canal and river trust stating none sighting

[Murflynn]

so we need an Act of Parliament to govern all aspects of our behaviour?

. When people start making up laws to suit themselves it takes someone with a pair bollacks to challenge that in court, like tony, you clearly have squirrel sized nuts, and probably rely on melds much more than me, so please do us both a favour,

your posts are descending into unfathomable depths.

clearly you are over concerned with other people's wedding tackle.

there must be a medical name for that kind of obsession.

[jenlyn]

so we need an Act of Parliament to govern all aspects of our behaviour?

 

This sort of comment ^^^^^^^ is why some threads get so utterly stupid.

[MtB]

wow FairPlay you pull out the passive aggressive card, when your argument falls flat, if you consider that personal abuse, and I've offended you I apologise, but I think it's really more to do with the fact that there is know act of parliament that states people must prove there whereabouts at all times as you,ve been trying to argue, I'm off to eat my puffball now so you,ll have to find someone else to try and play with for a while

 

 

Blimey what a load of waffle. You seem to have forgotten what we were arguing about. Bassplayer said the law does not place the burden of proof on the boater and I proved him wrong, then you weighed in with more of the same twaddle.

 

And you're still doing it! The law states the boater must satisfy the board, not the board must satisfy the boater.

 

Whether that regulation can be overturned on court is a different squabble. The regulation can be easily looked up and read, and it says the burden of proof lies with the boater. QED.

[GUMPY]

. Can't say with confidence, but when I first bought my boat I tried to licence it for three months, the cost was not equal to 25percent the 12month version but much more expensive, hence letting the boat go for a while will save a fair few quid

Yes but that's not in enforcement, reduced period licences when under enforcement are pro rata from the 12 month rate. Edited August 22, 2015 by Loddon

[craftycarper]

mushroom was lovely thanks, now we're back and you still seem to be vanishing in ever decreasing circles, the original post states that because CRT have,nt spotted the op,s son he must be in the same place, as I said if that were true he would be really easy to find, if this ever gets to court and CRT use, we have not been able to find him for a year as a reason to section 8 him they will probably be laughed out of court, especially if he turns round and states it's because he's not been in their water, if on the other hand they could show he is in the same place all year they will win with ease, he may well be able to satisfy the board with ease but feel why should I, there is not a law anywhere in the land that states he must prove his whereabouts at all times whenever they demand it, so please just stop trying to spread CRT,s web of lies and untruths, it's just part of the rule by fear society that we are sliding into, and you are simply helping with it, so I will say this one last time, CRT have no legal right to contact any of us and demand our whereabouts as and when it suits them, as I said before it's not yet Russia,

 

Yes but that's not in enforcement, reduced period licences when under enforcement are pro rata from the 12 month rate.

ah cheers for that maybe he won't have to sell it

Edited August 28, 2015 by GoodGurl

[MtB]

It's rather revealing that Craftycarper can't change his own tap washers

[bassplayer]

It's rather revealing that Craftycarper can't change his own tap washers

I kind of get tbe feeling he can and probably wouldn't appreciate someone charging him just listen to them say they could do a better job....

[Murflynn]

Miaowww !!

[cotswoldsman]

It's rather revealing that Craftycarper can't change his own tap washers

Personally I would rather pay someone to do it why do it yourself when you can get someone else to do it

[craftycarper]

Personally I would rather pay someone to do it why do it yourself when you can get someone else to do it

to be honest it was only about a fortnight ago that I taught my wife how to change one, it takes less time to do it yourself than to phone a plumber, and they will charge about £40/£50 quid to do it, I find learning to do it yourself is far more pleasurable, than just going to work to pay someone else, obviously if it's beyond my means I will pay for someone's skills but in general I carry out nearly all my own house and vehicle maintenance, and repairs keep hens for my eggs cut all my own timber, and am about to start growing my own veg I also gather odds and sods from the countryside like the mushrooms,berrys and even the od rabbit,squirrel etc, Idealy I would like to live off grid in the middle of nowhere,but life's about compromise and my wife and kids are of a more modern material, so I walk the line, I hate paying for anything and also adopt the barter system whenever I can, people that know me say I'm a hundred years to late, and I don't dispute it,

[bassplayer]

to be honest it was only about a fortnight ago that I taught my wife how to change one, it takes less time to do it yourself than to phone a plumber, and they will charge about £40/£50 quid to do it, I find learning to do it yourself is far more pleasurable, than just going to work to pay someone else, obviously if it's beyond my means I will pay for someone's skills but in general I carry out nearly all my own house and vehicle maintenance, and repairs keep hens for my eggs cut all my own timber, and am about to start growing my own veg I also gather odds and sods from the countryside like the mushrooms,berrys and even the od rabbit,squirrel etc, Idealy I would like to live off grid in the middle of nowhere,but life's about compromise and my wife and kids are of a more modern material, so I walk the line, I hate paying for anything and also adopt the barter system whenever I can, people that know me say I'm a hundred years to late, and I don't dispute it,

It is very satisfying sorting things out yourself. For a lot of people with a busy lifestyle, lack time is the problem. I suppose it depends what you prefer to do with your time in the end.

[craftycarper]

It is very satisfying sorting things out yourself. For a lot of people with a busy lifestyle, lack time is the problem. I suppose it depends what you prefer to do with your time in the end.

I guess that's why I have always worked for myself, a boss would not understand that I might need a day off to cut logs when there's a cold snap coming, and quite often a day spent repairing the car or truck can save me a weeks wages, I'm still working, it's just for my own benefit, only problem is Father Time is starting to catch up with me and things take a bit longer and I ache a lot longer after I finish,

[bassplayer]

I guess that's why I have always worked for myself, a boss would not understand that I might need a day off to cut logs when there's a cold snap coming, and quite often a day spent repairing the car or truck can save me a weeks wages, I'm still working, it's just for my own benefit, only problem is Father Time is starting to catch up with me and things take a bit longer and I ache a lot longer after I finish,

The trouble with the word 'work' is that it's often seen as a negative thing. It's still about what we chose to do with our time, it's just that some are fortunate to find something they love doing and get paid for it...

[craftycarper]

The trouble with the word 'work' is that it's often seen as a negative thing. It's still about what we chose to do with our time, it's just that some are fortunate to find something they love doing and get paid for it...

we are also becoming rather lazy as a species, with many parents stating they can't afford to do things so stick there little fat kids in front of a screen all day, were as even without spending anymore money a walk in the country or even the city can find them a bucket of fruit, which will provide a nice crumble, give them some exercise and teach them to do things themselves, instead of plonking them down filling them with unhealthy fats and sugars then shouting at them all day because they are bouncing off the walls charged up with E numbers, seems quite simple to someone as simple as me but many people just totally can't see it, as us Grumpy old gets always say not looking good for future generations, we are walking an unsustainable path,

[adam1uk]

the original post states that because CRT have,nt spotted the op,s son he must be in the same place

The OP says no such thing.

[Higgs]

The law states the boater must satisfy the board, not the board must satisfy the boater.

 

 

 

 

In satisfying the board, the board has not set a very good example or gained trust in the rigours of its own methods. The board needs to outline what for a boater, as CRT's spotting isn't good enough, what would be a minimum acceptable level of logging for a boat's movements, made by the boater. There is no set standard. If CRT are not there to apply their own standards, how are CRT fit to say other's aren't keeping them. The arbitrary nature of the application of standards that could satisfy the board is not acceptable.

 

If CRT's system can only provide an incomplete picture, they are in no position to be accusing anyone of violation.

 

'We have not seen you not keeping standards'. And who's fault is that. Well, obviously, it would be the boater's fault. Would a court agree? If a court would agree, then, it would open the way for abuse of position to be the norm.

 

In satisfying the Board, is the Board not expected to be able to prove or disprove by proof, over and above suspicion?

 

'We think you are up to no good, but can't prove it. We cannot prove that you are keeping within the T&C's, either.'

 

In reference to any part of law. This law cannot be tested outside of a court. Most of us shy away from that kind of confrontation because we lack experience to deal with those occurrences. We don't have the money. In this way, CRT can assume a position of pseudo legality. Playing their authoritarian hand, almost a game of poker.

 

CRT may have the powers that were once BW's, but that doesn't stop CRT losing in court over its application of the laws they rely on. That goes for the Police too. The agencies of law are not above finding themselves in contravention of the law.

Edited August 23, 2015 by Higgs

[dmr]

CaRT are generally a reactive rather than proactive organisation so just respond to what customers" tell them, though do rather listen to only a subset of their customers, and not the best subset at that.

The current logging system is generally adequate for identifying those boats that move hardly at all and those that move a lot.

It will often fail with those who work on the boundary of a suitable cruising pattern, and the best solution is for those to either cruise a bit further or to communicate with CaRT. If we all complain that the current system is "not fit for purpose" (popular bit of newspeak) then CaRT will respond by either spending a lot of money on more checkers, employing lots of volunteer checkers, or requiring all boats to have GPS trackers.

I am here to enjoy a bit of freedom and would HATE to see any of these approaches, so why is this forum forcing CaRT down that route??????

I think a lot of us just like discussing technical things and showing off how much technical stuff we know, but when we talk about GPS trackers do remember that CaRT are Listening.

The whole S.E.mooring fiasco was based on a few "murmurings" and here we are putting such "murmurings in writing..

 

...........Dave

[Higgs]

CaRT are generally a reactive rather than proactive organisation so just respond to what customers" tell them, though do rather listen to only a subset of their customers, and not the best subset at that.

The current logging system is generally adequate for identifying those boats that move hardly at all and those that move a lot.

It will often fail with those who work on the boundary of a suitable cruising pattern, and the best solution is for those to either cruise a bit further or to communicate with CaRT. If we all complain that the current system is "not fit for purpose" (popular bit of newspeak) then CaRT will respond by either spending a lot of money on more checkers, employing lots of volunteer checkers, or requiring all boats to have GPS trackers.

I am here to enjoy a bit of freedom and would HATE to see any of these approaches, so why is this forum forcing CaRT down that route??????

I think a lot of us just like discussing technical things and showing off how much technical stuff we know, but when we talk about GPS trackers do remember that CaRT are Listening.

The whole S.E.mooring fiasco was based on a few "murmurings" and here we are putting such "murmurings in writing..

 

...........Dave

 

 

Maybe CRT would like to understand that to fit GPS trackers would undermine any sense of autonomy a boater would have. Are you ok with the idea of herding? I'd be quite happy to use a tracker for me to be able to keep a log. Not for CRT to call up on a control centre. Your bit of freedom wouldn't actual exist, unless you'd like to define freedom in terms of big brother. Treating people like children who's lives have to be structured around some parent's need to know where you are all the time.

Edited August 23, 2015 by Higgs

[jenlyn]

Everyone relentlessly banging on about trackers. CRT are not allowed to implement such a system, they have previously looked into it.

 

I wish there was as much concern about the maintenance. Because ultimately, that's more important. If you can't navigate, what the hell is the use of a tracker.

Strange priorities.

[Higgs]

Everyone relentlessly banging on about trackers. CRT are not allowed to implement such a system, they have previously looked into it.

 

I wish there was as much concern about the maintenance. Because ultimately, that's more important. If you can't navigate, what the hell is the use of a tracker.

Strange priorities.

 

 

Maintenance is important. Maintenance should be important, but, I guess, it is more important ultimately for those who use the canal. It is not the only concern.

[jenlyn]

 

 

Maintenance is important. Maintenance should be important, but, I guess, it is more important ultimately for those who use the canal. It is not the only concern.

No maintenance to the network will eventually result in no canal. Its very important.

[Higgs]

No maintenance to the network will eventually result in no canal. Its very important.

 

 

How important is it to the average walker or cyclist. As I say, it is important. Not something to forget. Thinking about maintenance cannot exclude other's concerns and shouldn't be seen in a vacuum. I'm not going to bang on about my pet hate, but I haven't been out on the canal for nearly 3 years. I promise not to be blinkered about my needs if you're not blinkered about maintenance.

[Alan de Enfield]

Maintenance of the waterway is only important to those that need a navigable waterway, for the vast majority, maintenance of the towpath is more important than the locks, dredging etc etc.

[jenlyn]

 

 

How important is it to the average walker or cyclist. As I say, it is important. Not something to forget. Thinking about maintenance cannot exclude other's concerns and shouldn't be seen in a vacuum. I'm not going to bang on about my pet hate, but I haven't been out on the canal for nearly 3 years. I promise not to be blinkered about my needs if you're not blinkered about maintenance.

Ok, let me put it this way. If the canal-river outside of your marina is not navigable, what's the point of your marina?

[Tuscan]

Maintenance of the waterway is only important to those that need a navigable waterway, for the vast majority, maintenance of the towpath is more important than the locks, dredging etc etc.

For the vast majority of license payers maintenance of the navigation is prime importance.