Jump to content

Sally Ash to Retire

junior

By junior
in General Boating

 Share

Featured Posts

Ssscrudddy Rising Star

Ssscrudddy

Posted
Posted

You reckon? You want to try being one of those "who keep their boat in a marina and only come out a few times a year"! Torn apart we are wink.png

My marina has a pumpout, why on earth would I want to leave my marina when there is no need!

  • Greenie 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites
madcat Experienced

madcat

Posted
Posted

Not up for argument about person I do not know but my opinion of mooring auctions is well known and has been aired on this forum many times.

 

Boaters and CRT are best served by sensible discussion and attempts at co operation.

 

The problems on the K and A are part of the wider affordable housing problem and the high costs of moorings. None of this is helped by taking out or overpricing towpath moorings and trying to force boaters into marinas.

 

I wonder what Sally Ash plans for her retirement, at 63 concentrating on doing those things that give her the greatest pleasure would be what I would advise.

Link to comment
Share on other sites
sueb Veteran II

sueb

Posted
Posted

I didn't realise BW/CRT have been evicting compliant CCers.

 

That being the case, I must amend my view of CRT enforcement.

 

George ex nb Alton retired

That's why the guidance has changed over the years. Some left, some successfully fought back

Link to comment
Share on other sites
Alan de Enfield Veteran II

Alan de Enfield

Posted
Posted

I didn't realise BW/CRT have been evicting compliant CCers.

 

That's why the guidance has changed over the years. Some left, some successfully fought back

 

Are you saying that BW / C&RT have changed their guidance just so they can persue/evict compliant CCers ?

I'm not sure I could go with that view.

Link to comment
Share on other sites
mayalld Veteran II

mayalld

Posted
Posted

That's why the guidance has changed over the years. Some left, some successfully fought back

 

Yes, the guidance has changed over time.

 

However, so far as I can see, BW/CRT have only ever pursued the low hanging fruit on this.

 

Please provide an example of somebody who was removed from the waterways who would now be regarded as compliant.

Link to comment
Share on other sites
sueb Veteran II

sueb

Posted
Posted

I didn't realise BW/CRT have been evicting compliant CCers.

 

 

Are you saying that BW / C&RT have changed their guidance just so they can persue/evict compliant CCers ?

I'm not sure I could go with that view.

No that isn't what I am saying
Link to comment
Share on other sites
David Schweizer Veteran II

David Schweizer

Posted
Posted (edited)

Not up for argument about person I do not know but my opinion of mooring auctions is well known and has been aired on this forum many times.

 

Boaters and CRT are best served by sensible discussion and attempts at co operation.

 

The problems on the K and A are part of the wider affordable housing problem and the high costs of moorings. None of this is helped by taking out or overpricing towpath moorings and trying to force boaters into marinas.

 

I wonder what Sally Ash plans for her retirement, at 63 concentrating on doing those things that give her the greatest pleasure would be what I would advise.

 

Even if CaRT did seek to introduce residential moorings on the western end of the K & A, it is unlikely that the Local Authorities would grant Planning Consent for them.

 

BW did attempt to instal some at Avoncliffe some years ago but the Planning Authority refused consent. The proposed moorings were within a few hundred metres of the Parish boundary, and our Parish Council was included in the formal consultation, where spoke I in favour of recommending approval, but was in a minority of one. The debate was an interesting one with considerable hostility being expressed by some Councillors regarding residential boats, based upon their observations of some boats already moored in the area, together with considerable objection from local residents.

 

Since then the situation has become far worse and I'm afraid it is now just a case of give a dog a bad name!!

Edited by David Schweizer
Link to comment
Share on other sites
Sir Nibble Veteran II

Sir Nibble

Posted
Posted

No that isn't what I am saying

It's not what you are saying that is at issue, it is what you are not saying. You are being pleaded with to say it from several directions but just won't. You have a choice here. If you can cite an example of a compliant CCer being evicted and thereby evidence CaRT's institutional downer on CCers in general you will raise the whole of the forum membership to your cause. If on the other hand you would prefer to collude with this anti CC biase, keep it a secret and just winge then you are complicit in the very offence you complain about.
  • Greenie 3
Link to comment
Share on other sites
Sir Nibble Veteran II

Sir Nibble

Posted
Posted

Now that's serious and from such an unimpeachable source too. I wonder how far away from it's mooring the boat is. Looks like there is evidence of CaRT trying to turn us all into CCers which hardly supports an anti CCer biase. Perhaps we mooring holders should recognise now before it's too late that CaRT want to stamp us out. Poor us, just because we're different.

Link to comment
Share on other sites
mayalld Veteran II

mayalld

Posted
Posted

Just for the sake of clarity you can not have your boat removed for being "non compliant"

 

OK, for the sake of clarity...

 

Can anybody give me an example of somebody whose boat was removed under s8 British Waterways Act 1983, where the boat was unlicenced due to either it having been refused a licence under s17(3)©(ii) of the British Waterways Act 1995, or the licence having been revoked under s17(4)©(ii) of the British Waterways Act 1995, and where, under the current guidance published by CRT, they would accept that the boater is engaged in bona fide navigation.

Link to comment
Share on other sites
cotswoldsman Veteran II

cotswoldsman

Posted
Posted

 

OK, for the sake of clarity...

 

Can anybody give me an example of somebody whose boat was removed under s8 British Waterways Act 1983, where the boat was unlicenced due to either it having been refused a licence under s17(3)©(ii) of the British Waterways Act 1995, or the licence having been revoked under s17(4)©(ii) of the British Waterways Act 1995, and where, under the current guidance published by CRT, they would accept that the boater is engaged in bona fide navigation.

I very much doubt it CRT only go to court as a last resort and when they are fairly certain they will win. In the case of a boat declared as not having a "home mooring" they will have been given 4 warnings before licence is removed once again for the sake of clarity as I understand it all the Associations support enforcement for ALL mon compliant boaters.
Link to comment
Share on other sites
mayalld Veteran II

mayalld

Posted
Posted

I very much doubt it CRT only go to court as a last resort and when they are fairly certain they will win. In the case of a boat declared as not having a "home mooring" they will have been given 4 warnings before licence is removed once again for the sake of clarity as I understand it all the Associations support enforcement for ALL mon compliant boaters.

 

Sue's suggestion is that people have been through the loop of licence revoked for non-compliance, then removal who would be compliant under the rules today.

 

She doesn't seem half as keen on giving an example as she is to repeat the claim.

Link to comment
Share on other sites
Sir Nibble Veteran II

Sir Nibble

Posted
Posted

I have to say that I broadly trust CaRt on this and they are far, far more likely to fail to enforce when they should than the other way around. Looking at their motivation, the responsibility to manage the waterways and the need to make income I'm afraid the "Ethnic cleansing Sally Eichmann" school of thought rubs right alongside faked moon landings and ACAB as far as I am concerned.

Link to comment
Share on other sites
sueb Veteran II

sueb

Posted
Posted

 

Sue's suggestion is that people have been through the loop of licence revoked for non-compliance, then removal who would be compliant under the rules today.

 

She doesn't seem half as keen on giving an example as she is to repeat the claim.

No I'm not going to name people. I am surprised you expect me to.
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!

Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.

Sign In Now
 Share
Go to topic listing

  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    • No registered users viewing this page.
×
×
  • Create New...

Important Information

We have placed cookies on your device to help make this website better. You can adjust your cookie settings, otherwise we'll assume you're okay to continue.