NBTA Press Release : The continuous cruising case CRT couldn't win

[Allan(nb Albert)]

I know of one very recent case where a boater was subject to Section 8 due to his boat being unlicensed , proceedings which were put on hold through the intervention of the new welfare office, who organised for representative of workplace matters to accompany him to meeting with council and his appeal against their initial decision to refuse housing benefit for boat license was overturned. That's one less court case and one boat owner able to continue living on his boat (he's a CC'er).

Good result.

[PaulG]

Good result.

I look forward to seeing your "write up" on this case in NBW, Allan.

 

Credit where credit is due, and all that?

[cotswoldsman]

I look forward to seeing your "write up" on this case in NBW, Allan.

 

Credit where credit is due, and all that?

So are we to expect a write up every time he does what he is paid to do?

[patty-ann]

The comments on this thread clearly IMO illustrate the need for every case to be treated as individuals and maybe sometimes, particularly when people are overwhelmed by personal crises for compassion and bending of rules.

IF on the other hand someone is merely being a belligerent ar.. in confrontational mode then rules should be rules though lack of effective 2 way communication causes so many misunderstandings and aggro.

Peoples circumstances all different and it'd be a sad world if all treated uniformly because of rules.

I think its good when others take up someones case because shows compassion in this often all to unpleasant world we live in.

[bassplayer]

So are we to expect a write up every time he does what he is paid to do?

It's still nice to hear good news for a change though even if he is paid or not. Oi, go to the Grumpy thread

[cotswoldsman]

It's still nice to hear good news for a change though even if he is paid or not. Oi, go to the Grumpy thread

It certainly is nice to hear good news and this is an example of a small group of boaters helping another boater aided by CRT

[PaulG]

So are we to expect a write up every time he does what he is paid to do?

Maybe not every time.

But this story does seem to represent a considerable departure from all the negative stuff that is reported.

And perhaps other boaters who are in a similar position should be made aware that CRT were able to help this boater.

CRT always seem to be cast in the role of the "Robber Baron" in these cases, and, frankly, just from reading some of the stuff that I've seen written on this site and others, they would be the last people I would go to for help if I was having trouble with getting enough cash together to pay my licence fee.

[bassplayer]

It certainly is nice to hear good news and this is an example of a small group of boaters helping another boater aided by CRT

Yes, it's nice. Maybe it's just taking time for Richard Parry to see the true picture, I really hope so.

[Paul C]

So are we to expect a write up every time he does what he is paid to do?

 

I'd certainly expect a write up from a journalist, on a newsworthy item, if its the topic area of the website it would go on. That its positive, is good and also balances out a lot of the negative stuff.

[cotswoldsman]

Maybe not every time.

But this story does seem to represent a considerable departure from all the negative stuff that is reported.

And perhaps other boaters who are in a similar position should be made aware that CRT were able to help this boater.

CRT always seem to be cast in the role of the "Robber Baron" in these cases, and, frankly, just from reading some of the stuff that I've seen written on this site and others, they would be the last people I would go to for help if I was having trouble with getting enough cash together to pay my licence fee.

Fair point

[jenlyn]

I'd certainly expect a write up from a journalist, on a newsworthy item, if its the topic area of the website it would go on. That its positive, is good and also balances out a lot of the negative stuff.

Maybe the person involved does not want personal information spattered all over the internet by every Tom dick and harry on here, that is looking to score brownie points.

Honestly, some of you disgust me.

[kris88]

Some people do seem to forget that's it's actual human beings in these situations. That this is someone's life your posting about.

Regards kris

[PaulG]

Maybe the person involved does not want personal information spattered all over the internet by every Tom dick and harry on here, that is looking to score brownie points.

Honestly, some of you disgust me.

Then just do what the CRT-bashers do - change the person's name and then shout a lot!

Remember "Maggie"?

 

Edited to say - especially if, as reported, it has already been all over Facebook.

Edited February 24, 2015 by PaulG

[Paul C]

Maybe the person involved does not want personal information spattered all over the internet by every Tom dick and harry on here, that is looking to score brownie points.

Honestly, some of you disgust me.

 

Then write it up in a way which covers the main details but doesn't include personal information - its not complicated.

[jenlyn]

Then just do what the CRT-bashers do - change the person's name that then shout a lot!

Remember "Maggie"?

Just show some respect for another person's situation, rather than feeding your ego.

Then write it up in a way which covers the main details but doesn't include personal information - its not complicated.

How about if that's your juice you turn your TV on and watch some jeremy kyle.

[Paul C]

Just show some respect for another person's situation, rather than feeding your ego.

 

How about if that's your juice you turn your TV on and watch some jeremy kyle.

 

I have no idea why you're so grumpy about this issue, we're talking about the quite valid suggestion that NBW actually reports both positive and negative stories regarding the inland waterways network, in a fair way, rather than merely focusing on the negative/CRT bashing stuff. This would provide a balance to its reporting, which an only be a good thing.

[PaulG]

Just show some respect for another person's situation, rather than feeding your ego.

 

I really don't understand what you are trying to say here.

[Wanted]

I know of one very recent case where a boater was subject to Section 8 due to his boat being unlicensed , proceedings which were put on hold through the intervention of the new welfare office, who organised for representative of workplace matters to accompany him to meeting with council and his appeal against their initial decision to refuse housing benefit for boat license was overturned. That's one less court case and one boat owner able to continue living on his boat (he's a CC'er).

If that is the case then I have words to eat, and owe an tentative apology to Sean.

[Allan(nb Albert)]

I really don't understand what you are trying to say here.

What he is saying is that he does not want me to write on the matter out of respect for the boater concerned. He is also concerned that what is written might lead to identification of the boater.

 

He is suggesting that by asking me to do so you are on an ego trip attempting to get NBW to publish positive stories.

 

On the other hand, he might just want to have an argument!

[jenlyn]

What he is saying is that he does not want me to write on the matter out of respect for the boater concerned. He is also concerned that what is written might lead to identification of the boater.

He is suggesting that by asking me to do so you are on an ego trip attempting to get NBW to publish positive stories.

On the other hand, he might just want to have an argument!

Lol, you credit yourself with far too much self importance.

[Tuscan]

If that is the case then I have words to eat, and owe an tentative apology to Sean.

There should be an informative FAQ out shortly which hopefully will be a way of getting information out more widely both internally within CRT (so customer services and those on the ground are more informed) and externally via their website and other social media. He hopes to be more a sign post pointing people in the right direction in this case via workplace matters.

[PaulG]

What he is saying is that he does not want me to write on the matter out of respect for the boater concerned. He is also concerned that what is written might lead to identification of the boater.

 

He is suggesting that by asking me to do so you are on an ego trip attempting to get NBW to publish positive stories.

 

On the other hand, he might just want to have an argument!

I understand point one.

But I don't know the boater concerned, and I do not believe that he does either.

 

It is easy to publish a story in general terms that would make it impossible to identify the boater concerned.

 

I just thought that this is something that is quite important to boaters, and so the "Voice of the Waterways", should be interested in it.

 

Where, exactly, my ego comes into it, I don't know.

 

Finally, you may be right, perhaps he's just looking for an argument.

[Allan(nb Albert)]

I understand point one.

But I don't know the boater concerned, and I do not believe that he does either.

 

It is easy to publish a story in general terms that would make it impossible to identify the boater concerned.

 

I just thought that this is something that is quite important to boaters, and so the "Voice of the Waterways", should be interested in it.

 

Where, exactly, my ego comes into it, I don't know.

 

Finally, you may be right, perhaps he's just looking for an argument.

Yes, he was looking for an argument and he just tried to pick one with me.

 

.. and yes I will be writing on the matter.

 

 

[Tony Dunkley]

IN THE NOTTINGHAM COUNTY COURT CLAIM NO: 3NG01237

 

BETWEEN:

 

CANAL AND RIVER TRUST ------------- Claimant

-and-

 

ANDY WINGFIELD ------------- Defendant

 

____________________________________________________________________________________________________________

 

CONSENT ORDER

____________________________________________________________________________________________________________

 

Upon the Claimant's claim and upon the parties agreeing to compromise the claim upon the

terms set out in the document entitled "Settlement of claim number 3NG01237 between the

Canal and River Trust and Mr Andy Wingfield" ("The Settlement").

 

It is ordered by consent that:

 

1. The proceedings be stayed upon the terms set out in the Settlement dated and signed by the solicitors for each party, the original of which has been retained by the Claimant's solicitors and a copy of which has been retained by the Defendant's solicitors, except for the purpose of enforcing those terms.

2. Either party may be permitted to apply to the Court to enforce the terms upon which this case has been stayed without the need to bring a new claim.

3. No copy of the Settlement shall be retained upon the Court file. If such a copy is retained on the Court file it shall not be released to anyone save the parties' solicitors.

4. No order as to costs save for detailed assessment of the Defendant's publicly funded costs.

Dated this 4 day of March 2014

____________________________________________________________________________________________________________

 

 

The reasons for C&RT not wanting to publicise this Consent Order, considered to be the way to go by their Solicitors on the second day of a hearing, are sufficiently plain to need no further explanation, as are the implications arising from it.

Edited February 25, 2015 by Tony Dunkley

[Allan(nb Albert)]

IN THE NOTTINGHAM COUNTY COURT CLAIM NO: 3NG01237

 

BETWEEN:

 

CANAL AND RIVER TRUST ------------- Claimant

 

-and-

 

ANDY WINGFIELD ------------- Defendant

 

____________________________________________________________________________________________________________

 

CONSENT ORDER

____________________________________________________________________________________________________________

 

Upon the Claimant's claim and upon the parties agreeing to compromise the claim upon the

terms set out in the document entitled "Settlement of claim number 3NG01237 between the

Canal and River Trust and Mr Andy Wingfield" ("The Settlement").

 

It is ordered by consent that:

 

 

• The proceedings be stayed upon the terms set out in the Settlement dated and signed by the solicitors for each party, the original of which has been retained by the Claimant's solicitors and a copy of which has been retained by the Defendant's solicitors, except for the purpose of enforcing those terms.

• Either party may be permitted to apply to the Court to enforce the terms upon which this case has been stayed without the need to bring a new claim.

• No copy of the Settlement shall be retained upon the Court file. If such a copy is retained on the Court file it shall not be released to anyone save the parties' solicitors.

• No order as to costs save for detailed assessment of the Defendant's publicly funded costs.

Dated this 4 day of March 2014

____________________________________________________________________________________________________________

 

 

The reasons for C&RT not wanting to publicise this Consent Order, considered to be the way to go by their Solicitors on the second day of a hearing, are sufficiently plain to need no further explanation, as are the implications arising from it.

It does rather confirm what Tony stated earlier.

 

It is worth comparing this document to the two settlements published on CaRT's website.