|
Post by kris on Apr 29, 2019 7:48:40 GMT
|
|
|
Post by Mr Stabby on Apr 29, 2019 8:07:10 GMT
|
|
|
Post by kris on Apr 29, 2019 8:23:33 GMT
Off you go then.
|
|
|
Post by kris on Apr 29, 2019 8:27:06 GMT
There seem to be three issues with this that distract people from what is happening here. One is the owner of the boat is not English, the second is the asthetics of his boat and the third is that NBTA are involved in supporting the owner with his dispute with cart.
|
|
|
Post by Mr Stabby on Apr 29, 2019 8:34:39 GMT
There seem to be three issues with this that distract people from what is happening here. One is the owner of the boat is not English, the second is the asthetics of his boat and the third is that NBTA are involved in supporting the owner with his dispute with cart. I doubt his nationality has anything to do with it, but the aesthetics of the boats (as well as it being incapable of undertaking a bona fide canal journey) are probably an issue. I understand that several marinas were willing to provide a mooring for the boat until they saw a photo of it.
|
|
|
Post by TonyDunkley on Apr 29, 2019 9:57:00 GMT
The update on this situation referred to by kris in post #1 is factually accurate as far as it goes, but doesn't quite get to the heart of this latest example of C&RT's habitual abuse of the statutory powers they inherited from their almost as dishonest predecessors.
This man's boat is, arguably, not without a current PBL, thanks to C&RT, in effect, making a rather ham-fisted and unlawful attempt to cancel the Licence they issued in November 2018 by paying the unused portion of the licence fee back to his bank account and simply telling him that his Licence has been 'revoked'. Technically the boat has therefore been issued with, and does still have, a current PBL to go with it's Third Party Insurance cover and it's BSC.
At present C&RT's 'Legal Team' (sic) are groping in vain to find some legitimate basis for the action they are threatening, which is to seize and remove the boat under the terms of a 2017 Court Order which only forbids the use of a boat with a different name and Index Number unless first issued with a "relevant consent" - the terminology used in the 1995 Act to cover boat Licences (PBL's), registration Certificates (PBC's), and Houseboat Certificates.
The reality of the situation, as of right now, is that C&RT DON'T have a Court Order relating to the boat in question, and neither have they complied with the due process laid down in Section 17(4) of the 1995 Act for vessels suspected to be contravening Section 17(3)[c](ii) of the same Act, which is the one that says you mustn't stay in the same place for longer than 14 days unless you have a good reason so to do.
|
|
|
Post by kris on Apr 29, 2019 11:57:54 GMT
There seem to be three issues with this that distract people from what is happening here. One is the owner of the boat is not English, the second is the asthetics of his boat and the third is that NBTA are involved in supporting the owner with his dispute with cart. I'd suggest a fourth. In trouble with CRT before and didn't seem to learn his lesson.
Having said that if he is now moving the boat and complying with CC guidelines, I hope CRT back down and give him a final chance.
You really don't seem to understand the situation. How had he not learnt his lesson? What had he done wrong by paying for a winter mooring?
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Apr 29, 2019 12:12:38 GMT
|
|
|
Post by kris on Apr 29, 2019 12:25:16 GMT
I must remember to recite the Mantra before posting.
CRT bad, boaters good. CRT bad, boaters good. CRT bad, boaters good. CRT bad, boaters good. CRT bad, boaters good. CRT bad, boaters good.
Idiot, any statutory body that try's to exceed its powers needs putting back in its box. Or maybe you'd like to explain what this person has done to deserve this treatment from cart? ps I think you should change your forum name back to donkey it suits you better.
|
|
|
Post by kris on Apr 29, 2019 12:52:48 GMT
I apologise for my posts in this thread.
The boater has never done anything wrong, CRT are bar stewards.
So explain what he's done wrong then?
|
|
|
Post by patty on Apr 29, 2019 13:04:49 GMT
If CRT have made errors then one would hope the courts will act as they should.. I hope this boater has skilled and knowledgable legal representation who can put his case forward, especially if he has a problem with English...lets face it where legal stuff is concerned even home grown Brits have problems.. I hope justice is seen to be done as it should be.
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Apr 29, 2019 13:28:44 GMT
I apologise for my posts in this thread.
The boater has never done anything wrong, CRT are bar stewards.
So explain what he's done wrong then? Kriss Can you not read? He said the boater had done nothing wrong. Stop being a fucking bully and back off.
|
|
|
Post by Mr Stabby on Apr 29, 2019 13:42:07 GMT
I apologise for my posts in this thread.
The boater has never done anything wrong, CRT are bar stewards.
So explain what he's done wrong then? Built a shed in the canal?
|
|
|
Post by naughtyfox on Apr 29, 2019 13:44:13 GMT
Again, we are missing many details in this case.
|
|
|
Post by kris on Apr 29, 2019 13:55:35 GMT
So explain what he's done wrong then? Kriss Can you not read? He said the boater had done nothing wrong. Stop being a fucking bully and back off. You fuck off and stop telling me what to do. Who are you? Oh yes some random on the Internet with an inflated opinion of himself.
|
|