Double Mooring

[greywolf]

shame that just a little bit of give and take could have prevented all the fines etc

[Chris-B]

 

Right, I'm utterly fed-up with your baiting of respected members of this forum this so you've been added to my ignore list. Total number of participants = 1 since 2005. Well done.

 

Well said Jill have a special "greenie"

Chris

[deletedaccount]

Pepper spray is a bit much tbh. The guy must have been frothing at the mouth or something.

[mayalld]

Isn't the debate of the laws of trespass irrelevant? Whatever the answer surely no one actually believes that there is ever the slightest possibility of a case being brought. Might as well debate what Jesus would do, or Harry Potter for that matter.

 

irrelevant?

 

Possibly, but it's more fun that the other argument!

[deletedaccount]

irrelevant?

 

Possibly, but it's more fun that the other argument!

 

[wrigglefingers]

Well said Jill have a special "greenie"

Chris

 

Thanks, Chris.

Edited November 10, 2011 by wrigglefingers

[Albion]

Trespass to Chattels does indeed require an intent to interfere. I fail to see how a deliberate act of breasting to another boat could fail to have the requisite intent to interfere.

 

Surely nobody could actually imagine that breasting up can be done without interfering with the other boat, or the owners use of that other boat.

 

Getting back to the original post though Dave, as the area in front of Pennine is always congested with boats and as boats are always breasting up to fill with fuel and do pump-outs, don't you think it was unreasonable of the first guy to refuse the other permission to breast up while he fuelled up (unless, of course, he was just about to set off himself)? The reaction of the one refused was obviously OTT but that's a different matter.

Roger

[Sir Nibble]

shame that just a little bit of give and take could have prevented all the fines etc

It's the same with everything though isn't it. There is no problem so intractable that it cannot be solve by reasonable people talking about it. Equally there is no problem so straightforward that one unreasonable person cannot turn it into multiple arrests.

[mayalld]

But you are misinterpreting the word "interfere". You have to prove interference to possession so, if I breast up against your boat and you ask me to allow you to leave and I say no, then that would constitute trespass to chattels.

 

You would also have to prove actual damages to said chattels.

 

No I wouldn't.

 

Damaging the said chattels is indeed one possibility that would give rise to a trespass, but it is not a necessary part of the tort. Interference with my ability to make full use of my chattel is sufficient to create a trespass.

 

Now, whilst allowing me to leave on request may mitigate the tort, it does not extinguish it, because you would have interfered with my right to come and go at will. If breasing up for a pump out or to refuel, you are unlikely to stop that process to allow me to leave.

 

I should add that in this case, there is the added complication that the mooring owner may have mandated allowing breasting up as a part of permitting the first boat to be there, in which case there was implicit permission.

[WotEver]

I should add that in this case, there is the added complication that the mooring owner may have mandated allowing breasting up as a part of permitting the first boat to be there, in which case there was implicit permission.

Indeed. On the approach to Springwood Haven the sign reads "Feel free to breast-up". I've always understood that to mean "If you moor here don't be surprised if someone breasts-up to you".

 

Tony

 

edit to change writes to reads, because a sign can't write...

Edited November 10, 2011 by WotEver

[carlt]

No I wouldn't.

 

Damaging the said chattels is indeed one possibility that would give rise to a trespass, but it is not a necessary part of the tort. Interference with my ability to make full use of my chattel is sufficient to create a trespass.

 

Now, whilst allowing me to leave on request may mitigate the tort, it does not extinguish it, because you would have interfered with my right to come and go at will. If breasing up for a pump out or to refuel, you are unlikely to stop that process to allow me to leave.

 

I should add that in this case, there is the added complication that the mooring owner may have mandated allowing breasting up as a part of permitting the first boat to be there, in which case there was implicit permission.

Sorry Dave but you are still choosing to ignore the word "intent".

 

If someone is moored up at a refuelling or pumpout point and starts banging on about trespass I would imagine the business owner would soon be pointing out that your interference with his property is the greater wrong. Why are you still moored there, if you have finished refuelling?

 

Likewise, at a water point, how do you prove intent if someone is happy to disconnect their hose, whilst you move off?

Edited November 10, 2011 by carlt

[LoneWolf]

If you need to check yours a glance in the mirror should do it, it's that thing at the top of your neck.

 

I will wager in six months if you carry on the way you are you will be on that many ignore lists (Virtual or otherwise) that your participation in the forum will be pointless.

 

So my advice for what it's worth is to wind your neck in, stop trying to provoke an argument at each and every turn, learn from some of the more experienced members on here instead of trying to pick a fight with them.

 

Anyway over to you for the last word, I know you won't be able to resist, because I'm done with you -

 

well said.

 

6 months is a bit optimistic though, it's been about 6 weeks &, like Wriggle, i'm considering it which i've never done before

Edited November 10, 2011 by LoneWolf

[David Schweizer]

Getting back to the original post though Dave, as the area in front of Pennine is always congested with boats and as boats are always breasting up to fill with fuel and do pump-outs, don't you think it was unreasonable of the first guy to refuse the other permission to breast up while he fuelled up (unless, of course, he was just about to set off himself)? The reaction of the one refused was obviously OTT but that's a different matter.

Roger

Asking to breast up in some places muight be a bit of an imposition, but at a fueling point, where presumably the moored boat was taking on fuel, is fairly normal, and I doubt whether the boatyard would start delivering fuel until the boat was soundly secured.

 

I would always ask before actually doing it but would be somewhat surprised if permission was refused. I doubt that I would fly into a rage, but I might well sit outside the moored boat, and my enthusiasm to get out of the way if they wanted to leave before me, might be somewhat limited.

[Guest]

Surely non of this justifies flying into a rage though.

 

If I was at the fuel point I wouldn't have a problem with a boat mooring next to me, how long does it take to fill a boat diesel tank?? - way less time than a water tank (at least on our boat) and if I really was in a rush (which can happen) just a simple 'hang a sec while I get my boat away and you can have the mooring' would be all it takes.

 

I really wonder about folk who worry about other boats breasting up with them cope in broad locks with other boats....

 

 

 

 

 

doh.... typed narrow instead of broad....

Edited November 10, 2011 by MJG

[Albion]

Asking to breast up in some places muight be a bit of an imposition, but at a fueling point, where presumably the moored boat was taking on fuel, is fairly normal, and I doubt whether the boatyard would start delivering fuel until the boat was soundly secured.

 

I would always ask before actually doing it but would be somewhat surprised if permission was refused. I doubt that I would fly into a rage, but I might well sit outside the moored boat, and my enthusiasm to get out of the way if they wanted to leave before me, might be somewhat limited.

 

The situation at Pennine is fairly congested due to a smallish quay and their own trip boat moorings, so the same section of the quay is used for pump-out, fuel and even visiting boats wishing to discuss chandlery/repairs etc. The quay isn't dedicated to one specific function. If I happen to see Ian Clarke (the owner of Pennine) I'll ask him what happened to cause the fracas.

Roger

[AlanH]

Can someone explain what this is all about? I've looked through the thread and can't really find anything very cotroversial in Guitar Doctor's posts. At least nothing more offensive that the usual arguments. Is it because he is relativley new?

[sebrof]

So my advice for what it's worth is to wind your neck in, stop trying to provoke an argument at each and every turn, learn from some of the more experienced members on here instead of trying to pick a fight with them.

 

Yes, GD, there's no need to waste effort picking fights with people. Let them pick fights with you. And they will!

[David Schweizer]

Surely non of this justifies flying into a rage though.

 

If I was at the fuel point I wouldn't have a problem with a boat mooring next to me, how long does it take to fill a boat diesel tank?? - way less time than a water tank (at least on our boat) and if I really was in a rush (which can happen) just a simple 'hang a sec while I get my boat away and you can have the mooring' would be all it takes.

 

I really wonder about folk who worry about other boats breasting up with them cope in broad locks with other boats....

 

 

 

 

 

doh.... typed narrow instead of broad....

But some boat owners have the same problem with double locks, I have come across boat owners that would not allow another boat in the lock with them, (a somewhat unsuccsesful demand in some instances), and I once met a boat that had been waiting for over a couple of hours at a lock on the Grand Union because they did not wish to share.

 

I get a bit anxious about sharing with an elderly wooden or fibreglass cruiser, just in case our heavy hull causes damage. I do point out that I do not really want to hold our boat on hard with ropes, especially if working single handed, but if the owner is happy to share then that is Ok with me.

Edited November 10, 2011 by David Schweizer

[cereal tiller]

Can someone explain what this is all about? I've looked through the thread and can't really find anything very cotroversial in Guitar Doctor's posts. At least nothing more offensive that the usual arguments. Is it because he is relativley new?

Agreed

i dont recall having heard him swear at other forum members,or be abusive.

 

maybe he should display the unwanted,discarded and presumably disgraced ex-mayalld DRAGON as his avatar?

[wrigglefingers]

Can someone explain what this is all about? I've looked through the thread and can't really find anything very cotroversial in Guitar Doctor's posts. At least nothing more offensive that the usual arguments. Is it because he is relativley new?

 

No, it is because he made provocative and/or offensive comments in another thread and then dragged the argument into this one despite a number of us trying to deflect him. The issues that he chosen to comment on are long-standing areas of disagreement which he has descended onto and unerringly opened a number of old forum wounds. I think it's safe to say that I've rarely seen so many old protagonists so united. It is utterly untrue to to say that this forum is unwelcoming to new folk and the main decriers of his behaviour are people with whom I may not necessarily agree but would trust my life to in an emergency.

 

It's his utter lack of decorum and sensitivity that I object to not the fact hat he's new. We could think about it like this - I arrive at a new pub for a music session clutching my concertina. Do I play loudly over everyone else determined to show my spangly brilliance and mastery of my instrument in the hope of showing up the regulars' utter lack of skill and dexterity? Nope, because that's rude and frankly, I'm no better than them and often a lot worse so I listen and play along gently, working out where I can add to the mix and when to stay silent. It's the same here.

Edited November 10, 2011 by wrigglefingers

[mayalld]

Sorry Dave but you are still choosing to ignore the word "intent".

 

If someone is moored up at a refuelling or pumpout point and starts banging on about trespass I would imagine the business owner would soon be pointing out that your interference with his property is the greater wrong. Why are you still moored there, if you have finished refuelling?

 

Have we established that this is the case?

 

No, I rather think that we haven't!

 

Having found myself in a similar position previously, I can see other scenarios;

 

I had filled up, and went into the office to tender payment. By the time I returned to the boat, another boat was moored alongside, diesel cap off. His reaction to my polite "excuse me, but we are leaving now" was "well I'm tied up, so you'll have to wait until I've finished filling up".

 

I pointed out that I was actually leaving now, not waiting 15 minutes whilst he filled up and that it was entirely up to him whether he detatched his boat before that event occurred

[Laurie Booth]

But some boat owners have the same problem with double locks, I have come across boat owners that would not allow another boat in the lock with them, (a somewhat unsuccsesful demand in some instances), and I once met a boat that had been waiting for over a couple of hours at a lock on the Grand Union because they did not wish to share.

 

I get a bit anxious about sharing with an elderly wooden or fibreglass cruiser, just in case our heavy hull causes damage. I do point out that I do not really want to hold our boat on hard with ropes, especially if working single handed, but if the owner is happy to share then that is Ok with me.

I must admit I hate sharing locks with other boats.

[carlt]

It's his utter lack of decorum and sensitivity that I object to not the fact hat he's new. We could think about it like this - I arrive at a new pub for a music session clutching my concertina. Do I play loudly over everyone else determined to show my spangly brilliance and mastery of my instrument in the hope of showing up the regulars' utter lack of skill and dexterity? Nope, because that's rude and frankly, I'm no better than them and often a lot worse. It's the same here.

Perhaps, if he went back and read our first interchanges he would see that I wasn't looking for a fight but a discussion, he may stop the baiting but I don't see that happening.

 

Then again, this very much reminds me of Phylis' early days (weeks?) and, despite still being argumentative, stubborn and sometimes misguided, has stopped the pointless posturing (apart from with Dave who is just as bad when they are in the same thread ) and has become a valued and entertaining contributor to the forum.

 

Edited to add: Did you see how I resisted the temptation to tell the one about the landlord who always invited the concertina player to play a few ditties at 11pm, to clear the pub quickly?

Edited November 10, 2011 by carlt

[Sir Nibble]

has stopped the pointless posturing

Swing bridges anyone?

[carlt]

I had filled up, and went into the office to tender payment. By the time I returned to the boat, another boat was moored alongside, diesel cap off. His reaction to my polite "excuse me, but we are leaving now" was "well I'm tied up, so you'll have to wait until I've finished filling up".

 

Then he is, arguably, committing trespass to chattels because, as I said, there is intent to deprive you of them.

 

You are merely citing an example that proves my point, not yours.