Unnecessarily Inconsiderate Behaviour

[bargemast]

Come back Mr Dragon all is forgiven. Take no notice of Carl's opinion about what you were licking; if he can't tell the difference between an ice cream and a turd then a visit to Specsavers is in order.

Roger

 

 

Just one question: "What can they do at Specsavers to change his taste ?"

 

Peter.

[pearlygeoff]

Removes coat and returns to the fray.

 

 

I still don't see much more than unenlightened, ill informed drivel from people who don't know anything about my situation but assume that they do and, clearly, don't understand how the 'rules' dreamed up by Sally Ash et al relate to the law and how the enforcement of those rules relates to the duties and obligations of a public authority and, also, the Human Rights Act. Not to mention plain old common sense and a'reasonable' interpretation of law and reasonable exercise of power, another legal requirement of a public authority.

 

In short the usual load of bollocks. (With some exceptions).

 

Some of us are trying to do something about the abuses of BW regardless of consequences to ourselves. Yes I could avoid their attention and play 'hide and seek' or have an'unlawful' and unnecessary 'mooring' in a marina but I choose to challenge them as I will not tolerate their unreasonable, unlawful and criminal behaviour, particularly, in relation to the harassment of elderly people with health problems who they are mostly targetting as they are more easily 'rehoused'. Their boat is then sold to someone who, preferably, doesn't live on it and puts it into a BWML marina.

 

The stocking of BWML marinas is what the harassment is all about.

 

They won't listen to my complaints about the treatment of others so I have to put myself 'in harms way' and let them take me to court in an attempt to expose their disgraceful and, to me, intolerable behaviour. How selfish of me.

 

A constructive debate could be useful but I don't think it's possible given the general level of ignorance and intolerance.

 

Reaches for coat yet again.

[Albion]

snipped

A constructive debate could be useful but I don't think it's possible given the general level of ignorance and intolerance.

 

As someone who hasn't entered the debate about your motives and rhetoric I wonder if your comment above is really the best way to get people on your side?

Roger

[cereal tiller]

Removes coat and returns to the fray.

 

 

I still don't see much more than unenlightened, ill informed drivel from people who don't know anything about my situation but assume that they do and, clearly, don't understand how the 'rules' dreamed up by Sally Ash et al relate to the law and how the enforcement of those rules relates to the duties and obligations of a public authority and, also, the Human Rights Act. Not to mention plain old common sense and a'reasonable' interpretation of law and reasonable exercise of power, another legal requirement of a public authority.

 

In short the usual load of bollocks. (With some exceptions).

 

Some of us are trying to do something about the abuses of BW regardless of consequences to ourselves. Yes I could avoid their attention and play 'hide and seek' or have an'unlawful' and unnecessary 'mooring' in a marina but I choose to challenge them as I will not tolerate their unreasonable, unlawful and criminal behaviour, particularly, in relation to the harassment of elderly people with health problems who they are mostly targetting as they are more easily 'rehoused'. Their boat is then sold to someone who, preferably, doesn't live on it and puts it into a BWML marina.

 

The stocking of BWML marinas is what the harassment is all about.

 

They won't listen to my complaints about the treatment of others so I have to put myself 'in harms way' and let them take me to court in an attempt to expose their disgraceful and, to me, intolerable behaviour. How selfish of me.

 

A constructive debate could be useful but I don't think it's possible given the general level of ignorance and intolerance.

 

Reaches for coat yet again.

just what are these ABUSES?

[carlt]

A constructive debate could be useful but I don't think it's possible given the general level of ignorance and intolerance.

If you dismiss everyone in such a way how can you possibly expect anyone to have sympathy for your cause?

 

I haven't studied your case in detail in order to form an opinion but, to be honest, with your attitude, I don't feel inclined to.

[carlt]

Yet another double posting

Edited November 9, 2011 by carlt

[Athy]

Still sounds like Dave Spart to me. But that could be just my ignorance.

[Tiny]

Still sounds like Dave Spart to me. But that could be just my ignorance.

Sounds like Kenny Everett in the bowler hat and suspenders to me.

[14skipper]

Removes coat and returns to the fray.

 

 

I still don't see much more than unenlightened, ill informed drivel from people who don't know anything about my situation but assume that they do and, clearly, don't understand how the 'rules' dreamed up by Sally Ash et al relate to the law and how the enforcement of those rules relates to the duties and obligations of a public authority and, also, the Human Rights Act. Not to mention plain old common sense and a'reasonable' interpretation of law and reasonable exercise of power, another legal requirement of a public authority.

 

In short the usual load of bollocks. (With some exceptions).

 

Some of us are trying to do something about the abuses of BW regardless of consequences to ourselves. Yes I could avoid their attention and play 'hide and seek' or have an'unlawful' and unnecessary 'mooring' in a marina but I choose to challenge them as I will not tolerate their unreasonable, unlawful and criminal behaviour, particularly, in relation to the harassment of elderly people with health problems who they are mostly targetting as they are more easily 'rehoused'. Their boat is then sold to someone who, preferably, doesn't live on it and puts it into a BWML marina.

 

The stocking of BWML marinas is what the harassment is all about.

 

They won't listen to my complaints about the treatment of others so I have to put myself 'in harms way' and let them take me to court in an attempt to expose their disgraceful and, to me, intolerable behaviour. How selfish of me.

 

A constructive debate could be useful but I don't think it's possible given the general level of ignorance and intolerance.

 

Reaches for coat yet again.

Guess first posting did not the ressponse you would have like then ?

Now l see what your protest is all about l am with you " The uprooting of elderly people living on the canals and being forced against their will to move into BW marinas"Thats a disgrace do you have the numbers off how many this has happened to ?.Perhaps we should arrange a march on london to show people this is happening,we could go by coach as that many boats would block the thames do have any idea how many coaches might be needed to take all these poor displaced people ?

14Skipper

[sueb]

I don't know if BW have improved but I did deal with a gentleman who had arranged a hip replacement and social care but not a mooring. He received a lot of hassle, from BW and the locals, until I got involved. Swearing at the locals who told him to move on didn't help his cause, but he was correct, it really was none of their business. In the end he was allowed to stay at the one place he could get on and off his boat and his carers could visit him. As soon as he was able he continued his journey.

[David Mack]

Windlass: distressing gastric condition peculiar to Northern girls.

 

Or "Fart Tart" as said in a Daystar Theatre Company production some years ago.

 

David

[Sir Nibble]

Looks like BW have their next suicidal Davies character then, easy target believing they can make law.

[cereal tiller]

Looks like BW have their next suicidal Davies character then, easy target believing they can make law.

Yes,this chap does sound a bit like the next canal martyr.

 

maybe the the world is in need of futile gestures?

 

people dont seem to realise that BW is not a housing authority.

 

BW do recieve a good deal of criticism,but having had a good few dealings with them over several decades,i have never found their staff to be impolite,and they are not the draconian oppressors that continuous moorers make them out be.

 

someone said recently that mr. davies is currently in conflict with the EA,does anyone know which waterway is hosting this clash?

[carlt]

people dont seem to realise that BW is not a housing authority.

 

No but they are a landlord.

[sociable_hermit]

I see "sociable hermit" didn't offer up anything, as yet, in response to my request for a definitive explanation about how my opinion so differed from that of Mayalld.

Yes, but then I didn't promise to. I merely suggested that confirming which question it was you had in mind might get it answered quicker, if anyone felt inclined.

 

Now you've finally answered MY question about your question, I can see it's nothing of any particular interest to me, so I'm not going to bother. I was hoping it might be something a bit more interesting TBH.

[14skipper]

No but they are a landlord.

Only to those who pay the rent

14skipper

[sebrof]

That explains a lot. I remember the kids at school who excelled in Latin

 

Richard

 

An "O" Level is hardly "excelling".

[sebrof]

I've tried, Lord knows I've tried, to read this whole thread.

 

But, by God!, it's boring.

 

It's worse than those B*****y blogs.

 

Is there a Vet in the house? Put it to sleep, please.

[mayalld]

An "O" Level is hardly "excelling".

 

Indeed not.

 

I too remember the kids who excelled in Latin.

 

My grade C was creditable enough, but hardly stunning.

[David Schweizer]

Indeed not.

 

I too remember the kids who excelled in Latin.

 

My grade C was creditable enough, but hardly stunning.

My Grade '1' in Woodwork was far more useful.

 

P.S. Letter grades were introduced after I left Secondary school

[mrsmelly]

I've tried, Lord knows I've tried, to read this whole thread.

 

But, by God!, it's boring.

 

It's worse than those B*****y blogs.

 

Is there a Vet in the house? Put it to sleep, please.

 

I have to take issue with this post. Absolutely NOTHING is sadder or more boring than B*****y blogs.

[sociable_hermit]

In arguing the argument you actually had no argument in the first place. Undermining my opinion as an opposing opinion to the opinion of Mayalld merely proved you had no understanding of either opinion if you could not decipher the major similarities.

 

As proven now, your "gang" mentality, which failed to shake me, has indeed no foundations and was merely an exercise in attempting to put a person in his place.

 

What is even more amusing is that under the post "double mooring in Skipton", trespass can indeed be classed as a criminal act in a number of circumstances....your initial attacks completely disproven......

I haven't argued with you at all, up until now, AFAIK (though admittedly my memory isn't the best). Please show me where we have been arguing?

 

All I asked was that you repeated your question - whatever it was - so I could see what you were wittering on about. It is hard to filter out one particular point raised an unspecified distance back in a fragmented topic (especially one that you have completely derailed with pointless "humourous" redefinitions that belong in a thread of their own, in the Virtual Pub). It is either lazy or deliberately bloody-minded of you not to either type what you are on about clearly or use the quote function to quote yourself from the earlier post. You'll be able to find it easily, because you wrote it, but others don't have that insight.

 

I'll thank you not to make blanket assumptions and lump me into non-existent cliques to justify your sabre-rattling, thanks very much.

[sociable_hermit]

I owe you an apology then if that is the case as I am on the defensive. I may well have seen your avatar and confused you with another poster who was involved in the earlier melee. I can't confirm at this time of night, but if the error is my error then I accept it, thus apologise for the mix up.

 

As for the humorous redefinitions...I have to insist that I am not the only guilty party...the thread regarding "Liveaboards Mooring or Cruiser" ended up as conversation regarding wiping your ar*e on a copy of GQ with Simon Cowell's face on it (I wouldn't let his face near any part of me personally).....all from a thread where the guy admitted to absuing the CCer system.

 

At least mine were still boat related.....

Ok, fair enough.

 

I've made a few posts in these mooring / CCing threads, but generally about behaviour in the real world, rather than the legal side of things. I don't know enough about how the law works to really get involved in conversations about the dotting of 'i's and crossing of 't's like that, though I do try from time to time. To be honest the real world interests me more. There's a reason why the Courts should only ever be used as a last resort - they aren't good at being pragmatic, tend to benefit lawyers more than anyone else, and generally make everything far too bloody complicated!

 

I can also appreciate that most threads are well off topic by about page 4, and I don't normally mind. But most people who derail a thread don't then get angry when one of their serious questions buried 3 pages (back by their own off topic ramblings) doesn't get found and answered!

 

This particular thread is worse than most as it's also been hijacked on a serious debating level as a dispute about CCing, when it was nothing of the sort. The boat originally being complained about doesn't seem to be a liveaboard (despite being sold VAT free on the basis it would be), and it also doesn't seem to cruise anywhere, so it can't be regarded as a CCer in any shape or form. It IS, however, moored selfishly on a lock landing, thereby needlessly preventing the safe and easy working of the lock and the passage of other boats.

 

The chap (ex-NBW) who is claiming wholesale victimisation of CCers in this thread doesn't actually seem to have read it properly, and may be more than a bit paranoid. Talk about looking for trouble where none exists!

[sociable_hermit]

Ah I see, then effectively we're all uninformed about the situation and have gone off on a wild presumption which has degraded into silliness....

 

I expect inflamed opinions and lack of information has just made it worse by the post.

 

Oh well. I think there's a select number allowed to debate, and others are badgered out. It wasn't what I expected of people supposedly living a relaxed life, but I guess everyone needs an outlet for tension...!! Lol.

Oh, I wouldn't say "all".....

 

The fact that this thread really had nothing to do with CCing, but was then held up as a damning example of how CWDF hates CCers en masse, indicates to me that someone had a ready-made fight to pick and was simply looking for somewhere to start it.

 

The sad thing is that by lumping the selfish behaviour this thread WAS about, with a general tirade about the pros and cons of CCing, the two become associated when they shouldn't be. Which I thought was exactly the sort of thing the chief protagonist was up in arms about in the first place?

[sociable_hermit]

Going myself now.....

 

Your point is valid, as a principle, but on the canals change generally happens at a snail's pace. Perhaps that's why you're meeting with cynicism from certain quarters?

 

I see from another thread that you are in the process of buying a boat, and getting the gas locker modified. This may well prove to be a lesson in the gentle art of canal prevarication. Whatever the job, take the quoted timescale, double it and then add some. That's the pay off for having a life where you can spend time sniffing the roses - everybody else is doing the same. People are used to change on the waterways being at the pace of an arthritic sloth.

 

Having said that, the shift from BW to CaRT is happening at a positively supersonic pace by canal standards. This may mean some changes creeping in that few have spotted coming: it may also mean that the new organisation ends up with big holes in its constitutional structure. Or it might mean business as usual but with a nice new name and shiny logo, and little else.

 

Some would argue that the indecent haste is more about pocketing the last of the money before it runs out / anybody notices, in which case expect the longer term rate of change to become even more sedentary than before. More stakeholder involvement and less money seems like a recipe for indecision if ever there was one. But at least it'll be reassuringly slow