Jump to content

general terms and conditions.


onionbargee

Featured Posts

 

 

Is every one a shoplifter that walks through the doors of the supermarket. ? Do the police lock every one up as potential criminals? What does the law permit.

All you have done is try to side step my question. Can you suggest a more cost effective way to ensure more boats are licensed?

  • Greenie 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Maybe what is needed is an arbitration service where both sides can put their case and hopefully resolve the matter without someone's boat being destroyed.

 

As in complaining to the Ombudsman? Good luck with that.

 

But it is always possible, CaRT willing, to propose Alternative Dispute Resolution before, or following commencement of, court action; in fact the courts encourage this and are likely to take a dim view of parties unwilling to try that route.

 

  • Greenie 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

 

As in complaining to the Ombudsman? Good luck with that.

 

But it is always possible, CaRT willing, to propose Alternative Dispute Resolution before, or following commencement of, court action; in fact the courts encourage this and are likely to take a dim view of parties unwilling to try that route.

 

Having an independent ombudsman that could tell you you if you are right or wrong before large legal bills are accumulated and boat destruction being ordered can only be good news for most in conflict with CRT.

 

I suspect that some would be consider the ombudsman to be an secret extension of CRT and they will fight on until they have nothing.

  • Greenie 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Having an independent ombudsman that could tell you you if you are right or wrong before large legal bills are accumulated and boat destruction being ordered can only be good news for most in conflict with CRT.

 

I suspect that some would be consider the ombudsman to be an secret extension of CRT and they will fight on until they have nothing.

 

The present Waterways Ombiasman was appointed by C&RT, instead of by the Ombudsman Committee as he should have been, and is far from independent.

He is about as much use as Lord Lucan's passport, and prior to making any decisions he refers his findings and conclusions to C&RT for approval.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

 

The present Waterways Ombiasman was appointed by C&RT, instead of by the Ombudsman Committee as he should have been, and is far from independent.

He is about as much use as Lord Lucan's passport, and prior to making any decisions he refers his findings and conclusions to C&RT for approval.

That is not my idea of an independent ombudsman, and it would be of benefit to all if there was one.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

That is not my idea of an independent ombudsman, and it would be of benefit to all if there was one.

 

Well, I don't think Parry and his boat snatching Enforcement gang would see it that way, but a genuinely independent Ombudsman, such as his predecessor Hilary Bainbridge, would certainly be a welcome change.

Edited by Tony Dunkley
Link to comment
Share on other sites

 

Well, I don't think Parry and his boat snatching Enforcement gang would see it that way, but a genuinely independent Ombudsman, such as his predecessor Hilary Bainbridge, would certainly be a welcome change.

If you can present the evidence that he's not independent I will support a petition to replace him, and I'm sure a few others would. Just in time for the Tadworth case to land on the new ones desk ?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

 

 

Is every one a shoplifter that walks through the doors of the supermarket. ? Do the police lock every one up as potential criminals? What does the law permit.

If everyone who walks through the doors is NOT a shoplifter, what right have the supermarket security staff got to put whoever they want under surveillance through their CCTV cameras? I think you'll find that it is another part of these Terms and Conditions malarkey. If you choose to use Tescos,Sainsburys,Morrisons et al. the conditions of being able to shop there is that you agree to be under surveillance (you'll find there are posters telling you that you are being watched). Have you given them your authorisation for them to do that? Yes, by shopping under their Terms and Conditions. So we come back to the marinas, if you don't want to pay a licence fee, put your boat in an exempt marina, simples. By mooring in a non exempt marina and signing up to their terms and conditions you are agreeing to get a licence for your boat, get over itsleep.png

Edited by Wanderer Vagabond
  • Greenie 2
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Its the old "I want to moor in a marina in Nantwich but not Nantwich marina" argument again. Higgs wants to moor in a marina where he doesn't have to pay for a licence, but won't find/move to a marina where he doesn't have to pay for a licence, because of additional constraints on his preferred location.

Edited by Paul C
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Its the old "I want to moor in a marina in Nantwich but not Nantwich marina" argument again. Higgs wants to moor in a marina where he doesn't have to pay for a licence, but won't find/move to a marina where he doesn't have to pay for a licence, because of additional constraints on his preferred location.

I know what his complaint is but, to be honest, its becoming a bit tedious. I'd like to moor in a marina for the cost of Hawne Basin but in Central London, it is sooooo unfair that I can't angry.png

  • Greenie 2
Link to comment
Share on other sites

 

On what grounds do you think a Section 8 Notice could be issued, or a vessel craned out of the waterway, as a means of dealing with an alleged 'overstay' ?

 

Probably not if the vessel has a home mooring, but if licensed as a boat without a home mooring, a Notice under sec.17 (4) ( c) (ii) would be valid. Boat doesn't move, 28 days later, licence revoked. Section 8 issued?

 

 

edited to eliminate the © !

Edited by Iain_S
Link to comment
Share on other sites

That is not my idea of an independent ombudsman, and it would be of benefit to all if there was one.

The danger is that he is now registered to provide ADR for disputes involving CaRT and CaRT's Head of Legal is a member of the 'independent' committee that has oversight of his activities.

 

 

 

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

From the onbudsmans website

 

"It is not my role to interpret the law or to decide whether the Trust has interpreted the law correctly. I can consider whether it has implemented its own policies correctly "

 

Of course he cannot interpret the law, he is not qualified to do so, and nor are you, I, or anyone else - we have our opinions but the only legally binding interpretation is that of a court.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

 

The present Waterways Ombiasman was appointed by C&RT, instead of by the Ombudsman Committee as he should have been, and is far from independent.

He is about as much use as Lord Lucan's passport, and prior to making any decisions he refers his findings and conclusions to C&RT for approval.

Genuine question: is there any source of redress if you feel the ombudsman has acted improperly?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

If you can present the evidence that he's not independent I will support a petition to replace him, and I'm sure a few others would. Just in time for the Tadworth case to land on the new ones desk ?

I certainly would.

I hadn't actually realised that the Ombudsman was appointed by C&RT ! blush.png

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Genuine question: is there any source of redress if you feel the ombudsman has acted improperly?

In a word - no.

 

I certainly would.

I hadn't actually realised that the Ombudsman was appointed by C&RT ! blush.png

The current Ombudsman should have been appointed by a quorum of an independent committee according to the rules of the waterways ombudsman scheme. However, this did not happen for the current Waterways Ombudsman, Andrew Walker because the committee had been disbanded ...

 

Neither, Mr Walker nor CaRT told anyone using the service that he had been properly appointed ...

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I certainly would.

I hadn't actually realised that the Ombudsman was appointed by C&RT ! blush.png

Either the website is wrong or those who say he is a CRT appointee are wrong as the website says:

 

The current Ombudsman was appointed in November 2012 by the Waterways Ombudsman Committee, following an advertisement and open competition for the post.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

The ombudsman is appointed by a committee. From the web site -

 

The Committee has five members, with the provision in the rules for a sixth. Of the five members, three (including the current chairman - Steve Harriott) are independent and two are appointed by the Canal & River Trust.

 

The main roles of the Committee are:

the appointment (or removal from office) of the Ombudsman;
keeping the operation of the scheme under review, both to ensure that it meets its purposes and that it is adequately funded;
to receive reports on the method and adequacy of publicising the scheme;
to publish an annual report.
Issues relating to the investigation or determination of complaints are matters for the Ombudsman alone, and the Committee has no part to play in those.


All the cases dealt with by the ombudsman are detailed on the site, makes for interesting reading

 

http://www.waterways-ombudsman.org/case-summaries/

 

It took me a while to find them - put your cursor over the dark blue "case summaries" box and click on the year of interest.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

The ombudsman is appointed by a committee. From the web site -

 

The Committee has five members, with the provision in the rules for a sixth. Of the five members, three (including the current chairman - Steve Harriott) are independent and two are appointed by the Canal & River Trust.

 

The main roles of the Committee are:

the appointment (or removal from office) of the Ombudsman;

keeping the operation of the scheme under review, both to ensure that it meets its purposes and that it is adequately funded;

to receive reports on the method and adequacy of publicising the scheme;

to publish an annual report.

Issues relating to the investigation or determination of complaints are matters for the Ombudsman alone, and the Committee has no part to play in those.

All the cases dealt with by the ombudsman are detailed on the site, makes for interesting reading

 

http://www.waterways-ombudsman.org/case-summaries/

 

It took me a while to find them - put your cursor over the dark blue "case summaries" box and click on the year of interest.

Looking at the history of the current Waterways Ombudsman, Andrew Walker, he has come to the role from other ombudsman roles (Oftel, Ofcom and Otelo, although only the latter as an actual ombudsman). Since the committee have no role in investigation of complaints and CRT only hold a minority position in that committee I can't say that I find it any more surprising than there being communications workers employed by Ofcom.

 

Having looked at a few of the issues that Walker has looked at, he seems to have reached quite reasonable decisions on the half dozen or so that I read. I suppose that a conspiracy theorist would tell me that they don't report on the dodgy one's unsure.png

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Looking at the history of the current Waterways Ombudsman, Andrew Walker, he has come to the role from other ombudsman roles (Oftel, Ofcom and Otelo, although only the latter as an actual ombudsman). Since the committee have no role in investigation of complaints and CRT only hold a minority position in that committee I can't say that I find it any more surprising than there being communications workers employed by Ofcom.

 

Having looked at a few of the issues that Walker has looked at, he seems to have reached quite reasonable decisions on the half dozen or so that I read. I suppose that a conspiracy theorist would tell me that they don't report on the dodgy one's unsure.png

I'm not sure that anyone can draw conclusions about Andrew Walkers decisions based on his own portrayal. The facts are that Andrew Walker was appointed by CaRT rather than according to the rules of the scheme.

 

Quite simply (and you can check this out on the Waterways Ombudsman's website via the committee minutes) between May 2011 and February 2015 CaRT the committee did not meet. CaRT have confirmed this in writing in response to a FOI request. Andrew Walker was appointed during this period so could only have been appointed by CaRT.

 

When the reconstituted committee met in February 2015 it did so under the chairmanship of a person who was not eligible under the rules of the scheme and without any user representatives present. One of its first actions was to decide that it no longer required users -

 

5. Composition of the Committee - User representatives

 

5.1 Jackie Lewis noted that the newly constituted Committee should consider whether user representatives should have a place on the Committee. She stated that members of the former British Waterways Advisory Forum had representatives on the old Committee, adding that the OA had raised the issue of non-membership of user representatives during the initial discussions on revalidation of the Scheme. Members discussed and felt that a small Committee was preferred, and that other forms of engaging with users can be explored. However this point will be revisited if it became a requirement to include user representative in order to be a fully validated scheme.

 

 

(OA is Ombudsman's Association which approves schemes that comply with its standards)

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I'm not sure that anyone can draw conclusions about Andrew Walkers decisions based on his own portrayal. The facts are that Andrew Walker was appointed by CaRT rather than according to the rules of the scheme.

 

Quite simply (and you can check this out on the Waterways Ombudsman's website via the committee minutes) between May 2011 and February 2015 CaRT the committee did not meet. CaRT have confirmed this in writing in response to a FOI request. Andrew Walker was appointed during this period so could only have been appointed by CaRT.

 

When the reconstituted committee met in February 2015 it did so under the chairmanship of a person who was not eligible under the rules of the scheme and without any user representatives present. One of its first actions was to decide that it no longer required users -

 

 

(OA is Ombudsman's Association which approves schemes that comply with its standards)

 

I applaud you for that post Allan,its yet further exposure of CRT and their dysfunctional behaviour which brings the whole position of

Ombudsman into disrepute.Its like a gang of poachers appointing the Gamekeeper.

Looking at the history of the current Waterways Ombudsman, Andrew Walker, he has come to the role from other ombudsman roles (Oftel, Ofcom and Otelo, although only the latter as an actual ombudsman). Since the committee have no role in investigation of complaints and CRT only hold a minority position in that committee I can't say that I find it any more surprising than there being communications workers employed by Ofcom.

 

Having looked at a few of the issues that Walker has looked at, he seems to have reached quite reasonable decisions on the half dozen or so that I read. I suppose that a conspiracy theorist would tell me that they don't report on the dodgy one's unsure.png

It doesn't matter if he came to the role on a Spaceship from Mars,whats the point of establishing rules and procedures if they are continually ignored and abrogated

by CRT.

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
  • 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.