|
Post by peterboat on Sept 27, 2016 18:57:54 GMT
I have had a look on the other channel as as always they are ripping each other to pieces over it!! At the end if the owner had paid his bills none of this would be happening would it? It's a yes and no sort of thing, neither Nigel nor Tony have excused the owner for non payment of bills. What is mind boggling is the demand 'gerrof my land(water)' then towing it to Sharpness straight back onto 'my land(water)' surley, arrangements made to keep the vessel at Birkenhead or wherever more local to Liverpool to be paid at the owners expense or deducted from the sale of vessel if money was not forthcoming would have been better than this cluster fuck of an exercise? Tony doesn't strike me as the sort to support lost causes, on the face of it C&RT look to have made an utter balls of this one. I agree with you Gazza but if he had paid they wouldnt have towed it away!! He had plenty of warning that action was going to be taken and CRT always remove boats when they take action. I will wait and see what happens but I can see both sides of the issue but sometimes action has to be taken
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Sept 27, 2016 19:02:14 GMT
Yes, I struggle to understand the negative view towards CRT over this? I was there as it was dragged out and there wasn't much negativity about it going! After talking to locals, Mersey marina people etc the consensus was that the alledged owner was a pissed up tosser who bought cheap cans from tesco over the road, charged people to go onboard then charged nightclub prices for canned beer...all without licenses, insurance etc.. .Why the vigorous defence of it? I've had zero hassle, bullying or intimidation from CRT, but then again, I pay my way as outlined in my T & C's with them... Think some people just like to find any minute problem / T not crossed to try and enhance their reputation!! My take on it is C&RT have acted outside of the law available to them. That's the crux of the matter. The fact it was a shit, expensive place to go for a can of beer is neither here nor there. Don't loose sight of the fact a reported £20k+ had been Spunked on this exercise. How much would Peel or ABP want for a few months fees while the legal side of things was made watertight for C&RT? Bearing in mind that any expense accrued would be deducted from an eventual sale, any excess being returned to the owner.
|
|
|
Post by Andyberg on Sept 27, 2016 19:07:09 GMT
Yes, I struggle to understand the negative view towards CRT over this? I was there as it was dragged out and there wasn't much negativity about it going! After talking to locals, Mersey marina people etc the consensus was that the alledged owner was a pissed up tosser who bought cheap cans from tesco over the road, charged people to go onboard then charged nightclub prices for canned beer...all without licenses, insurance etc.. .Why the vigorous defence of it? I've had zero hassle, bullying or intimidation from CRT, but then again, I pay my way as outlined in my T & C's with them... Think some people just like to find any minute problem / T not crossed to try and enhance their reputation!! My take on it is C&RT have acted outside of the law available to them. That's the crux of the matter. The fact it was a shit, expensive place to go for a can of beer is neither here nor there. Don't loose sight of the fact a reported £20k+ had been Spunked on this exercise. How much would Peel or ABP want for a few months fees while the legal side of things was made watertight for C&RT? Bearing in mind that any expense accrued would be deducted from an eventual sale, any excess being returned to the owner. There was a manic woman there running round the crowds shouting 'it's not going to Gloucester docks, it's being taken to Sheerness to be cut up' so we will see!!
|
|
|
Post by Andyberg on Sept 27, 2016 19:09:26 GMT
Was quite an earie view as I left Canning Dock on Sunday and saw the redundant ropes, life belt etc floating in the water. ..oh well..Can't pay we will take it away and hear hear I say!!
|
|
|
Post by Andyberg on Sept 27, 2016 19:12:26 GMT
Mods at it again...Who will think of the kittens!!
***********************************************************
Mod's hat time ...
It's a good debate and some interesting points have been raised. What I do want you to think about, is the wording of your posts. Nothing is proven or disproven other than money was owed and a boat taken to another place. Beyond that, we can surmise, infer, suggest or posit amongst many other useful terms, but we cannot say exactly. To suggest that one party has committed a crime is a serious allegation, however, the other party cannot refute this because they are not represented. Moreover, can I suggest that m'learned friend might not take too kindly to hearing that an ongoing case had been freely discussed in an open place. We rely on 'the conversation in the pub' rule often here, but I think we're going well beyond it with allegations of crimes being committed.
I am going to leave the thread open, because it is, in the main, important and useful, but please consider what you post, particularly where you are involved as advisors and as friends. If the content continues in the same manner as prior to this post, I will be taking sanctions against those who bring the forum into disrepute or who are vexatious.
Wriggly Edited by wrigglefingers, Today, 06:58 PM.
|
|
|
Post by peterboat on Sept 27, 2016 19:14:26 GMT
What do the locals think? I wonder if they are bothered? We will have to see what we see on this one
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Sept 27, 2016 19:26:16 GMT
Mods at it again...Who will think of the kittens!! *********************************************************** Mod's hat time ... It's a good debate and some interesting points have been raised. What I do want you to think about, is the wording of your posts. Nothing is proven or disproven other than money was owed and a boat taken to another place. Beyond that, we can surmise, infer, suggest or posit amongst many other useful terms, but we cannot say exactly. To suggest that one party has committed a crime is a serious allegation, however, the other party cannot refute this because they are not represented. Moreover, can I suggest that m'learned friend might not take too kindly to hearing that an ongoing case had been freely discussed in an open place. We rely on 'the conversation in the pub' rule often here, but I think we're going well beyond it with allegations of crimes being committed. I am going to leave the thread open, because it is, in the main, important and useful, but please consider what you post, particularly where you are involved as advisors and as friends. If the content continues in the same manner as prior to this post, I will be taking sanctions against those who bring the forum into disrepute or who are vexatious. Wriggly Edited by wrigglefingers, Today, 06:58 PM. She really is a Fuckin control freak.
|
|
|
Post by JohnV on Sept 28, 2016 13:35:21 GMT
It has occurred to me that we have been talking about canal legal procedures ........ but although the dock might be now under CRT control it was never originally subject to the acts and regulations of the canal system but subject to it's own bylaws etc (The Port of Liverpool). I am completely unfamiliar with those regulations but I do know that (for instance) the Port of London regulations and powers bear no resemblance to those governing canals and rivers. How many of those regulations still apply to the docks in Liverpool?
|
|
|
Post by PaulG2 on Sept 28, 2016 14:35:10 GMT
She really is a Fuckin control freak. No kidding! "I will be taking sanctions against those who bring the forum into disrepute"
|
|
|
Post by Andyberg on Sept 28, 2016 15:03:46 GMT
She really is a Fuckin control freak.
More of it due to that welsh tosser Davis laying down the rules.. Its just laughable...
******************************************************************************************************************* Moderator statement.
I am locking this thread for a short while so that I can have a good look at some of the posting.
Do not attempt open another thread discussing this, otherwise I shall place you in modqueue or worse.
Wriggly
Added ...
Thread is reopened. Do not get involved in tit for tat posting, it reflects badly on the forum and on you as a member. This is a serious and emotive matter, and I am trying to keep the thread civil and on topic. You can make sure that it continues.
Edited by wrigglefingers, Today, 01:22 PM. ******************************************************************************************
Followed by a 'Thank You' from Dan!!
|
|
|
Post by JohnV on Sept 28, 2016 17:59:25 GMT
Due to this thread, I decided to pull up a map of Liverpool Docks to remind myself of where everything was (It's a long time since I was there) I found that I couldn't work out where anything was, nothing seemed to fit with my memory !!! I finally realised that half of it has gone !!! I was about a year on a small tanker spending a lot of time trading between Modewheel (on the Manchester Ship Canal) to Toxteth or Herculaneum docks in Liverpool. No wonder I couldn't recognise anything from the map ........ half of it has been filled in !!! (and just to make me really feel like a fossil, I read that it was filled in over 40 years ago)
|
|
|
Post by kris on Sept 28, 2016 18:26:12 GMT
More of it due to that welsh tosser Davis laying down the rules.. Its just laughable...
******************************************************************************************************************* Moderator statement.
I am locking this thread for a short while so that I can have a good look at some of the posting.
Do not attempt open another thread discussing this, otherwise I shall place you in modqueue or worse.
Wriggly
Added ...
Thread is reopened. Do not get involved in tit for tat posting, it reflects badly on the forum and on you as a member. This is a serious and emotive matter, and I am trying to keep the thread civil and on topic. You can make sure that it continues.
Edited by wrigglefingers, Today, 01:22 PM. ******************************************************************************************
Followed by a 'Thank You' from Dan!!
on reflection and taking into consideration that Crt have used some of Nigel moores posts on cwdf as evidence in court recently. I think there's more to the clamp down and banning of members on cwdf than dans cv. I think someone from Crt has had a quite word in dans shell like. Maybe Dan bumped into Richard parry at a waterways event?
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Sept 28, 2016 18:39:34 GMT
More of it due to that welsh tosser Davis laying down the rules.. Its just laughable...
******************************************************************************************************************* Moderator statement.
I am locking this thread for a short while so that I can have a good look at some of the posting.
Do not attempt open another thread discussing this, otherwise I shall place you in modqueue or worse.
Wriggly
Added ...
Thread is reopened. Do not get involved in tit for tat posting, it reflects badly on the forum and on you as a member. This is a serious and emotive matter, and I am trying to keep the thread civil and on topic. You can make sure that it continues.
Edited by wrigglefingers, Today, 01:22 PM. ******************************************************************************************
Followed by a 'Thank You' from Dan!!
on reflection and taking into consideration that Crt have used some of Nigel moores posts on cwdf as evidence in court recently. I think there's more to the clamp down and banning of members on cwdf than dans cv. I think someone from Crt has had a quite word in dans shell like. Maybe Dan bumped into Richard parry at a waterways event? Your close. As I stated once before, Dan was at one stage attempting to look at ways cwdf and crt could interact. This was a Dan thing, and at the time, crt were not interested. They (or to be precise, Debbie figgy), monitor the site on a daily basis. Passing any relevant info to the departments it may concern. Crt did for a while think cwdf with its huge membership, was in the main representative of the majority of boat owners. They have since realised this is not the case. I would not be in the least surprised if it was discovered that Dan had been sucking up to a crt employee.
|
|
|
Post by kris on Sept 29, 2016 10:43:36 GMT
It seems the same old story, crt acting outside of their legal remit. If the owner hadn't paid the mooring fees, then yes he is in the wrong. I'm not defending anyone who doesn't abide by the relevant legislation and pay his/her way. But surely crt should have to abide by the law of the land. The problem as I see it is their is no oversight of crt, the government can't be bothered. So they feel they can do what they like. The only recourse is the courts, that we all know is an expensive and difficult exercise. One thing that's struck me is crt have a legal requirement to gain the market value for boats that they confiscate under section 8?
|
|
|
Post by peterboat on Sept 29, 2016 11:09:08 GMT
It has been a year of overdue fees letters passed to him he was still trading he was taking the mick to say the least so CRT removed his boat they have not used section 8 but some other method. If someone moored that boat in my pond and didnt pay I would have towed it to waddies and cut it up a long time ago. A while ago a traded dumped 3 cars in our yard we couldnt get him to respond so we towed them onto the road and NSL removed them for us problem sorted, sometimes you just have to take action
|
|