Overstaying

[cotswoldsman]

Just one point BW do not seem to issue Winter Mooring licences unless you are staying for the complete 5 months so they might well have paid for winter moorings. Also some people choose not to display a winter mooring thingy as it is just another piece of paper on the window and feel that as long as BW know they have paid for a winter mooring then why would they need to display it. I also understand that if you have paid for a winter mooring then BW do allow some flexibility as to where you moor.

Think I got it on the correct thread now!!!!

Dave you will also need to check with BW if your supposed over stayers have actually paid for winter moorings and I suspect BW under Data Protection will not give you that information, so suggest you knock on each boat and ask if they have paid for winter moorings. If the answer is no then ask them to move on as it is giving you problems by them being there.

[canaldrifter]

Dave you will also need to check with BW if your supposed over stayers have actually paid for winter moorings and I suspect BW under Data Protection will not give you that information, so suggest you knock on each boat and ask if they have paid for winter moorings. If the answer is no then ask them to move on as it is giving you problems by them being there. [/color][/size]

 

... can I come and take photos when you do it?

 

Tone

[Naughty Cal]

... can I come and take photos when you do it?

 

Tone

 

And i will come and film it as well.

[Willber G]

Just one point BW do not seem to issue Winter Mooring licences unless you are staying for the complete 5 months so they might well have paid for winter moorings.

That's not true any more, they allow pro rata payments for part of the term as long as it is contiguous and finishes at the end of March. That's what I did (Dec-Mar, £432).

[mayalld]

Just one point BW do not seem to issue Winter Mooring licences unless you are staying for the complete 5 months so they might well have paid for winter moorings. Also some people choose not to display a winter mooring thingy as it is just another piece of paper on the window and feel that as long as BW know they have paid for a winter mooring then why would they need to display it. I also understand that if you have paid for a winter mooring then BW do allow some flexibility as to where you moor.

Think I got it on the correct thread now!!!!

Dave you will also need to check with BW if your supposed over stayers have actually paid for winter moorings and I suspect BW under Data Protection will not give you that information, so suggest you knock on each boat and ask if they have paid for winter moorings. If the answer is no then ask them to move on as it is giving you problems by them being there.

 

Whilst they may not tell me that, they will no doubt tell me whether any winter moorings have been allocated at that location.

[Chris Pink]

 

I'm not saying there is a particular problem caused by them not being moved - but clearly nobody has coerced people here into paying extra to stay in the town. That's presumably why nobody bothered to pay!

 

Methinks you protest too much.

 

So if you don't have problem with these people, Alan, why are you talking up the witch burning?

 

Oh, that's a good one!

 

SO, if somebody thinks the price for something is too much, they can simply opt out of paying.

 

Cloud cuckoo land!

 

Well of course they can, it's called consumer choice.

 

You're 2 slices short of a sandwich today continuous moorer.

Edited February 9, 2011 by Chris Pink

[Naughty Cal]

Are we going to get photographic evidence of these "overstayers" or do we just have to takes Sir Mayallds word for it that they are there?

[mayalld]

Are we going to get photographic evidence of these "overstayers" or do we just have to takes Sir Mayallds word for it that they are there?

 

I am pondering what to do about that.

 

I have a record of which boats were there when, recorded in such a way that it can be verified that the entries were made contemperaneously.

 

Not sure that photos would prove anything.

[Chris Pink]

Are we going to get photographic evidence of these "overstayers" or do we just have to takes Sir Mayallds word for it that they are there?

 

It would be also good to have some evidence as to how exactly Lime Green Dave and his continuous mooring buddies are inconvenienced by the witches boats he is targetting.

 

It would be also interesting to know whether these people would like to take action against him for harassment.

[mayalld]

 

Well of course they can, it's called consumer choice.

 

You're 2 slices short of a sandwich today continuous moorer.

 

You seem to have misunderstood consumer choice.

 

Consumer choice means that I can decide not to pay for a loaf of bread that I think is expensive, but that choice goes hand in hand with not having the loaf of bread.

[Naughty Cal]

I am pondering what to do about that.

 

I have a record of which boats were there when, recorded in such a way that it can be verified that the entries were made contemperaneously.

 

Not sure that photos would prove anything.

 

It would prove that thse boats exist

[mayalld]

It would be also good to have some evidence as to how exactly Lime Green Dave and his continuous mooring buddies are inconvenienced by the witches boats he is targetting.

 

It would be also interesting to know whether these people would like to take action against him for harassment.

 

I have already mentioned that the reasons why it affects me personally are not something I intend to discuss.

 

As to harrassment, I think not.

 

It would prove that thse boats exist

 

It would also be excessively intrusive to post such a photo. It is my wish that BW should deal with them appropriately, and my intention to press BW to do so.

 

f it would make you happy, I am prepared to take a photo of the boats, and pass it to a trusted person on the forum who can verify what it shows, and that it corresponds to that day's list.

[Dovetail]

I think we have two sides to this argument.

 

On the one hand Continuous Cruisers

 

And then on the other hand Permanent Moaners

 

Really folk’s life’s to short lol

[mayalld]

I think we have two sides to this argument.

 

On the one hand Continuous Cruisers

 

And then on the other hand Permanent Moaners

 

Really folk's life's to short lol

 

Yet you choose to join the debate.

[Chris Pink]

You seem to have misunderstood consumer choice.

 

Consumer choice means that I can decide not to pay for a loaf of bread that I think is expensive, but that choice goes hand in hand with not having the loaf of bread.

 

Ah good, glad see your ol' grey matter is beginning to work.

 

So a boater without home mooring has a consumer choice, to take a winter mooring without needing to move within the "14 day or longer as is reasonable" stipulation of the law or they can choose to continue in their year round cruising pattern.

 

Directly contradicting your post I originally commented on.

[cotswoldsman]

That's not true any more, they allow pro rata payments for part of the term as long as it is contiguous and finishes at the end of March. That's what I did (Dec-Mar, £432).

 

 

I am talking about the piece of paper that you stick on the window should you so choose to. I personally would not if only on the basis that it would make dave think I had not paid and I could be part of his survey. Just one other point dave I took winter moorings from a farmer but was not issued with a mooring certificate so would I be in your survey as a over stayer?

 

 

 

Edited for spelling

Edited February 9, 2011 by cotswoldsman

[Tim Doran]

I dont know the area in question but if I did and was bothered then I would do an FOI asking for;

 

The number of overstaying notices in that area

The number of convictions ...

The number of complaints ...

The number of winter moorings for each month.

 

Then as a starting point you could see whether BW considers it to be a problem. Asking for agregating information removes the data protection

[Willber G]

I am talking about the piece of paper that you stick on the window should you so choose to.

I got one of these (well, two), it's in my window.

[cotswoldsman]

I got one of these (well, two), it's in my window.

 

Shows how much (little) I know. I was on L&L last year and they certainly did not issue them to anyone staying less than 5 months.

[mayalld]

I am talking about the piece of paper that you stick on the window should you so choose to. I personally would not if only on the basis that it would make dave think I had not paid and I could be part of his survey. Just one other point dave I took winter moorings from a farmer but was not issued with a mooring certificate so would I be in your survey as a over stayer?

 

 

I assume that boaters on the offside have a permanent mooring.

[Chris Pink]

I dont know the area in question but if I did and was bothered then I would do an FOI asking for;

 

The number of overstaying notices in that area

The number of convictions ...

The number of complaints ...

The number of winter moorings for each month.

 

Then as a starting point you could see whether BW considers it to be a problem. Asking for agregating information removes the data protection

 

Thing is Tim, Dave is not after information or an analysis of any problem, as can be seen from his posts, he has simply fallen out with a couple of the boaters on his canal who choose to live how they want and he wants to create trouble and ill feeling for these people.

 

As to harrassment, I think not.

 

 

That's not really for you to say.

 

I know how fond you are of spouting law, here's some for you;

 

(1)A person must not pursue a course of conduct—

 

(a)which amounts to harassment of another, and

 

(b)which he knows or ought to know amounts to harassment of the other.

 

(2)For the purposes of this section, the person whose course of conduct is in question ought to know that it amounts to harassment of another if a reasonable person in possession of the same information would think the course of conduct amounted to harassment of the other.

 

and from Section 7

 

(2)References to harassing a person include alarming the person or causing the person distress.

 

It is my opinion that you are acting illegally. I hope that the victims of your crime feel sufficiently the same as to report you to the police.

 

We have established that this is not an abstract survey of any problem but simply your vendetta against a number of individuals.

 

Unless those individuals reply on this forum and agree to your actions. I ask that the moderators take down this topic.

Edited February 9, 2011 by Chris Pink

[Tim Doran]

Thing is Tim, Dave is not after information or an analysis of any problem, as can be seen from his posts, he has simply fallen out with a couple of the boaters on his canal who choose to live how they want and he wants to create trouble and ill feeling for these people.

 

I was trying to be more subtle than that, but you have hit the nail on the head.

[Iain_S]

Thing is Tim, Dave is not after information or an analysis of any problem, as can be seen from his posts, he has simply fallen out with a couple of the boaters on his canal who choose to live how they want and he wants to create trouble and ill feeling for these people.

 

Really? I don't know one way or the other.

 

That's not really for you to say.

I know how fond you are of spouting law, here's some for you;

(1)A person must not pursue a course of conduct

 

(a)which amounts to harassment of another, and

 

(b)which he knows or ought to know amounts to harassment of the other.

 

(2)For the purposes of this section, the person whose course of conduct is in question ought to know that it amounts to harassment of another if a reasonable person in possession of the same information would think the course of conduct amounted to harassment of the other.

 

I don't think noting boat names/numbers can be construed as harrassment. I consider myself a reasonable person. Therefore, as (2) above refers to "a reasonable person", and not "all rasonable persons", Dave's conduct is not harrassment.

 

and from Section 7

 

(2)References to harassing a person include alarming the person or causing the person distress.

 

It is my opinion that you are acting illegally. I hope that the victims of your crime feel sufficiently the same as to report you to the police.

 

We have established that this is not an abstract survey of any problem but simply your vendetta against a number of individuals.

Have we? I don't recall Dave stating this, and as only he can speak to his motive, we have not established anything.

 

Unless those individuals reply on this forum and agree to your actions. I ask that the moderators take down this topic.

 

So we must assume alarm or distress, unless there is evidence to the contrary?

I may object to my photograph being taken, but that does not mean that every snapper along the cut is guilty of harrassment. Is any person under the age of 20 or so on the towpath is guilty of harrassment, given the number of posts on various fora on "youth problems", "is it safe to moor here?" etc, given that most of the posters are "reasonable persons"?

 

Iain

edited for speelin

Edited February 9, 2011 by Iain_S

[mikevye]

I am pondering what to do about that.

 

I have a record of which boats were there when, recorded in such a way that it can be verified that the entries were made contemperaneously.

 

Not sure that photos would prove anything.

 

It would prove you or a representative could take photos and that you have the use of a camera.

[pearley]

BW-007-xxx or BW-xxx-007 mooring codes indicate a boat that is licenced on BW waters without a home mooring on BW waters.

 

This means;

• Continuous cruisers
• Trailable boats
• Boats based on non-BW waters

 

/quote]

 

 

I'm a Continuous Cruiser and my licence number is CE-001-019-01. Which part of this means no home mooring?