Hackney CMers want to have a "CC Licence" and to remain in one place.

[mayalld]

 

Is that a 'typo' or just an admission that you're not really sure what you are doing ?

 

No, it is clearly just beyond your understanding.

 

I do not read ANYTHING on the dark side.

 

As such, the statement "I believe what I read on the dark side" is untrue, and the statement "I disbelieve what I read on the dark side" is equally untrue.

 

Both are untrue, because "what I read on the dark side" is an empty set.

[magnetman]

I thought it made sense as it was written

[magnetman]

 

They don't! It's fiction.

 

Some boater children are registered as travellers because their parents were. Ok, they were not on boats, but this is the situation - there are quite a few families who have never lived in houses.

 

Well this is what community moorings are.

Ok

 

However. If someone currently registered as 'no home mooring' acquires a residential mooring do they retain traveller status? I think not because a residential mooring is effectively the same as a flat or house so although you are still in a floating box you are no longer a 'traveller'

 

Genuinely interested in this not just a moan as some may like to believe.

 

Which to me implies a clear advantage to retaining cc status IF you are hoping to gain a place in a 'good' aka oversubscribed school

[mayalld]

 

So what makes you believe they wish to declare no home mooring on their licence applications?

 

the fact that they trotted out Panda Smith to demand that they not be forced into taking permanent moorings.

 

if I am wrong to read this into it, then I retract all that I have said about wishing to retain CCer status.

[Alf Roberts]

 

the fact that they trotted out Panda Smith to demand that they not be forced into taking permanent moorings.

 

if I am wrong to read this into it, then I retract all that I have said about wishing to retain CCer status.

 

OK, let me get this right.....

 

you read this; "Boating groups have also criticised the CRT for their “aggressive” enforcement. Pamela Smith, chair of The National Boating Travellers Assocation said that Hackney Boating Families should not be “harassed into taking permanent moorings”.

 

....and went from there to "they wish to retain CCer status"?

 

(whatever that is, given that if they have a home mooring there is no "CCer status" to claim)

 

 

You're not really following this, are you.

Edited December 17, 2014 by Alf Roberts

[mayalld]

 

OK, let me get this right.....

 

you read this; "Boating groups have also criticised the CRT for their “aggressive” enforcement. Pamela Smith, chair of The National Boating Travellers Assocation said that Hackney Boating Families should not be “harassed into taking permanent moorings”.

 

....and went from there to "they wish to retain CCer status"?

 

(whatever that is, given that if they have a home mooring there is no "CCer status" to claim)

 

 

You're not really following this, are you.

 

Did the newspaper find Panda Smith all by themselves, or did the community find her for them?

 

I would agree that you can't have a home mooring and be a CCer, but I gained an impression that they wanted to have a place they could stay for as long as they want, but to remain as CCers.

 

As I am now informed that this is not the case, I accept that information as accurate.

[magnetman]

Probablu best to believe that as it does seem to be a made up part of the story.

 

would be.pretty handy to be able to access state schooling without having to find £20 a week to pay the damn council tax though

 

Hackney Boater Families?

 

HBF I thought that acronym was taken, by the Hairy Beer Fairy anyway

[Tony Dunkley]

I'm probably being thick here, but isn't that what happens when you win your case? Or does that only refer to when you win your case, if CRT/BW win their case it obviously is because of a dishonest solicitor/gullible Judge, is that how it works?

 

Your earlier suggestion that people shouldn't be paying the EOG fee , if taken up, and assuming that any legal challenge failed, would be the ultimate definition of a Pyrrhic victory. CRT have annual expenses which is met by their income (from whatever source). If you take away one income stream (EOG moorings) what do we think that they will do? Government aren't going to give them a bigger grant to fill the shortfall, so the obvious income stream to increase will be the licence fee. On my travels so far (and I haven't done a whole lot of the system) I would guesstimate that I have probably passed over 1000 boats who will (or should) be paying the EOG charge. That is going to be a big shortfall on the budget so if they escape the EOG charge we'll all be paying £1000+ per year for our licence, all courtesy of Tony's splendid wheeze!

Well, firstly I haven't actually 'won' anything, because C&RT, having realised that their Claim against me was too shaky to stand scrutiny by a Judge, decided to discontinue, and secondly I don't believe that you really think that Courts and Judges always get things right. If that was so, then we wouldn't have such things as Courts of Appeal.

 

As far as the EOG mooring charge, all I can say is that you're at liberty to condone dishonesty and fraudulent charging by C&RT if you wish to do so, but I can't help wondering if you'd be quite so happy about it if it was you that was being diddled.

[magnetman]

 

Lets all find lawyers who can prove CRT aren't allowed to charge for this or can't legally do that.

 

things can only get better

 

what a clever way to carry on

 

 

Oops no water in the cut

Who you gonna call?

 

Ghostbusters

 

Typo edit

Edited December 17, 2014 by magnetman

[Wanderer Vagabond]

Your're already paying for something that entitles you to use of the water(space) the boat's floating in . . . it's called a licence. The sad truth is that BW and now C&RT get away with it because at the Court hearings you refer to they had a lawyer who was able to persuade the Judge to agree to their way of thinking, and too many people, you amongst them apparently, are prepared to swallow all the guff that C&RT dish out.

 

 

Well, firstly I haven't actually 'won' anything, because C&RT, having realised that their Claim against me was too shaky to stand scrutiny by a Judge, decided to discontinue, and secondly I don't believe that you really think that Courts and Judges always get things right. If that was so, then we wouldn't have such things as Courts of Appeal.

 

As far as the EOG mooring charge, all I can say is that you're at liberty to condone dishonesty and fraudulent charging by C&RT if you wish to do so, but I can't help wondering if you'd be quite so happy about it if it was you that was being diddled.

In the light of the judgement above, perhaps you'd like to clarify exactly how CRT are committing "dishonesty and fraudulent charging". The Judgement says that they can so are you claiming that the Judge is endorsing crime?

 

I should also clarify that when I said "...when you win your case, if CRT/BW win their case it obviously is because of a dishonest solicitor/gullible Judge..." it was intended in general terms rather that whatever your current status is with the CRT. It always seems that if you happen to win a case it is just because you were right but if BW/CRT happen to win anything it is because of a corrupt or incompetent judicial system. This is why I have previously mentioned that when you give us an account of what may be happening we are only getting one side of a case.

 

Just as a further aside, who actually sits on a Court of Appeal? Oh, that'd be a Judge then would it? So presumably by your logic they will also get it wrong unless they find in your favour, in which they will have got it right! Do you really understand the legal process?

Edited December 17, 2014 by Wanderer Vagabond

[magnetman]

[Tony Dunkley]

 

 

In the light of the judgement above, perhaps you'd like to clarify exactly how CRT are committing "dishonesty and fraudulent charging". The Judgement says that they can so are you claiming that the Judge is endorsing crime?

 

I should also clarify that when I said "...when you win your case, if CRT/BW win their case it obviously is because of a dishonest solicitor/gullible Judge..." it was intended in general terms rather that whatever your current status is with the CRT. It always seems that if you happen to win a case it is just because you were right but if BW/CRT happen to win anything it is because of a corrupt or incompetent judicial system. This is why I have previously mentioned that when you give us an account of what may be happening we are only getting one side of a case.

 

Just as a further aside, who actually sits on a Court of Appeal? Oh, that'd be a Judge then would it? So presumably by your logic they will also get it wrong unless they find in your favour, in which they will have got it right! Do you really understand the legal process?

 

Yes I do understand it, and very clearly a whole lot better than you do.

Edited December 17, 2014 by Tony Dunkley

[Alf Roberts]

 

Did the newspaper find Panda Smith all by themselves, or did the community find her for them?

 

 

 

The community appears quite able to speak for itself.

Edited December 17, 2014 by Alf Roberts

[mayalld]

 

 

 

The community appears quite able to speak for itself.

Indeed.

 

So how is it that a Panda Smith rentaquote is in there?

[magnetman]

Is there someone called "panda" or are you taking the mickey bliss mayalld?

 

I can never be sure what with the silly names <insert own descriptive word here> people come up with

 

Laser,

Peaches

 

&c

[Alf Roberts]

Panda is a familiar name for Pamela Smith so I guess Mayalld is just attempting a sneer - as he is certainly no friend of hers.

 

I figure, and would have though Mayalld intelligent enough to work out too, that part of the journalistic process is to garner quotes from their contacts who are qualified to take a view on a situation -- Ms Smith is eminently qualified, as spokesperson for NBTA, to give their view on the situation.

 

It may be he's jealous they didn't ask his opinion. Perhaps they thought she more qualified than an IT technician from Macclesfield.

[alan_fincher]

Is there someone called "panda" or are you taking the mickey bliss mayalld?

 

I can never be sure what with the silly names <insert own descriptive word here> people come up with

 

Panda is a familiar name for Pamela Smith so I guess Mayalld is just attempting a sneer - as he is certainly no friend of hers.

 

Sorry, but I don't think Dave is sneering very much more than you are at him!

 

"Pamela" may be her birth name, but although I would not count her as a friend, each time I have met her, she has introduced herself to me, and others, as "Panda", not as "Pamela". In my limited experience, Pamela seems to be reserved more for formalities, (like her many FOIA requests to CRT).

 

To me she is better known as "Panda", and less easily confused with anybody else called Pamela Smith, so that is probably how I would refer to her. If I did, it would be with no intention of indicating anything to do with friendship on the one hand, or a sneer on the other.

 

Still this has not been without some educational value - at least Magnetman now knows references to Pamela Smith and Panda Smith are probably to the same person.

 

EDIT: To acknowledge that the reference to "rentaquote" I would say is more of a sneer that the choice Dave used for her name!

Edited December 17, 2014 by alan_fincher

[Alf Roberts]

If she has introduced herself as Panda Smith to Mayalld I shall apologise.

 

...at the very least it would be less ambiguous and polite to use the name in the article.

EDIT: To acknowledge that the reference to "rentaquote" I would say is more of a sneer that the choice Dave used for her name!

I think we can both agree he is not welcoming her contribution.

[RLWP]

She is generally called Panda, and you can easily google her by that name

 

Which etiquette book are you using, Alf?

 

Richard

[Alf Roberts]

She is generally called Panda, and you can easily google her by that name

 

Which etiquette book are you using, Alf?

 

Richard

The Gentleman's guide to Internet Debate and other Onanistic Practices (2nd Ed).

[RLWP]

Is that the one with the diagrams?

 

Richard

[Alf Roberts]

it used to but those pages are discoloured now.

[Noah T]

 

There is a difference between a community group and a group that, for all its community or charitable basis, is actually seeking to compete with commercial enterprises.

 

 

It's rather unlikely that this community mooring group would be touting for business that would otherwise go to, eg, private sector or other commercial marinas.

 

But if such groups could or would do that, they should be applauded.

 

The commercial prices for moorings in London are astronomically high, and if some competition from community groups were to help bring down those prices I would say amen to that.

[alan_fincher]

The Gentleman's guide to Internet Debate and other Onanistic Practices (2nd Ed).

A lot of stuff has actually changed in the 3rd edition - might be worth getting a copy.....

[RLWP]

The free Specsavers voucher is very handy

 

Richard