|
Post by kris on May 1, 2019 17:15:27 GMT
Lucy Barry must hate you Tony.
|
|
|
Post by patty on May 1, 2019 19:06:18 GMT
Thats a good letter.. I hope you get a response that you can work with.
|
|
|
Post by TonyDunkley on May 1, 2019 19:33:49 GMT
Thats a good letter.. I hope you get a response that you can work with. Thank you, patty. I don't know if it was just coincidence, or as a consequence of that e-mail, but after it was sent Leiam Walsh, the local Enforcement Officer/ Customer Licence Support Officer, or whatever he's called this week, visited the boat and informed Mr Szymanski that the C&RT would issue him with a replacement boat Licence on condition that he first obtained a 'home mooring'. Significantly perhaps, there was no mention made of seizing and removing his boat on the strength of the 2017 Court Order, no mention of the boat being unsafe or unsuitable for the canal upon which it is to be kept and used, and no paperwork of any description was left with him.
|
|
|
Post by kris on May 1, 2019 19:37:20 GMT
Thats a good letter.. I hope you get a response that you can work with. Thank you, patty. I don't know if it was just coincidence, or as a consequence of that e-mail, but after it was sent Leiam Walsh, the local Enforcement Officer/ Customer Licence Support Officer, or whatever he's called this week, visited the boat and informed Mr Szymanski that the C&RT would issue him with a replacement boat Licence on condition that he first obtained a 'home mooring'. Significantly perhaps, there was no mention made of seizing and removing his boat on the strength of the 2017 Court Order, no mention of the boat being unsafe or unsuitable for the canal upon which it is to be kept and used, and no paperwork of any description was left with him. Maybe cart should provide him with a mooring if they are so kean on him having one.
|
|
|
Post by Mr Stabby on May 1, 2019 19:42:37 GMT
Thank you, patty. I don't know if it was just coincidence, or as a consequence of that e-mail, but after it was sent Leiam Walsh, the local Enforcement Officer/ Customer Licence Support Officer, or whatever he's called this week, visited the boat and informed Mr Szymanski that the C&RT would issue him with a replacement boat Licence on condition that he first obtained a 'home mooring'. Significantly perhaps, there was no mention made of seizing and removing his boat on the strength of the 2017 Court Order, no mention of the boat being unsafe or unsuitable for the canal upon which it is to be kept and used, and no paperwork of any description was left with him. Maybe cart should provide him with a mooring if they are so kean on him having one. I'd be surprised if CRT had mooring availability in that part of London and I understand that several marinas which did have availability were willing to provide a mooring until they saw photographs of the boat.
|
|
|
Post by kris on May 1, 2019 19:49:38 GMT
Maybe cart should provide him with a mooring if they are so kean on him having one. I'd be surprised if CRT had mooring availability in that part of London and I understand that several marinas which did have availability were willing to provide a mooring until they saw photographs of the boat. Your like a stuck record.
|
|
|
Post by Mr Stabby on May 1, 2019 19:52:21 GMT
I'm simply answering your point Christopher. Can you tell me what moorings CRT have available in that part of London?
|
|
|
Post by naughtyfox on May 1, 2019 19:58:46 GMT
We still haven't heard the details in this case. Not to my satisfaction, anyway.
|
|
|
Post by kris on May 1, 2019 20:05:38 GMT
I'm simply answering your point Christopher. Can you tell me what moorings CRT have available in that part of London? Who's Christopher?
|
|
|
Post by naughtyfox on May 1, 2019 20:09:55 GMT
The love child of and
|
|
|
Post by Mr Stabby on May 1, 2019 20:09:57 GMT
I'm simply answering your point Christopher. Can you tell me what moorings CRT have available in that part of London? Who's Christopher? You're like a stuck record.
|
|
|
Post by TonyDunkley on May 1, 2019 20:28:47 GMT
Thank you, patty. I don't know if it was just coincidence, or as a consequence of that e-mail, but after it was sent Leiam Walsh, the local Enforcement Officer/ Customer Licence Support Officer, or whatever he's called this week, visited the boat and informed Mr Szymanski that the C&RT would issue him with a replacement boat Licence on condition that he first obtained a 'home mooring'. Significantly perhaps, there was no mention made of seizing and removing his boat on the strength of the 2017 Court Order, no mention of the boat being unsafe or unsuitable for the canal upon which it is to be kept and used, and no paperwork of any description was left with him. Maybe cart should provide him with a mooring if they are so kean on him having one. Well, . . if they're so desperate to have him on a 'home mooring' and want to make it a pre-condition of formally re-instating his Licence, which in reality still has a further 6 months to run, then lacking the statutory powers to insist that anyone or any boat must have a 'home mooring', they would be obliged to provide him with one FoC.
|
|
|
Post by kris on May 1, 2019 20:34:27 GMT
Maybe cart should provide him with a mooring if they are so kean on him having one. Well, . . if they're so desperate to have him on a 'home mooring' and want to make it a pre-condition of formally re-instating his Licence, which in reality still has a further 6 months to run, then lacking the statutory powers to insist that anyone or any boat must have a 'home mooring', they would be obliged to provide him with one FoC. As I understood it, Bw/cart where refused when they asked for the right to demand boats had to have a home mooring to be liscenced.
|
|
|
Post by TonyDunkley on May 1, 2019 20:43:55 GMT
Well, . . if they're so desperate to have him on a 'home mooring' and want to make it a pre-condition of formally re-instating his Licence, which in reality still has a further 6 months to run, then lacking the statutory powers to insist that anyone or any boat must have a 'home mooring', they would be obliged to provide him with one FoC. As I understood it, Bw/cart where refused when they asked for the right to demand boats had to have a home mooring to be liscenced. That's correct, . . they were specifically refused such powers at the Committee stage of the Bill which became the 1995 BW Act. Leaves them in a bit of a hole with all this, doesn't it !
|
|
|
Post by kris on May 1, 2019 20:49:31 GMT
As I understood it, Bw/cart where refused when they asked for the right to demand boats had to have a home mooring to be liscenced. That's correct, . . they were specifically refused such powers at the Committee stage of the Bill which became the 1995 BW Act. Leaves them in a bit of a hole with all this, doesn't it ! It does seem that they've tried to overstep their mark yet again.
|
|