More Bell Weir Drama !

[Serenity Malc]

Yello,

 

I was awoken this morning to the racket of portable fire pumps and half a dozen fire crew ! .... my neighbour's 1920's 65ft gentlemans cruiser was a metre deep in Thames water.

 

It's been a house boat for years ... apparently the bilge pump(s)had packed up. It's been pumped out 80% by the fire crew but is still taking on water.

 

Malc.

[Naughty Cal]

There have certainly been some unlucky boaters up your way!

[bargemast]

I hope for him that they'll manage to safe his boat.

 

Peter.

[bigcol]

devastating

 

I wonder if when a bilge pump fails either due to loss of battery power or faulty old pump, the insurance will pay out if the boat sinks.

 

it seems to me that that insurance companys will wiggle out of anything, and all boats should have bilge pumps,

and if the boat is mantained then sinkings wouldnt happen?

 

ie why would a insurance company pay out??

 

col

[Naughty Cal]

They may not if it is proven to have sunk due to lack of maintenance.

 

The owners may well then be landed with the bill from the fire service as well!

 

Hopefully it can be proven to be something else and the insurers will settle the claim swiftly.

[Serenity Malc]

Yello,

 

The fault was with the main HUGE bilge pump. Being and old wooden boat, there had been a gradual seepage into the bilges, until the water tank overflow eventually became submerged and the craft began to fill somehow.

Now pumped out and owner has gone to buy a new bilge pump.

 

Hopefully the drama in now over .... [personal details removed]

 

Malc.

Edited January 3, 2013 by DHutch

[MtB]

 

 

Nor me but for a different reason. I cannot imagine an insurance company issuing comprehensive insurance on an old boat such as this without a hull survey showing it to be in tip-top condition. Given the need for a 'HUGE bilge pump' it seems to me that the hull is probably in dire need of possibly extensive repair work.

 

MtB

Edited January 3, 2013 by Theo
To remove personal information

[ChimneyChain]

I bet the poor chap will Appreciate his personal situation being spoken about on the Internet.

 

Darren

[Barry]

 

The owners may well then be landed with the bill from the fire service as well!

 

 

 

I don't think so Rachel. Payments for fire service services are extremely rare. In my 28 years I was involved in a job that the fire service charged for only once. It was a pre-arranged job to water a newly laid grass tennis court that was suffering in a drought.

 

There are Special Service Calls, which might be charged for. There are also Emergency Special Service Calls, which are not charged for, on the grounds that all emergency calls have been paid for out of your council tax. In my experience saving somebody's floating home from sinking would be seen as an emergency

 

This is as it was when I retired two years ago of course. I accept that in these rapidly changing financially tough times Fire Authorities (who are part of county or metropolitan councils) may well change their policies to save or recoup money

Edited January 3, 2013 by Bazza2

[Arthur Marshall]

devastating

 

I wonder if when a bilge pump fails either due to loss of battery power or faulty old pump, the insurance will pay out if the boat sinks.

 

 

Has anyone ever had an automatic bilge pump that's worked? I've always used them, and both times they've really been needed they haven't switched on when the water rose in the bilge. I don't trust them any more.

[Naughty Cal]

Has anyone ever had an automatic bilge pump that's worked? I've always used them, and both times they've really been needed they haven't switched on when the water rose in the bilge. I don't trust them any more.

 

Ours works and has been used in anger when our raw water pump seals bailed out on the lower Ouse. We check it on a regular basis to make sure it works.

 

The float switch has broken once which we have replaced and the alarm broke as well which we also fixed at the same time.

[Chris Pink]

I bet the poor chap will Appreciate his personal situation being spoken about on the Internet.

 

Darren

 

Well said Darren, it's loathsome the way this forum talks about people behind their back sometimes.

 

It's one thing to do this in private in the pub but in public in the widest sense?

 

It's poor taste at best.

[Naughty Cal]

Well said Darren, it's loathsome the way this forum talks about people behind their back sometimes.

 

It's one thing to do this in private in the pub but in public in the widest sense?

 

It's poor taste at best.

 

How do you talk behind someone's back on a public forum?

[Theo]

How do you talk behind someone's back on a public forum?

 

He might not look at this forum

 

N

[Naughty Cal]

He might not look at this forum

 

N

 

But he is free to if he wishes.

 

If you are talking behind someone's back you make sure they don't hear you. You don't do it on a public forum.

 

Aside from that I'm not sure who is being rude or offensive to him. It has just been mentioned that a boat is sinking, so what?

[Nine of Hearts]

It's one thing to do this in private in the pub but in public in the widest sense?

 

I'm struggling to make moral sense of this one. It's ok in the pub, but not in public? What is the distinction, that in the former case your conversation is less likely to be overheard (and possibly corrected?) by the subject of your gossip? Are you, by any chance, from Sparta?

[Guest]

But he is free to if he wishes.

 

If you are talking behind someone's back you make sure they don't hear you. You don't do it on a public forum.

 

Aside from that I'm not sure who is being rude or offensive to him. It has just been mentioned that a boat is sinking, so what?

 

I think some stuff about his personal situation was removed though. See post #6 it was appended with -

 

This post has been edited by Theo: Today, 12:12 PM

Reason for edit: To remove personal information

Edited January 3, 2013 by The Dog House

[John Holden]

devastating

 

I wonder if when a bilge pump fails either due to loss of battery power or faulty old pump, the insurance will pay out if the boat sinks.

 

it seems to me that that insurance companys will wiggle out of anything, and all boats should have bilge pumps,

and if the boat is mantained then sinkings wouldnt happen?

 

ie why would a insurance company pay out??

 

col

 

Many years ago when in the building industry, I remember a case of a builder who had a load of scaffolding collapse. The insurance company was about to pay out on the basis that the builder had been negligent.

The builder argued, successfully, that he had not been negligent and the insurance company rescinded its payment on the grounds that if the builder wasn't negligent then it must have been an act of god, and they don't cover acts of god!

[Serenity Malc]

Yello,

 

Well .... I personally think that license evasion is wrong .... why should honest Thames boaters have to pay considerable sums to use the facilities and moor on the river, whilst dishonest ones evade it for years ? It's the particular owners risk to evade the authorities though. I have another neighbour who has been to court this year for the same offence. I also think that not insuring your craft is stupid .... but then once again it's down to the individual concerned. It's their potential loss ... not mine.

 

It's nothing to do with talking behind someones back ..... I'd say the very same to his face, any day of the week.

 

Malc.

[Serenity Malc]

Yello,

 

I fail to understand why censorship has been required for one of my posts.

 

I'm not someone who actively seeks to "grass" on the dishonest people of The Thames, regardless of my personal opinions of license evaders and those who are to stupid to insure their craft.

 

 

There's nothing 'poor' about people who seek to evade their costs on The Thames ! It's their risk, not mine.

 

 

Malc.

 

 

Edited: For fear of further offense.

Edited January 3, 2013 by Serenity Malc

[OldGoat]

Yello,

 

I fail to understand why censorship has been required for one of my posts.

 

I'm not someone who actively seeks to "grass" on the dishonest people of The Thames, regardless of my personal opinions of license evaders and those who are to stupid to insure their craft.

 

This particular chap has already come under the scrutiny of The EA very recently. I've purposely NOT mentioned a boat name or an owner name. Not that it would make any difference.

 

There's nothing 'poor' about people who seek to evade their costs on The Thames ! It's their risk, not mine.

 

 

Malc.

 

 

You a get a greenie for that sentiment, Too many folks take the - water nowadays. EA have done a lot this year to make folks pay up their dues. If all boats were licenced EA would have more funds to give users a better service (not that it's bad at the moment - but wait until the season starts...)

 

If the boat in question is the one that I guess it is - then that's a shame as it has a grace about it under the modifications and a pleasant change from the acres of white composites....

Edited January 3, 2013 by OldGoat

[MtB]

I think some stuff about his personal situation was removed though. See post #6 it was appended with -

 

This post has been edited by Theo: Today, 12:12 PM

Reason for edit: To remove personal information

 

Post No 6 was mine, and nothing I wrote was deleted by Theo, other than my quote from the OP.

 

I don't understand why as none was personal info, but some was information about the boat licence. Public info already surely.

 

MtB

[Chris Pink]

I'm struggling to make moral sense of this one. It's ok in the pub, but not in public? What is the distinction, that in the former case your conversation is less likely to be overheard (and possibly corrected?) by the subject of your gossip? Are you, by any chance, from Sparta?

 

Well then if you are struggling to understand the moral situation try the legal one; a private conversation cannot fall foul of the laws of slander.

 

This boat's licensing status is purely an affair between the owner and the EA.

 

Mind if you are struggling with the morality of public allegations then you'll probably struggle with that also.

 

Do you think it would be Ok if I made an allegation about you or Serenity Malc?

 

 

..

Edited January 3, 2013 by Chris Pink

[DHutch]

You a get a greenie for that sentiment, Too many folks take the - water nowadays. EA have done a lot this year to make folks pay up their dues. If all boats were licenced EA would have more funds to give users a better service (not that it's bad at the moment - but wait until the season starts...)

The thing is however, we don't know the full story, and even if we did, I don't think its fair to post it on the forum.

 

How anyone else here like it if there where in a similar position?

 

I have been contact by another member who states the boat in question is not on EA water and hence does not require a licence. Again I do no know if this is true or not, but nor am I about to spend time finding out, think it to be debated further on this forum, or support anyone airing others personal matters publicly or otherwise on the forum.

 

 

Daniel