|
Post by TonyDunkley on Nov 12, 2017 17:47:30 GMT
it probably has damaged it which is a worry on an old boat, but I doubt I can claim compensation. With CRT claiming they own canals and rivers from 'side to side' and being responsible for these waterways fit for navigation, then I would certainly look at contacting them for the cost of having your boat out of the water, examined by a hull surveyor, and charged for any repair work necessary. Perhaps this will be the alarm bell ringing to wake them up and start clearing the waterways of debris. I think this is an excellent suggestion. Not only is there the possibility, remote as it might be, of some benefit to Kris, but C&RT's response could prove to be useful ammunition in Leigh Ravencroft's appeal against the High Court MNC findings.
|
|
|
Post by kris on Nov 12, 2017 17:49:15 GMT
With CRT claiming they own canals and rivers from 'side to side' and being responsible for these waterways fit for navigation, then I would certainly look at contacting them for the cost of having your boat out of the water, examined by a hull surveyor, and charged for any repair work necessary. Perhaps this will be the alarm bell ringing to wake them up and start clearing the waterways of debris. I think this is an excellent suggestion. Not only is there the possibility, remote as it might be, of some benefit to Kris, but C&RT's response could prove to be useful ammunition in Leigh Ravencroft's appeal against the High Court MNC findings. how would you suggest going forward with it tony, if I was to.
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Nov 12, 2017 17:56:50 GMT
In my experience of grounding its usually better to go backwards.
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Nov 12, 2017 19:09:09 GMT
I was talking to a CRT workman the other day and he told me that stop planks now have to be made to order for the job. I remember when they were kept in little holes in bridges or beside locks. Times change. A job like getting old bits of concrete shite out of the cut is going to take ages and ages. This will not suddenly change it is simply the current reality. The ideal thing would be to somehow stop dickhead contractors chucking the stuff in to start with. I really think going for a damage claim against CRT is catastrophically pointless. My 2p anyway Typo edit
|
|
|
Post by TonyDunkley on Nov 12, 2017 20:05:51 GMT
I think this is an excellent suggestion. Not only is there the possibility, remote as it might be, of some benefit to Kris, but C&RT's response could prove to be useful ammunition in Leigh Ravencroft's appeal against the High Court MNC findings. how would you suggest going forward with it tony, if I was to. To start off, Kris, I'd suggest just a brief e-mail giving the location, specifying the distance of the unmarked obstruction from the piling, and A41's draught in comparison with the 8' 2'' that C&RT publish as the maximum along that stretch. Include a few words re. the measures/action required to shift her off the obstruction and express your concerns as to the probablity of there being some resulting damage and/or setting-up of bottom plating and frames. From your description of these concrete blocks when we were talking a few days ago, I'd take a guess that they're probably old craneboat weights.
|
|
|
Post by kris on Nov 12, 2017 20:09:32 GMT
how would you suggest going forward with it tony, if I was to. To start off, Kris, I'd suggest just a brief e-mail giving the location, specifying the distance of the unmarked obstruction from the piling, and A41's draught in comparison with the 8' 2'' that C&RT publish as the maximum along that stretch. Include a few words re. the measures/action required to shift her off the obstruction and express your concerns as to the probablity of there being some resulting damage and/or setting-up of bottom plating and frames. okay who should I send that to?
|
|
|
Post by TonyDunkley on Nov 12, 2017 20:21:00 GMT
To start off, Kris, I'd suggest just a brief e-mail giving the location, specifying the distance of the unmarked obstruction from the piling, and A41's draught in comparison with the 8' 2'' that C&RT publish as the maximum along that stretch. Include a few words re. the measures/action required to shift her off the obstruction and express your concerns as to the probablity of there being some resulting damage and/or setting-up of bottom plating and frames. okay who should I send that to? The useless article who masquerades as the 'Waterway Manager' at Leeds Office, . . as C&RT's 'Acting Head of Boating' he really should be someone to set the standard in dealing with matters such as this !
|
|
|
Post by thebfg on Nov 12, 2017 21:29:04 GMT
I really think going for a damage claim against CRT is catastrophically pointless. My 2p anyway Typo edit I think the point is to get CRT to either say Yes that's our fault we will pay Or more likely tell Kris that it's outside the MNC and they have no legal responsibility. Further evidence for their definition of MNC in action. There is nothing better than asking a question you already the answer to. A nice poison challace. edit to further add. Actually a better question is one that either answer messes them up and refusal to answer really kills them.
|
|
|
Post by TonyDunkley on Nov 12, 2017 22:24:39 GMT
I really think going for a damage claim against CRT is catastrophically pointless. My 2p anyway Typo edit I think the point is to get CRT to either say Yes that's our fault we will pay Or more likely tell Kris that it's outside the MNC and they have no legal responsibility. Further evidence for their definition of MNC in action. There is nothing better than asking a question you already the answer to. A nice poison challace. edit to further add. Actually a better question is one that either answer messes them up and refusal to answer really kills them. My Dad always referred to such queries as "Have you stopped beating your wife ?" questions.
|
|