|
Post by Telemachus on Jul 4, 2017 17:25:08 GMT
I'm ignoring all the bitchiness I'll take my hat off to Kris for tackling the jobs he did afloat, all my refit work is done at no extra cost, be that undercover a float or on hard standing. I couldn't contemplate carrying out the works he did on what is his home while getting grief off C&RT. It's easy for me, when I've had a tits full of it I go home or don't bother doing anything for a bit, no such option for Kris. Despite my initial scepticism with going down the road he did, I've got to say I was wrong and he obviously he had to put measures in place to protect himself and his boat that look like they needn't have been forced on him. It's a shame you have to spend the money on a mooring you don't want or need to keep the CRT sharks at bay when that money would be better spent on hard standing or dry docking. That's exactly what annoys me, the fact that if I had put that money into my boat it would be a lot further on than it is. But if I hadnt paid for a mooring I would definately now be fighting crt to keep my boat. If you not had to pay for a licence, or even had robbed a bank, or maybe mugged a few grannies, you would have had more money to put into your boat, but unfortunately all those things are illegal.
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Jul 4, 2017 17:28:08 GMT
It is a protection racket in the sense that you have to pay or bad things happen but lots of things are like that. Even the food supply is a protection racket when you think about it, unless you are able to grow your own and even if you can do self sufficiency what do you do about bog rolls?
All important questions.
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Jul 4, 2017 17:33:59 GMT
One thing that strikes me is the difference between say the GU in the 80's and now. When I was a kid there were loads of shagged out old working boats, sunk, sinking or just about being kept afloat - particularly wooden boats. Now there are very few, most have become shinny toys for the wealthy retired or have been dragged out with the dredger and sent into oblivion.
I wonder what the cost to CRT is for destroying historic craft rather than helping preserve them - even if that is just giving an exemption to the owners from the usual s8 s13 nonsense.
|
|
|
Post by JohnV on Jul 4, 2017 17:41:27 GMT
I think that's the thing that bugs me as well ..... if you own a classic car you receive assistance from the government by paying no road licence. If you own a historic boat it's "pay up or else".
It doesn't even have to cost them ..... All Kris needed was some flexibility. (I still reckon that he could have made some attempt to move.... but Kris and I decided we would agree to disagree on that point, without rancour) but like gazza I'm impressed by what he has achieved
|
|
|
Post by Telemachus on Jul 4, 2017 17:41:27 GMT
One thing that strikes me is the difference between say the GU in the 80's and now. When I was a kid there were loads of shagged out old working boats, sunk, sinking or just about being kept afloat - particularly wooden boats. Now there are very few, most have become shinny toys for the wealthy retired or have been dragged out with the dredger and sent into oblivion. I wonder what the cost to CRT is for destroying historic craft rather than helping preserve them - even if that is just giving an exemption to the owners from the usual s8 s13 nonsense. This is a bit like bemoaning all the old cars piled on scrap heaps. Such a shame the government doesn't fund the restoration of all these old cars so they could be plonked all along the country's roadsides!
|
|
|
Post by JohnV on Jul 4, 2017 17:42:38 GMT
One thing that strikes me is the difference between say the GU in the 80's and now. When I was a kid there were loads of shagged out old working boats, sunk, sinking or just about being kept afloat - particularly wooden boats. Now there are very few, most have become shinny toys for the wealthy retired or have been dragged out with the dredger and sent into oblivion. I wonder what the cost to CRT is for destroying historic craft rather than helping preserve them - even if that is just giving an exemption to the owners from the usual s8 s13 nonsense. This is a bit like bemoaning all the old cars piled on scrap heaps. Such a shame the government doesn't fund the restoration of all these old cars so they could be plonked all along the country's roadsides! see my post that crossed yours ....... they do assist !!!
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Jul 4, 2017 17:47:15 GMT
This is a bit like bemoaning all the old cars piled on scrap heaps. Such a shame the government doesn't fund the restoration of all these old cars so they could be plonked all along the country's roadsides! see my post that crossed yours ....... they do assist !!! He can't hear you, the racket from his Skoda cheesecake has made him deaf.
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Jul 4, 2017 17:49:47 GMT
. (I still reckon that he could have made some attempt to move.... but Kris and I decided we would agree to disagree on that point, without rancour) ... I like it.
|
|
|
Post by Telemachus on Jul 4, 2017 17:58:18 GMT
This is a bit like bemoaning all the old cars piled on scrap heaps. Such a shame the government doesn't fund the restoration of all these old cars so they could be plonked all along the country's roadsides! see my post that crossed yours ....... they do assist !!! No, they don't assist one to renovate an old vehicle on public land. Yes, once the vehicle is restored and roadworthy, they do offer a lower rate of tax, though no lower than some modern economical or unpolluting (at the point of delivery) vehicles. It is EXACTLY THE SAME with CRT and historic boats. They get a discount on the licence too. So what was your point again?
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Jul 4, 2017 17:58:47 GMT
One thing that strikes me is the difference between say the GU in the 80's and now. When I was a kid there were loads of shagged out old working boats, sunk, sinking or just about being kept afloat - particularly wooden boats. Now there are very few, most have become shinny toys for the wealthy retired or have been dragged out with the dredger and sent into oblivion. I wonder what the cost to CRT is for destroying historic craft rather than helping preserve them - even if that is just giving an exemption to the owners from the usual s8 s13 nonsense. This is a bit like bemoaning all the old cars piled on scrap heaps. Such a shame the government doesn't fund the restoration of all these old cars so they could be plonked all along the country's roadsides! No, it's nothing like that. Given that many were involved in the war effort as opposed to being leisure toys it's not that big an ask is it? On the stretch we cruised regularly gayton - solbury, gayton - napton, gayton - lemington, gayton - foxton none of those boats ever interfered with our cruising. They provided my parents with a bit of a historical talking point and stimulated my imagination. Cost to BW? Not much as they were there for donkey's ages. It would seem the gentrification of the canals has more to do with it than the actual cost to the navigation authority along with its impact on being able to navigate the waterway.
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Jul 4, 2017 18:00:49 GMT
Looks like we'll have to be a a bit careful how we respond to you in future. I mean we don't want to get accused by you of libel do we? If I wanted to sue you for libel, you have already given me plenty of material. Now that's called a threat which I hope you can back up. It's also libel in itself being a false accusation being made in a public domain.
|
|
|
Post by Mr Stabby on Jul 4, 2017 18:07:35 GMT
Looks like we'll have to be a a bit careful how we respond to you in future. I mean we don't want to get accused by you of libel do we? If I wanted to sue you for libel, you have already given me plenty of material. Don't talk like a cunt, you need to be seriously minted to take libel action, and the person you take action against needs to be sufficiently wealthy to make legal action worthwhile.
|
|
|
Post by Telemachus on Jul 4, 2017 18:13:59 GMT
If I wanted to sue you for libel, you have already given me plenty of material. Now that's called a threat which I hope you can back up. It's also libel in itself being a false accusation being made in a public domain. No, its called pointing out that if I wanted to sue you for libel, you have already given me plenty of material. But as previously mentioned, I don't want to.
|
|
|
Post by Telemachus on Jul 4, 2017 18:14:56 GMT
If I wanted to sue you for libel, you have already given me plenty of material. Don't talk like a cunt, you need to be seriously minted to take libel action, and the person you take action against needs to be sufficiently wealthy to make legal action worthwhile. So, bearing in mind I said some time ago in this thread that I didn't want to sue anybody for libel, what is your point exactly? Other than stating the obvious!
|
|
|
Post by JohnV on Jul 4, 2017 18:30:04 GMT
see my post that crossed yours ....... they do assist !!! No, they don't assist one to renovate an old vehicle on public land. Yes, once the vehicle is restored and roadworthy, they do offer a lower rate of tax, though no lower than some modern economical or unpolluting (at the point of delivery) vehicles. It is EXACTLY THE SAME with CRT and historic boats. They get a discount on the licence too. So what was your point again? Cars older than a certain date pay no road tax .... so they get a assistance ..... the fact that it is the same rate that new, non or less polluting cars is irrelevant. Boats older than a certain date unless they conform to a very strict series of conditions receive NO reduction and even if they do manage to conform, then the reduction is riseable. Totally different ballgame
|
|