|
Post by Jim on Aug 21, 2017 6:27:09 GMT
Yes , good luck. Have you got anyone that can video any interactions?
|
|
|
Post by IainS on Aug 21, 2017 15:29:26 GMT
Good luck from me as well. I expect nobody will ask for money ...
|
|
|
Post by gigoguy on Aug 21, 2017 19:52:49 GMT
Thank you all. I'll let you know what happens. As Ian says probably no one will come. I've told them exactly where to find me and when I'm going to be there. So no excuse for not turning up.
Has anyone asked on the narrowboat users group for me?
|
|
|
Post by gigoguy on Aug 21, 2017 22:08:09 GMT
So are you expecting Louise Morrisey herself to be standing on the towpath with her hand outstretched for two £20 notes? I'm still confused as to your exact intentions and meaning. I'd expect them just to ignore you and rake in £40 from all the other boaters who think that's what they are supposed to pay. On payment of anything I'd expect a proper receipt. Please take photos of anyone coming up to you demanding payment and post the photos here. On the other hand are you allowed to do that, as Bridgewater land is private, and photos taken in the private domain may not necessarily be posted publicly without permission. Don't forget to turn the tape recorder on under your jacket!! Well I don't know what they'll do. I have made a report to CaRT as requested and I'm also making one for Trading Standards, as requested. If they come and ask and have no legal authority to do so. Then I'll call the police, who won't do anything but at least they'll log the report. They can't physically rob me and they know they've got no legal right to remove my boat if I don't pay. All they can do, if anything I suppose. Is threaten me with court action through the county court. But they won't do that because after 10 times of asking for legal authority and not getting any. Is in itself enough to get me off I shouldn't wonder. What I'm actually hoping for is that trading standards will take action and at the very least force them to stop charging from now on. Even if they aren't made to pay anything back. That alone will get in the press and hopefully more people will use the canal and bring some life back to it and some income back to the people who depend on it. And it will show Peel Holdings and all the other bullying corporations. That they can't do what the fuck they want and no one will stand up to hem.
|
|
|
Post by TonyDunkley on Aug 22, 2017 8:43:30 GMT
So are you expecting Louise Morrisey herself to be standing on the towpath with her hand outstretched for two £20 notes? I'm still confused as to your exact intentions and meaning. I'd expect them just to ignore you and rake in £40 from all the other boaters who think that's what they are supposed to pay. On payment of anything I'd expect a proper receipt. Please take photos of anyone coming up to you demanding payment and post the photos here. On the other hand are you allowed to do that, as Bridgewater land is private, and photos taken in the private domain may not necessarily be posted publicly without permission. Don't forget to turn the tape recorder on under your jacket!! Well I don't know what they'll do. I have made a report to CaRT as requested and I'm also making one for Trading Standards, as requested. If they come and ask and have no legal authority to do so. Then I'll call the police, who won't do anything but at least they'll log the report. They can't physically rob me and they know they've got no legal right to remove my boat if I don't pay. All they can do, if anything I suppose. Is threaten me with court action through the county court. But they won't do that because after 10 times of asking for legal authority and not getting any. Is in itself enough to get me off I shouldn't wonder. What I'm actually hoping for is that trading standards will take action and at the very least force them to stop charging from now on. Even if they aren't made to pay anything back. That alone will get in the press and hopefully more people will use the canal and bring some life back to it and some income back to the people who depend on it. And it will show Peel Holdings and all the other bullying corporations. That they can't do what the fuck they want and no one will stand up to hem. While you've got BCCo./Peel under some pressure already it would probably be as good a time as any to pile a bit more more misery on top of that over the question of the boats they are currently holding unlawfully impounded. Not only is there the obvious potential benefit for the owners of those boats, but getting them returned to their rightful owners would generate some helpful publicity toward allaying the fears of others who may be avoiding the Bridgewater due to worries about having their boats snatched from them by the BCCo. PS. I've messaged you re. those two posts about levying distress illegally that you enquired about on the 20th.
|
|
|
Post by gigoguy on Aug 22, 2017 17:03:46 GMT
Well I don't know what they'll do. I have made a report to CaRT as requested and I'm also making one for Trading Standards, as requested. If they come and ask and have no legal authority to do so. Then I'll call the police, who won't do anything but at least they'll log the report. They can't physically rob me and they know they've got no legal right to remove my boat if I don't pay. All they can do, if anything I suppose. Is threaten me with court action through the county court. But they won't do that because after 10 times of asking for legal authority and not getting any. Is in itself enough to get me off I shouldn't wonder. What I'm actually hoping for is that trading standards will take action and at the very least force them to stop charging from now on. Even if they aren't made to pay anything back. That alone will get in the press and hopefully more people will use the canal and bring some life back to it and some income back to the people who depend on it. And it will show Peel Holdings and all the other bullying corporations. That they can't do what the fuck they want and no one will stand up to hem. While you've got BCCo./Peel under some pressure already it would probably be as good a time as any to pile a bit more more misery on top of that over the question of the boats they are currently holding unlawfully impounded. Not only is there the obvious potential benefit for the owners of those boats, but getting them returned to their rightful owners would generate some helpful publicity toward allaying the fears of others who may be avoiding the Bridgewater due to worries about having their boats snatched from them by the BCCo. PS. I've messaged you re. those two posts about levying distress illegally that you enquired about on the 20th. Will they answer me if I write to them about the impounded boats, or will they tell me it's the owner's business?
|
|
|
Post by TonyDunkley on Aug 22, 2017 21:02:50 GMT
While you've got BCCo./Peel under some pressure already it would probably be as good a time as any to pile a bit more more misery on top of that over the question of the boats they are currently holding unlawfully impounded. Not only is there the obvious potential benefit for the owners of those boats, but getting them returned to their rightful owners would generate some helpful publicity toward allaying the fears of others who may be avoiding the Bridgewater due to worries about having their boats snatched from them by the BCCo. PS. I've messaged you re. those two posts about levying distress illegally that you enquired about on the 20th. Will they answer me if I write to them about the impounded boats, or will they tell me it's the owner's business? They might do just that, it's the sort of stock initial response to expect in the circumstances, but if you make the matter your business on behalf of the wronged owners and as someone who has been threatened with the same illegal/criminal treatment, then they'll be obliged to respond in a rather more helpful and positive fashion. Of vital importance is to establish in their minds from the very beginning is that neither you nor the owners of the boats they have unlawfully seized are prepared to be fobbed off, . . . your dogged persistence with regard to the charging of pleasure craft for using the Bridgewater will help to convince them of that ! Are you in contact with the owner and the family, or executors (of the estate), of the deceased owner of the two vessels being held ?
|
|
|
Post by gigoguy on Aug 23, 2017 7:03:40 GMT
Will they answer me if I write to them about the impounded boats, or will they tell me it's the owner's business? They might do just that, it's the sort of stock initial response to expect in the circumstances, but if you make the matter your business on behalf of the wronged owners and as someone who has been threatened with the same illegal/criminal treatment, then they'll be obliged to respond in a rather more helpful and positive fashion. Of vital importance is to establish in their minds from the very beginning is that neither you nor the owners of the boats they have unlawfully seized are prepared to be fobbed off, . . . your dogged persistence with regard to the charging of pleasure craft for using the Bridgewater will help to convince them of that ! Are you in contact with the owner and the family, or executors (of the estate), of the deceased owner of the two vessels being held ? I am in contact with one of the boaters and have written to Peel on his behalf. I've spoken to him and we're going to do an email from him later today giving his permission for Peel to deal with me. So if they do try to play the 'confidentiality' card we've got it covered. They haven't replied to me about my email informing them that I am going to re enter the canal tomorrow. I've got a friend coming with me in his boat so if they do try anything really silly like trying to tow me away. I've got some support. Not that I think they would for one minute. I've been through every post on all 3 threads and can't find the one about Peel's notice. Have you seen the sign?
|
|
|
Post by gigoguy on Aug 25, 2017 19:17:44 GMT
Update
Star date 250817 on this endless mission to conquer oppression, fight injustice and protect the rights and freedoms our grandmothers fought for.
I'm outside the Trafford Centre. Which for anyone who doesn't know is the headquarters of Peel Holdings and BCCL. I got here yesterday at 2.30 ish and I'm leaving tomorrow, when I get up if it isn't raining.
Today I went out for an hour and when I got back there was a contact notice on my boat asking me to get in touch with the enforcement officer. I mean I've emailed them every day. I emailed them yesterday to tell them I was here. Although I'm under a security camera so they can see me.
So I called them but it went to answerphone. So I called reception and they couldn't get through so I emailed them again with my telephone number. No one called me.
It's just odd. There are 3 boats here, where there should be 20 at least. One of them is a bridgewater boat. And they didn't put a contact note on the other crt boat behind me??!!
I don't understand the reasoning for that. That's just odd
Good news though. No legal authority presented, no over stay notice issued and no ugly confrontation over money.
I do think it's a Peel CRT conspiracy though. I think CRT are as pissed as Peel that I won't shout the fuck up. They've had everything. Chapter and verse and still they won't tell Peel to stop and return the money and boats and everything else they've stolen or extorted from boaters over the years.
I'm going to challenge the seven day restriction next. But I can't do it for a couple of weeks coz i'm busy. But if anyone fancy's a couple of weeks on the bridgewater towards the middle of September let me know and we can meet up. Maybe we can get the 400 foxy suggested?
Into the valley of death rode the.......can't remember was it 4 or 6 hundred?
|
|
|
Post by Jim on Aug 26, 2017 6:34:01 GMT
I'd say the ball is now in their court again, you having made efforts to answer their request to get in touch. Can you avoid phone contact and insist it's done by email? Then you have it in writing.
|
|
|
Post by gigoguy on Aug 26, 2017 7:49:00 GMT
What does the contact notice look like? Printed? Official-looking? Hand written? How many days in a continuous stretch have you now been on the Bridgewater? How many days between this time and the last time you were on the Bridgewater? Don't go onto the roof of the Trafford centre!!! "When Mr Bigglesworth gets upset, people die!" I left on Monday 21st and returned on Thursday 24th. The note was printed on headed paper and laminated. The first paragraph asks me to get in touch. The second threatens me under section 9 MSC act 1960 that they can remove my boat and sell or scrap it. I emailed and said that the act most certainly does not give them those powers. I'm not sure why they did it, it's most strange. I've emailed them every day for over a month. And last time I told them when I arrived and where I am. I'm first boat on the Trafford Centre mooring directly under a security camera. They know exactly when I arrived and where I am. Sad thing is there are 3 boats here outside one of the largest entertainment and shopping complexes in the country. Until this nonsense started there would have been 20 boats here at this time of the year.
|
|
|
Post by NigelMoore on Aug 29, 2017 13:02:16 GMT
Have today confirmed that the 1961 byelaws were made law in 1961 by way of a Statutory Instrument. Made copies of them, but it will be a few days before I get a chance to read through properly.
|
|
|
Post by IainS on Aug 29, 2017 18:18:44 GMT
Have today confirmed that the 1961 byelaws were made law in 1961 by way of a Statutory Instrument. Made copies of them, but it will be a few days before I get a chance to read through properly. Well done! Might be an idea to send the Bridgewater Canal Company a copy, as they seem to have lost theirs ....
|
|
|
Post by gigoguy on Aug 29, 2017 18:57:25 GMT
Have today confirmed that the 1961 byelaws were made law in 1961 by way of a Statutory Instrument. Made copies of them, but it will be a few days before I get a chance to read through properly. Well done indeed. I hope they tell us what we want to hear. That would be excellent.
|
|
|
Post by NigelMoore on Aug 29, 2017 19:55:18 GMT
Well I had pre-booked access to the files for today, at the National Archives, but when I turned up they were out with the copying section. I had to go to the next floor and ask to borrow them, because evidently some other party had paid for them to be copied - perhaps Peel?
|
|