|
Post by kris on Apr 29, 2019 13:57:24 GMT
So explain what he's done wrong then? Built a shed in the canal? In many ways my boat is a floating shed, so can cart tell me to remove it at any time for no valid reason?
|
|
|
Post by naughtyfox on Apr 29, 2019 13:57:26 GMT
Oh dear.
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Apr 29, 2019 13:59:31 GMT
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. Much like you then, its what we all are when on here.
|
|
|
Post by TonyDunkley on Apr 29, 2019 14:00:10 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. I applaud your sentiments patty, but the only way that there's going to be any further Court involvement in this matter will be a Claim against C&RT founded in the unlawful seizure and removal of this man's boat from the canal, . . . which, unless they have legitimate grounds, and go through the entire Section 8 process starting with the mandatory notice called for under Section 17(4) of the 1995 British Waterways Act, will be a wholly unlawful act exceeding their statutory powers and authority, and contrary to the 1267 Statute of Marlborough, the 2007 Tribunals, Courts and Enforcement Act, and the 1977 Torts(Interference with Goods) Act.
|
|
|
Post by Mr Stabby on Apr 29, 2019 14:00:31 GMT
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. Shania has an inflated opinion of herself.
|
|
|
Post by Wilson on Apr 29, 2019 14:15:09 GMT
Outside opinion - That's a funny looking boat.
|
|
|
Post by kris on Apr 29, 2019 14:18:51 GMT
You fuck off and stop telling me what to do. Who are you? Oh yes some random on the Internet. Much like you then, its what we all are when on here. The difference is you think you have the right to tell people what to do.
|
|
|
Post by kris on Apr 29, 2019 14:20:51 GMT
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. Shania has an inflated opinion of herself. What about answering the question I asked you then?
|
|
|
Post by Mr Stabby on Apr 29, 2019 14:26:22 GMT
Shania has an inflated opinion of herself. What about answering the question I asked you then? If you are asking what he has done wrong, while enforcement is not within my remit I would speculate that CRT are taking the viewpoint that this is not a genuine boat and wish to remove it pour encourager les autres.
|
|
|
Post by kris on Apr 29, 2019 14:29:12 GMT
What about answering the question I asked you then? If you are asking what he has done wrong, while enforcement is not within my remit I would speculate that CRT are taking the viewpoint that this is not a genuine boat and wish to remove it pour encourager les autres. Okay if we run with this statement. Crt have no legal powers to decide what constitutes a boat. So therefore they are overstepping their legal powers. So you think it's okay for crt to act outside of the law?
|
|
|
Post by TonyDunkley on Apr 29, 2019 14:29:22 GMT
So explain what he's done wrong then? Built a shed in the canal? At least he has made the effort to tie it up properly !
|
|
|
Post by wellyftw on Apr 29, 2019 14:40:34 GMT
There's a boat just up from where I work that looks equally or more DIY than the boat discussed in this thread. I'll take a photo of it later. Yet, the CRT (as far as I understand) have not only not sought to remove it from the cut but have given the boat permission to remain where it is on what is apparently a visitor mooring. I don't know the full details (or any details for that matter) but I wonder how they let one DIY boat remain on the canal but not another.
Weird thing about that story is if he's trying to pull his boat to London from Liverpool, surely he's going the wrong way if he's ended up in Leeds.
|
|
|
Post by TonyDunkley on Apr 29, 2019 14:59:46 GMT
There's a boat just up from where I work that looks equally or more DIY than the boat discussed in this thread. I'll take a photo of it later. Yet, the CRT (as far as I understand) have not only not sought to remove it from the cut but have given the boat permission to remain where it is on what is apparently a visitor mooring. I don't know the full details (or any details for that matter) but I wonder how they let one DIY boat remain on the canal but not another.
Weird thing about that story is if he's trying to pull his boat to London from Liverpool, surely he's going the wrong way if he's ended up in Leeds.
He's in for a hard time if he tries to bow-haul it up the Trent from Keadby, . . but perhaps it's too wide to head South down the other side of the Pennines and he's going to fit some wheels to get it up Foxton and down Watford.
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Apr 29, 2019 15:12:51 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. I applaud your sentiments patty, but the only way that there's going to be any further Court involvement in this matter will be a Claim against C&RT founded in the unlawful seizure and removal of this man's boat from the canal, . . . which, unless they have legitimate grounds, and go through the entire Section 8 process starting with the mandatory notice called for under Section 17(4) of the 1995 British Waterways Act, will be a wholly unlawful act exceeding their statutory powers and authority, and contrary to the 1267 Statute of Marlborough, the 2007 Tribunals, Courts and Enforcement Act, and the 1977 Torts(Interference with Goods) Act. If the boat has already been renamed and given a different index number what is to stop that happening again? You'd rapidly get into silly situation territory. Yes you would need another bs certificate but thats easy to sort out. this changing of boats identity when everyone knows its the same vessel seems a little bit like it might be slightly ridiculous loophole seeking. You could just do it again and again indefinitely.
|
|
|
Post by kris on Apr 29, 2019 15:24:31 GMT
Wasn't going to reply again on this thread but here goes...
If you make a nuisance of yourself so that people complain about you and you also push the rules, expect trouble.
You seem to have some inside imformation that your not sharing with us. Who has complained?and how has he made a nuisance of himself? Genuine questions by the way.
|
|