* FOUND * Stolen Boat - from Mercia Marina

[MtB]

Have I missed the bit where it was reported that someone is in custody or are you guessing?

 

 

No not guessing, ISTR reading a report on here saying the culprits were on board and arrested when the police found it. I think it was Chris and Graham said so in their final post. Or YotC. I can't imagine anyone else being in close enough contact with the police to know this.

Otherwise, your hypothesis that it was an identity swap followed by a quick cheap sale to some mug punters would fit the facts well.

The boat was hidden repainted and 'sold', the new 'owners' took it out of the dock onto the cut and were virtually immediately spotted and apprehended.

The bit that doesn't fit is the victims are not usually held in custardy.

[Lysander]

I agree with this, been wondering the same myself. They could have stolen a boat that could have merged in with the many others out there with few identifiable points. This particular boat had so many stand out things to look for that even a lick of paint would have never let it sail by without question. No doubt will all come out in the wash. I am very pleased that the boat has been recovered and the owners are reunited.

 

I suspect this boat was chosen simply because the stern of it was immediately identifiable. The thief needed to walk straight to the right boat with confidence in order not to attract suspicion so a 'clone' boat clearly would not do. The person who extracted the information from the boat's owners on the canal side may not have been the individual who actually took the boat and would have needed to pass on a clear description and even if it were the same person then it would still be important to identify it with confidence. If the Chilton theft is linked then it's probably significant that the name was unusual and was displayed prominently on the side of the boat at the rear. Once the boat had been painted and sold on, the thief would not have to worry about it being spotted out and about.

[MtB]

 

I suspect this boat was chosen simply because the stern of it was immediately identifiable. The thief needed to walk straight to the right boat with confidence in order not to attract suspicion so a 'clone' boat clearly would not do.

 

 

Interesting and good thinking. I was imagining the absense of a signwritten name was the reason for picking this boat in particular, and absense of a name was why the thief needed to ask which boat it was.

 

The bit that puzzles me is how did the thief drescribe the boat he was seeking, given it had no name written on it? And if he knew the unusual shape of the boat, he wouldn't have needed to ask which boat!

 

I.m wondering if he didn't need to ask at all, but was challenged about what he was doing there, so asked where the boat was.

Edited August 8, 2016 by Mike the Boilerman

[mross]

 

 

No not guessing, ISTR reading a report on here saying the culprits were on board and arrested when the police found it. I think it was Chris and Graham said so in their final post. Or YotC. I can't imagine anyone else being in close enough contact with the police to know this.

Otherwise, your hypothesis that it was an identity swap followed by a quick cheap sale to some mug punters would fit the facts well.

The boat was hidden repainted and 'sold', the new 'owners' took it out of the dock onto the cut and were virtually immediately spotted and apprehended.

The bit that doesn't fit is the victims are not usually held in custardy.

isn't custard wot you put on puddings?

[MtB]

isn't custard wot you put on puddings?

 

Too Mr Oss, slow, we did all the custardy puns a dozen or two posts back!!

 

But I guess you're poking fun at my speeling mistake. "Custody" I think I should of wrote.

[Lampyrichard]

<snip>

 

Speaking to adjoining boaters reveals that 1 spoke to the man, to tell him which pontoon was called Moorhen, and him and 2 others saw the man drive off with the boat. There is some dispute whether this was 1 week ago or 2. I will try to nail that down. The man is medium build and nondescript.

 

The boaters that saw the thief said he new exactly which boat he was looking for because he went straight to it, used the keys he had to open the hatch, he started the engine, unplugged the shore power and cruised off. He was a boater as he drove off and did everything else with confidence, except find the pontoon.

 

</snip>

 

 

 

The bit that puzzles me is how did the thief drescribe the boat he was seeking, given it had no name written on it? And if he knew the unusual shape of the boat, he wouldn't have needed to ask which boat!

 

I.m wondering if he didn't need to ask at all, but was challenged about what he was doing there, so asked where the boat was.

 

From post #1 - it was the pontoon, not the boat he asked directions for.

[alan_fincher]

 

 

Unlikely, unless the police have the wrong people in custardy.

 

Accomplices still at large could though, if there are any.

 

 

Have I missed the bit where it was reported that someone is in custody or are you guessing?

 

 

 

 

No not guessing, ISTR reading a report on here saying the culprits were on board and arrested when the police found it. I think it was Chris and Graham said so in their final post. Or YotC.

I can't actually recall seeing anything that confirms anybody has been apprehended.

 

But it is now a very long thread, with an increasing number of totally spurious posts appearing, so maybe I missed it.

 

Can you find the actual post that confirms person or persons was caught?

 

I must admit I am also totally struggling to comprehend why somebody thought a partial repaint would be enough to disguise this boat sufficiently that it would not be found on a busy canal, less than 2 days travel from where it was taken from. As they seem to have removed it from the marina very efficiently, and had huge numbers of people looking a long while, that particular twist doesn't fit the rest of the story.

[Ray T]

I must admit I am also totally struggling to comprehend why somebody thought a partial repaint would be enough to disguise this boat sufficiently that it would not be found on a busy canal, less than 2 days travel from where it was taken from. As they seem to have removed it from the marina very efficiently, and had huge numbers of people looking a long while, that particular twist doesn't fit the rest of the story.

 

Just a guess, perhaps the thief's logic was that mostly when a boat or car is stolen the object is to get as far away as possible from the scene of the crime. He could have reasoned that people wouldn't be looking "under their noses?"

Edited August 8, 2016 by Ray T

[Chris and Graham]

We are still not able to join in with comments etc at the moment. Two points we would like to clarify, there was no one on board when we found our boat, also we have not been informed by the Police that anyone has been arrested. Thank you all for comments and kind words, we really do appreciate you all.

[john6767]

We are still not able to join in with comments etc at the moment. Two points we would like to clarify, there was no one on board when we found our boat, also we have not been informed by the Police that anyone has been arrested. Thank you all for comments and kind words, we really do appreciate you all.

Thanks for providing what info you can, and I hope you are being able to reinstate the boat back to being "yours" again.

Edited August 8, 2016 by john6767

[steven wilkinson]

We are still not able to join in with comments etc at the moment. Two points we would like to clarify, there was no one on board when we found our boat, also we have not been informed by the Police that anyone has been arrested. Thank you all for comments and kind words, we really do appreciate you all.

 

 

In which case - Lets be careful out there!

[David Mack]

 

I must admit I am also totally struggling to comprehend why somebody thought a partial repaint would be enough to disguise this boat sufficiently that it would not be found on a busy canal, less than 2 days travel from where it was taken from. As they seem to have removed it from the marina very efficiently, and had huge numbers of people looking a long while, that particular twist doesn't fit the rest of the story.

 

Maybe the thief isn't the brightest in the box.

 

Those with long memories of this forum will remember when hire boat Holly went missing from Middlewich Narrowboats in 2007. It turned out that the chap who had hired it, had given his home address and used his credit card to pay for the booking, then failed to return the boat at the end of the week. He had repainted the cabin a different colour in an attempt to disguise the boat, and when the repainted boat was reported seen, he repainted it again another colour before he was caught. But how did he ever expect to get way with that?

 

Found the thread - 49 pages of it

http://www.canalworld.net/forums/index.php?showtopic=8050&page=1

[cuthound]

What information do CRT require when a new boat is registered with them (either brand new or brought from a different waterways system)?

 

Specifically do they require the Hull Identification Number, as it is the only truly unique identifier?

 

When I bought DQ she was already registered with them, so a simple transfer of ownership form was all that was required, as it predated the need to apply for a new licence.

 

Could it be that the thief had already registered "his" boat with them and having acquired it, only had to fit new registration plates and stick his new licence in the window?

 

Edited to add the bit about the HIN.

Edited August 8, 2016 by cuthound

[Nev]

 

The trouble with questions like this is that we are approaching it, and thinking about it as a boater, rather than as a boat thief.

 

 

He also needs to engineer the information about the boat from those he talks to, and some may not tell enough.

 

Basically, it appears to me that Chris and Graham were unlucky enough to have a nice boat, and to let slip where it was and that it would be unattended and that this matched the thief's logistics. Once the thief has his mark, he isn't going to hang around asking questions of more boaters. To do so increases the risk of detection.

 

 

 

I think Mayalld has the right focus on this ... we all share various levels of information (mainly on social media) but also as Chris & Graham did on the basis of expecting to be talking to honest and interested, for the right reasons, individuals. The bad men and women will exploit this information as we have seen.

 

So sadly as part of the learning from this we may need to reconsider what and how we share information. We also need to consider how we make it harder for the thief. I'd suggest marinas are easier as they could and should have a daily checking system, even if it is by the other pontoon owners or a smaller marina by a daily premises check.

 

The linear moorers have a broader challenge but still one with cooperation they can set up their own boat watch, letting others know when their boats will be away. Closed facebook groups might be the best way of sharing this information or maybe just a closed email group. Trackers we have discussed. Thankfully thefts are rare and we have shown that this very knowledgable and linear community have an excellent boat awareness and are protective of their boats.

 

I know others have commented on the insures looking to increase premiums if we flag up this issue but I do think the insurance industry should react to this and the other two recent thefts with some guidance and anything else that have the ability to introduce that deters such activity in the future.

[alan_fincher]

Two points we would like to clarify, there was no one on board when we found our boat, also we have not been informed by the Police that anyone has been arrested.

 

Thank you for confirming at least this.

 

I only asked the question because people seemed to be assuming someone was arrested.

[David Mack]

I'd suggest marinas are easier as they could and should have a daily checking system, even if it is by the other pontoon owners or a smaller marina by a daily premises check.

 

Which means that you would need to notify the marina of your comings and goings. I can see some people resenting that degree of intrusion into the relaxed world of boating.

[Dyertribe]

 

Which means that you would need to notify the marina of your comings and goings. I can see some people resenting that degree of intrusion into the relaxed world of boating.

Maybe that is the price that has to be paid for security of one's property and piece of mind?

Edited August 8, 2016 by Dyertribe

[Guest]

The simplest thing to do at a marina like Mercia would be to erect a fob operated barrier across the water on the narrow section of the entrance. Rather like you see in car parks.

 

© Copyright Mat Fascione and licensed for reuse under this Creative Commons Licence

 

As you approach slow or stop - touch the fob on the sensor pad and the barrier rises, cruise under, barrier automatically closes behind you.

 

For visiting boats - stop at the entrance and use an intercom to speak to the office and gain access. For visiting boats to get out the office give them a token (which the barrier retains) to operate the barrier just once.

 

No need for 'daily checks' of any sort and minimum inconvenience to those that moor there.

 

ed to add - it would of course need to be something fairly robust in order to resist accidental impact from inept boaters.

Edited August 8, 2016 by MJG

[frahkn]

 

Which means that you would need to notify the marina of your comings and goings. I can see some people resenting that degree of intrusion into the relaxed world of boating.

My marina would be completely uninterested in knowing of my comings and goings. Even if I provided a note of these, I expect it would soon get lost.

 

I quite like it like this, that's part of why I'm here, having tried a year in both Aston and in Mercia (both of which are great for those who like that sort of thing).

[Top cat]

Several people have talked about chaining their boats to the mooring but Yank on the cut stated that they would not tolerate that in their marina for fire reasons. So if marina operators are not going to permit boaters to physically secure their property then they need to provide other security measures that do work.

 

 

This is a wake up call for boat owners and the boating industry as a whole. Something the car industry tackled decades ago. Having more than one ignition key type would be a start as would securing the electris to make hot wiring the starter impossible.

 

T C

[Guest]

Several people have talked about chaining their boats to the mooring but Yank on the cut stated that they would not tolerate that in their marina for fire reasons. So if marina operators are not going to permit boaters to physically secure their property then they need to provide other security measures that do work.

 

 

This is a wake up call for boat owners and the boating industry as a whole. Something the car industry tackled decades ago. Having more than one ignition key type would be a start as would securing the electris to make hot wiring the starter impossible.

 

T C

 

However the logic for not allowing people to lock and chain their boats to the pontoons is entirely sound in my opinion.

 

I do think some people are getting some of this a bit out of perspective regards actual risk verses the perceived risk, how many boats are actually stolen each year? It is as far as I know still a very very rare event, unless somebody knows different of course.

Edited August 8, 2016 by MJG

[haggis]

 

However the logic for not allowing people to lock and chain their boats to the pontoons is entirely sound in my opinion.

 

I do think some people are getting some of this a bit out of perspective regards actual risk verses the perceived risk, how many boats are actually stolen each year? It is as far as I know still a very very rare event, unless somebody knows different of course.

yes, Martin, the actual risk may be low but if it is your boat which is stolen I don't think you will feel any better knowing that not many are :-)

 

haggis

[Jess--]

I can understand marinas refusing locking boats to moorings (unless they held a master key for the locks, but with a common key for all locks we're back to square one).

 

another option given has been to lock the rudder hard over to prevent the boat being moved, this would work but could cause problems if the boat ever has to be moved within the marina (I know mine got moved to the opposite end for an afternoon while some work was done on the pontoon)

 

a third option would surely be some sort of lock on the morse lever (locking it into either neutral or full astern), since a lot of boats have this in full view it may attract a bit more attention if someone has to spend time getting the lock off or has to rig some alternative control (also if they were highly visible locks it's an extra deterrent)

[Ray T]

 

Which means that you would need to notify the marina of your comings and goings. I can see some people resenting that degree of intrusion into the relaxed world of boating.

 

Ventnor Marina used to have a "Boat in / out board". Of course it was all voluntary but at least it gave the harbourmasters some indication who was in or out when they walk the pontoons. Sadly through lack of notification it is no longer in use.

Edited August 8, 2016 by Ray T

[Guest]

yes, Martin, the actual risk may be low but if it is your boat which is stolen I don't think you will feel any better knowing that not many are :-)

 

haggis

 

Well yes of course, all I am pointing out is that this needs to be kept in proportion when considering the degree of intrusive security people need to take and marinas need to consider.

 

By way of comparison something like 1,200 caravans get stolen each year (The AA once estimated it as 4,000 per year - we were a statistic in this once) meaning owners tend to take more security precautions, I don't think the stats for narrowboats come anywhere near that do they? -

 

ed - to add - that 'risk' is reflected in insurance premiums BTW - as one thing I have found is that it costs me as much as a third more to insure my caravan than it did my boat, even though the boat was worth very roughly three times what my caravan is.

Edited August 8, 2016 by MJG