that may be a long wait, during which prime moorings currently 24 or 48 hours would become more or less residential to the great detriment of all but the selfish, of whom there would be enough to colonise everything close to water and refuse points.

I am astonished that NABO should want to spend money going to the barricades on this one as the only result other than the status quo would be to ruin the chances of most boaters to make cruising stops at the best locations.

Dave sometimes comes over badly but I do not think I can ever recall him aiming any spite at anyone however much he recieves, what he does do is try and interpret the law in what I personally see as a sensible and most likely pretty accurate way and is torn into by anyone who doesn't want the law to mean what it most likely does as that would be inconvenient. A case in point is the "lime green boat rule", that is neither an argument nor counter argument but a demonstration of the absence of an argument.

[Steilsteven]

At the risk of encouraging a ton of bricks to fall on my head,I would like to say the following.

 

Before NABO was formed, there really was no way of persuing complaints/problems to any satisfactory result unless you were well healed and prepared to take it to the ultimate.

 

Organisations, such as this, are started with good intentions but they can't be all things to all people. Some people will be dissatisfied, believing that what is being persued is not in their interest, but this could be because they have an axe to grind and their view becomes clouded. It's very easy to accuse committees of being cliques and it's understanderble that this view point is so common. Any organisation that's run by volunteers will suffer this critisism from time to time. In an ideal world committee members would be rotated on a regular basis in order that no one falls into the trap (and it is a trap) of following their own agenda. Trouble is, there are never enough people that are prepared to give up the free time that is needed to allow this. Ask any committee member of any organisation how long they were prepared to take on the role when they took it up and then ask them how long they've been doing it. There'll be a considerable difference, I'll wager and it won't be because they like it so much that they couldn't give it up. Our last treasurer (NBT) stood down from the roll a couple of years back after 25 years! The reason he stayed on so long, when he was asked, was because no one else was prepared to take over.

 

Constructive critisism is all well and good but this is usually preceeded by knocking so usually takes some time to tell the difference.

 

I've never been a member of NABO and have no connection with it ( I can't belong to everything ) but I'm sure that those in the committee put in an extraordinary amount of time and effort on behalf of the membership and boaters in general. No, they're not perfect but neither is any other organisation.

 

Keith