Jump to content

Boater With Home Mooring - Court Action Started.


Alan de Enfield
 Share

Featured Posts

 

It would seem to others, CRT especially, that he IS breaking the rules.

 

Surely the whole point of this action is to find out if this bloke is breaking the rules, or not, by asking the court for a ruling.

 

 

MtB

 

It should be remembered that CaRT and their solicitors, initially tried to make this an undisputed hearing rather than asking for a ruling. The difference is considerable.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

No, I believe that Mr Dunkerly has just such a mooring. The issue is that he doesn't seem to like his mooring and chooses to use visitor moorings instead

Why don't you read earlier posts before repeating previously made ill informed speculation? I have never moored on a VM with my present boat since buying it.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Why don't you read earlier posts before repeating previously made ill informed speculation? I have never moored on a VM with my present boat since buying it.

 

I don't see why you should not use visitor moorings. We are "all" entitled to use them.

In fact given the present state of affairs on some parts of the system, visitor moorings will possibly be the "only" place to moor in future.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Where did you get that idea from Steve?

 

Probably from me.

 

I've been noting how long uncut sections of bankside on the K&A are getting signs saying "Nature Reserve, NO MOORING", and predicting this will spread over the whole system eventiually. When this happens, VMs will be the only politically correct places to moor in order to protect the voles, wild flowers etc.

 

The final step will be to charge the captive market £10 a night to moor on the VMs.

 

Just my pet conspiracy theory. It may never happen!

 

MtB

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I don't see why you should not use visitor moorings. We are "all" entitled to use them.

In fact given the present state of affairs on some parts of the system, visitor moorings will possibly be the "only" place to moor in future.

Yes we are, but C&RT claimed at one point to be taking action against me for overstaying on VM's . . . more info. on Post 352

Link to comment
Share on other sites

 

Probably from me.

 

I've been noting how long uncut sections of bankside on the K&A are getting signs saying "Nature Reserve, NO MOORING", and predicting this will spread over the whole system eventiually. When this happens, VMs will be the only politically correct places to moor in order to protect the voles, wild flowers etc.

 

The final step will be to charge the captive market £10 a night to moor on the VMs.

 

Just my pet conspiracy theory. It may never happen!

 

MtB

 

And if that actually happened Mike, there would be hundreds of boats cruising through the night because they cannot find anywhere to moor. The K&A would seem to be an exception, when I was volunteering for the K&A Trust there was something almost amounting to paranoia amongst BW staff about Voles, to the extent that people stopped reporting sightings for fear that anothe section of bank woud be made off limits.

 

That was all more than ten years ago, and i haven't seen the pracrice extend to other canals yet. If anything, my experience suggests that there seem to be more (non VM) spaces for mooring in many places than in the past.

Edited by David Schweizer
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Why don't you read earlier posts before repeating previously made ill informed speculation? I have never moored on a VM with my present boat since buying it.

 

In which case, I will correct myself.

 

You don't moor on formal VMs, but you do moor to the towpath.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

paranoia amongst BW staff about Voles, to the extent that people stopped reporting sightings for fear that anothe section of bank would be made off limits.

There seem to be more (non VM) spaces for mooring in many places than in the past.

Non-Vole-Molesting, I assume?

Edited by Athy
Link to comment
Share on other sites

 

I don't see the significance of that statement, unless TD claims he doesn't, which I don't think he did.

 

TD appears to believe that the fact that he is continually occupying public moorings that are not formal VMs, rather than occupying VMs means that it is OK.

 

Bridge Hopping is Bridge Hopping

Link to comment
Share on other sites

 

TD appears to believe that the fact that he is continually occupying public moorings that are not formal VMs, rather than occupying VMs means that it is OK.

 

Bridge Hopping is Bridge Hopping

Just for the sake of clarity could you explain what you mean by bridge hopping when it comes to a boat with a home mooring? And to make it even clearer a link to any relevant law would be very useful
Link to comment
Share on other sites

TD appears to believe that the fact that he is continually occupying public moorings that are not formal VMs, rather than occupying VMs means that it is OK.

 

Bridge Hopping is Bridge Hopping

 

If you are continuously cruising are you not continually occupying "public moorings" I assume this is just towpath.

 

If you have a home mooring and move every 14 days at what stage do you not conform with the Act under which CRT runs the waterways? Surely this is the point here as opposed to whether we approve of an individuals chosen cruising pattern or not.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

 

TD appears to believe that the fact that he is continually occupying public moorings that are not formal VMs, rather than occupying VMs means that it is OK.

 

Bridge Hopping is Bridge Hopping

 

When did this word appear in the accusations ?

 

According to TD he is accused of :-

 

...........insufficient use of my home mooring and overstaying on nearby VM's . . . they had to give up with this one after they were obliged to admit in writing that one of the places where I am frequently seen to be moored are not VM's at all, and my other much used spot is against land owned by the Environment Agency

 

Accused of overstaying on VMs - subsequently retracted.

 

So your interpretation of "frequently seen" becomes "Continually"

 

Give the guy a break - until he is either found innocent or guilty and then discuss the reasons why it has gone the way it has.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

TD appears to believe that the fact that he is continually occupying public moorings that are not formal VMs, rather than occupying VMs means that it is OK.

 

Bridge Hopping is Bridge Hopping

. I bet he,s chuffed your not the judge in this case you,ve come to a guilty verdict without even reading any of the previous 21 pages A bell end is a bell end
Link to comment
Share on other sites

All this legal messing about surely if CRT gets its act together then everything will be covered by terms and conditions of licence which we either accept or remove boat from CRT waters.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

It's been conclusively shown earlier in the thread that CRT have no right to impose conditions for granting a licence beyond having insurance and a BSS.

 

MtB

But having insurance is the law seems you do not really follow the thread you do a lot of posting in you should try and keep to the facts
  • Greenie 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

All this legal messing about surely if CRT gets its act together then everything will be covered by terms and conditions of licence which we either accept or remove boat from CRT waters.

 

Are you proposing that C&RT can write anything in their T&C's (even if it is illegal) and we either adhere to it or get off C&RT waters ?

 

So - if the DVLA decided that as a condition of taxing/licensing your car you could only drive on Motorways on a Friday and must maintain a speed of 90 miles an hour, or you were not allowed to park within 5 miles of your house, you would accept it or get rid of your car ?

 

Sorry - poor analogies but brain frustrated by such a blinkered view of reality - sad really.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

BUT why can they not impose terms and conditions it is upto the individual to accept or not surely same as going into a pub that has a dress code or having a car on the public highway .One is landlords terms &conditions the other is law .

Link to comment
Share on other sites

BUT why can they not impose terms and conditions it is upto the individual to accept or not surely same as going into a pub that has a dress code or having a car on the public highway .One is landlords terms &conditions the other is law .

And there you have it waterways are subject to law as set out by parliament
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

  • 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.