|
|
Post by kris on May 10, 2017 12:15:27 GMT
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on May 10, 2017 12:39:45 GMT
Lol@Damien and his boaters updates. He was a sub mariner, pity he didn't stay there.
I was having a discussion with him at one of the workgroups for 48hr moorings. He was stating his case for change. I asked him when he had last walked the towpath at the site, his reply was "oh, well, I've never been there, but I can see it on Google maps". 😂😂😂.
|
|
|
|
Post by kris on May 10, 2017 13:22:56 GMT
Sounds about right for Crt . I'm happy if I meet a Crt manager and they know what a canal is. If I was ceo of Crt I'd get a simple quiz about the waterways together. Get all Crt employees to take it, anybody you gets below 50% I'd sack straight away.
|
|
|
|
Post by markhez on May 10, 2017 14:05:48 GMT
Sounds about right for Crt . I'm happy if I meet a Crt manager and they know what a canal is. If I was ceo of Crt I'd get a simple quiz about the waterways together. Get all Crt employees to take it, anybody you gets below 50% I'd sack straight away. Parry wouldn't want to do that though, he'd lose his own job! |
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on May 10, 2017 16:19:45 GMT
I noticed that. Seemed a bit odd as a lot of the boats they section 8 and crush are cheap fibreglass cruisers. I suppose if crt are going to be benefiting from the production of new cheap boats it would make sense. It didn't seem to be clear whether they were on about new or second hand. Maybe they don't crush boats and have a stock of s8 then refurbished dawncrafts etc needing selling? |
|
|
|
Post by kris on May 10, 2017 18:36:03 GMT
I noticed that. Seemed a bit odd as a lot of the boats they section 8 and crush are cheap fibreglass cruisers. I suppose if crt are going to be benefiting from the production of new cheap boats it would make sense. It didn't seem to be clear whether they were on about new or second hand. Maybe they don't crush boats and have a stock of s8 then refurbished dawncrafts etc needing selling? I'm sure they would tell you, that they are recycling them. In fact the more I think about it, the more I think it's a stroke of genius. Probably the best money making scheme crt have come up with so far. Sell the s8 boat to an unsuspecting dupe, sorry I mean new boater. Charge exorbitant liscence and mooring fees for a couple of years, then s8 the boat again. Hey presto recyling in action. Rinse and repeat until you have made enough to pay the high wages of management and their bonuses. It should make more money than the friends scheme has so far. |
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on May 10, 2017 18:43:45 GMT
I heard thats exactly why they crush these types of boats because they tend to be sold cheap to someone else who will then be subject to s8 and it all costs money. I suppose the question is does the value of the boat cover the costs of enforcement. Maybe if it is tidied up and a new 4 stroke outboard put on it this might work. Would look good for the pollution worriers as well specially in cities.
|
|
|
|
Post by kris on May 10, 2017 18:47:09 GMT
I heard thats exactly why they crush these types of boats because they tend to be sold cheap to someone else who will then be subject to s8 and it all costs money. I suppose the question is does the value of the boat cover the costs of enforcement. Maybe if it is tidied up and a new 4 stroke outboard put on it this might work. Would look good for the pollution worriers as well specially in cities. Your forgetting that crt are on their way to taking people's boats without ever stepping inside a court ( ala planet.) The exorbitant new liscence fees and moorings should cover costs with a tidy profit over. |
|
|
|
Post by tadworth on May 29, 2017 14:32:15 GMT
They don't profit from section 8 ing boats, its a huge loss, in fact they actively make sure that it costs them as much as possible, so that the costs to the owner to get the boat back are malicious.
The idea of "crushing" boats is just one they made up to scare people, no scrappy or waste company would crush a usable boat and reduce its value to nothing, it would be sold as found. I bought a 60 ft narrow boat that was written off by the insurance company after being burnt out, but the scrappy sold it to me for scrap value instead of cutting it up which would have cost them , I rebuilt the engine and sold it and got my money back, everyone's a winner.
|
|
|
|
Post by NigelMoore on May 30, 2017 9:24:18 GMT
I suppose the question is does the value of the boat cover the costs of enforcement. The cost of removal appears to be a standard contract price of £5,000 - £5,500 using Commercial Boat Services, as indicated by news articles showing a fibreglass cruiser being lifted out but returned when the owner turned up and paid, and the same amounts being claimed for narrowboats [except in exceptional circumstances such as ‘Pearl’ where the price doubled]. According to Paul Griffin in the Towpath Talk interview [that CaRT liked so much they asked for permission to reproduce it on their own site], they consider destroying any boat valued at under £3,000, and only if worth more than that will they look to try selling it after 6 weeks. I do not know what the costs of crushing or otherwise disposing of a boat might be, but it could not be that cheap even if they had their own crusher. Whatever, even allowing for nil costs in destroying the boat, the loss is of the total CBS invoice at a minimum, whereas for sold boats at the lower end of their scale commencing with boats valued at £3,000, the immediate loss to CaRT would on those figures amount to a minimum £2,000 – 2,500 per boat seized and destroyed, even if they got full value. The only time when sale of a seized boat would cover the costs of enforcement is when the value of the boat is considerably in excess of £6,000; realistically, given forced sale conditions, it would have to be worth very much more. |
|
