|
Post by Mr Stabby on May 11, 2019 8:32:50 GMT
How do you provide evidence of doing something in the future? Can you do any more than say you intend to comply? I don't know but I'd speculate that CRT are suggesting that the profile of the boat might be modified to make it capable of continuous cruising?
|
|
|
Post by JohnV on May 11, 2019 8:39:40 GMT
How do you provide evidence of doing something in the future? Can you do any more than say you intend to comply? I don't know but I'd speculate that CRT are suggesting that the profile of the boat might be modified to make it capable of continuous cruising? they would have a hell of a job enforcing the profile of a boat that could go anywhere on the canal system on CCers (remember all the pinch points)
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on May 11, 2019 8:51:02 GMT
Why would it need to be the whole system?
You can cc in a limited area. Otherwise wide beam vessels would be unable to acquire "boat to be used bona fide for navigation" declaration licenses.
|
|
|
Post by Jim on May 11, 2019 9:24:32 GMT
How do you provide evidence of doing something in the future? Can you do any more than say you intend to comply? I don't know but I'd speculate that CRT are suggesting that the profile of the boat might be modified to make it capable of continuous cruising? They can always create a pinch point to trap him. He's moved 10k lately.
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on May 11, 2019 9:28:53 GMT
I read somewhere that the A45 bridge at Braunston is possibly going to be rebuilt narrower so that only narrow boats can get through.
The section between there is part of the Oxford canal but some wider boats can get further due to bridgehole width. Obviously Hillmorton itself is narrow.
That would be interesting to know how wide the statutory beam is for that section.
Braunston to Hillmorton stretch.
Combined with the apparent narrowing of the K&A it could get interesting.
|
|
|
Post by Mr Stabby on May 11, 2019 10:00:14 GMT
I don't know but I'd speculate that CRT are suggesting that the profile of the boat might be modified to make it capable of continuous cruising? they would have a hell of a job enforcing the profile of a boat that could go anywhere on the canal system on CCers (remember all the pinch points) Yes, I'm just speculating as I'm not privy to CRT's thought processes here but possibly it can only travel in an extremely restricted area due to its size, for example a couple of miles in each direction?
|
|
|
Post by TonyDunkley on May 11, 2019 10:16:27 GMT
they would have a hell of a job enforcing the profile of a boat that could go anywhere on the canal system on CCers (remember all the pinch points) Yes, I'm just speculating as I'm not privy to CRT's thought processes here but possibly it can only travel in an extremely restricted area due to its size, for example a couple of miles in each direction? Try reading the post I quoted from on page 7 this morning !
|
|
|
Post by Mr Stabby on May 11, 2019 10:26:06 GMT
Yes, I'm just speculating as I'm not privy to CRT's thought processes here but possibly it can only travel in an extremely restricted area due to its size, for example a couple of miles in each direction? Try reading the post I quoted from on page 7 this morning ! You mean this? "This was in relation to the fact that he had failed to continuously cruise during his previous licence period, and then also did not start any sort of real movement until April this year. During the period of his 6 month licence between June 2016 to November 2016 he only moved 3 km". Possibly moving two miles in six months doesn't satisfy CRT as being bona fide cruising as you suggest, I'm not a continuous cruiser myself so don't have these issues.
|
|
|
Post by TonyDunkley on May 11, 2019 10:32:12 GMT
Try reading the post I quoted from on page 7 this morning ! You mean this? "This was in relation to the fact that he had failed to continuously cruise during his previous licence period, and then also did not start any sort of real movement until April this year. During the period of his 6 month licence between June 2016 to November 2016 he only moved 3 km". Possibly moving two miles in six months doesn't satisfy CRT as being bona fide cruising as you suggest, I'm not a continuous cruiser myself so don't have these issues. No, you fucking idiot, . . I mean this : " With the boat now about 10 miles away from where it was a couple of weeks ago, all the nonsense about the boat being 'unsafe', unable to move under it's own power, or 'unfit' for the waterway it's on has now been quietly dropped in favour of refusing a Licence on the grounds of insufficient boat movement up until two years ago, ie. May 2017, and no movement at all during the period 1 November 2018 to 31 March 2019, . . a period which just happens to have been covered by a Winter Mooring Permit !"
|
|
|
Post by NigelMoore on May 11, 2019 11:30:35 GMT
That would be interesting to know how wide the statutory beam is for that section. Statutory beam width for the Oxford is 2.13 mtrs.
|
|
|
Post by Mr Stabby on May 11, 2019 17:28:34 GMT
To be honest, if I had some type of enforcement issue with CRT, the last thing in the world I would want would be Tony Dunkley sticking his beak in. I really can't see how it would be an aid to the boater in any way, shape or form.
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on May 11, 2019 17:32:17 GMT
To be honest, if I had some type of enforcement issue with CRT, the last thing in the world I would want would be Tony Dunkley sticking his beak in. I really can't see how it would be an aid to the boater in any way, shape or form. Best you shut up then. You don't have a clue. 😊
|
|
|
Post by Mr Stabby on May 11, 2019 17:39:24 GMT
To be honest, if I had some type of enforcement issue with CRT, the last thing in the world I would want would be Tony Dunkley sticking his beak in. I really can't see how it would be an aid to the boater in any way, shape or form. Best you shut up then. You don't have a clue. 😊 You seem to be mistaken about what a forum is. It is a place for the expression of thoughts, views and opinions. That is my honest opinion. If you have a different opinion then you are equally at liberty to say your thing. I cannot see how Tony Dunkley's involvement can help this boater in any way, given Tony Dunkley's history with CRT and his ascerbic and confrontational nature.
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on May 11, 2019 17:46:39 GMT
Best you shut up then. You don't have a clue. 😊 You seem to be mistaken about what a forum is. It is a place for the expression of thoughts, views and opinions. That is my honest opinion. If you have a different opinion then you are equally at liberty to say your thing. I cannot see how Tony Dunkley's involvement can help this boater in any way, given Tony Dunkley's history with CRT and his ascerbic and confrontational nature. Given the fact you have no knowledge on any of this, your "opinion" is pretty much worth zilch. So any mistake I have made about how a forum works is irrelevant. Tony gets stuck in, and has helped two people I know to keep their boats, whilst you sit on here, at best, propping up your opinion.
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on May 11, 2019 19:34:05 GMT
I wonder if the boat might have been towed. There is nothing wrong with towing other than not being insured and I have towed boats around for nothing before but does being towed from place to place by friendly other boaters fulfil the "bona fide navigating" criteria? Genuine thought not one intended to agitate. I guess it would come down to the definition of navigating. The reason I find it interesting is because it means that a boat incapable of navigating on its own is a sound option for a residential vessel. It really makes a lot of sense if your aim is to remain generally in one area. No fuel costs, no engine install costs, boat can be the best shape for residential use etc. This could get quite popular
|
|