Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Mar 28, 2018 13:35:09 GMT
I got the first sentence right. In your opinion. Which is just as (ir)relevant as anyone else's. I already said I don't know the details of the person in question but I do know there are a lot of eastern Europeans living in varying degrees of homelessness including on rough canal boats (do I wonder why?) in the UK and I think it is an economic thing. For some reason I believe they can go back to their own countries and suddenly not be homeless if they need to. I don't know if they are "homeless" here but I do know that some people actually choose homeless status for economic reasons, temporarily. If you don't see the point I am making then never mind.
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Mar 28, 2018 13:37:41 GMT
I don't particularly give a shit about the details on this one. What boils my piss is the fact he is 67 years old, and now fuckin homeless. It matters little whether the Trust are a housing association or not, the humanity factor should have engaged in some twats brain cell and made preparation for the guy to be in a bed before disgustingly kicking the poor sod onto the towpath. No, you unsocked sandal-wearing lefty, in this world you cannot just take things that you fancy without having to pay for them, and expect to get away with it. It matters not if you are 67 (which is not old these days, only 6 years older than me) or 17. If you don’t pay for your land-based home, you lose it. End of. Same applies to floating homes. If you want to live in some utopia where everything is free I suggest you emigrate there. Oh wait a minute, such a place doesn’t exist. I wonder why? Oh fuck off you dope. I'm not even a lefty, just human with human emotions. You really are a cock sucking prick at times.
|
|
|
Post by lollygagger on Mar 28, 2018 13:40:10 GMT
I'd also ask the question of why the people who might donate didn't step in before the boat was seized - perhaps they tried to. They didn't know, and if they had known, he would definitely have got help. Do CRT have to notify Social Services when then make someone homeless? If so it's a failure for them not to sort it on his behalf. Hard to credit that £1k a year from somewhere couldn't be found, along with an hour or two from a social worker, per year. Wouldn't that be a bargain to keep a pensioner in the home he's clearly had the resourcefulness to buy at some point? I feel CRT could very easily have liased with social services and sorted this out and the fact that they are not a housing authority is a red herring. They chose draconian route and I find it difficult to find a reason for it other than exercising maximum power just because they can. It serves nobody.
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Mar 28, 2018 13:41:59 GMT
No, you unsocked sandal-wearing lefty, in this world you cannot just take things that you fancy without having to pay for them, and expect to get away with it. It matters not if you are 67 (which is not old these days, only 6 years older than me) or 17. If you don’t pay for your land-based home, you lose it. End of. Same applies to floating homes. If you want to live in some utopia where everything is free I suggest you emigrate there. Oh wait a minute, such a place doesn’t exist. I wonder why? Oh fuck off you dope. I'm not even a lefty, just human with human emotions. You really are a cock sucking prick at times. So if you had some accommodation like a second boat or a flat, house or whatever, you would use your human emotions to let a homeless person stay there for a bit while they sort themselves out ? I wouldn't but I'm not claiming to have human emotions.
|
|
|
Post by thebfg on Mar 28, 2018 13:43:51 GMT
I doubt any mortgage company or landlord would notify local authority if they chucked someone out of a house.
In fact I'm not sure they would do anything untill they were actually homeless.
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Mar 28, 2018 13:46:40 GMT
They didn't know, and if they had known, he would definitely have got help. Do CRT have to notify Social Services when then make someone homeless? If so it's a failure for them not to sort it on his behalf. Hard to credit that £1k a year from somewhere couldn't be found, along with an hour or two from a social worker, per year. Wouldn't that be a bargain to keep a pensioner in the home he's clearly had the resourcefulness to buy at some point? I feel CRT could very easily have liased with social services and sorted this out and the fact that they are not a housing authority is a red herring. They chose draconian route and I find it difficult to find a reason for it other than exercising maximum power just because they can. It serves nobody. They are not obliged to do anything about informing anyone, and often this has been the case. To me, this is just a sheer lack of humanity. You have to sit down with some at those offices to understand how arrogant and self centred they are. I won't mention names, but several of them are really disgusting with their actions and attitudes.
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Mar 28, 2018 13:49:21 GMT
Oh fuck off you dope. I'm not even a lefty, just human with human emotions. You really are a cock sucking prick at times. I wouldn't but I'm not claiming to have human emotions. No, don't fret, I sort of came to the conclusion a while ago that your a tad stupid.
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Mar 28, 2018 13:50:57 GMT
They didn't know, and if they had known, he would definitely have got help. Do CRT have to notify Social Services when then make someone homeless? If so it's a failure for them not to sort it on his behalf. Hard to credit that £1k a year from somewhere couldn't be found, along with an hour or two from a social worker, per year. Wouldn't that be a bargain to keep a pensioner in the home he's clearly had the resourcefulness to buy at some point? I feel CRT could very easily have liased with social services and sorted this out and the fact that they are not a housing authority is a red herring. They chose draconian route and I find it difficult to find a reason for it other than exercising maximum power just because they can. It serves nobody. I agree it serves nobody but the problem is what would happen if nothing was done and suddenly there was a massive influx of scrappy boats. This would definitely happen in some areas. Obviously an unlicensed boat is never obliged to move so the 2 week rule does not apply. Do you just let the place fill up and turn into slum housing? CRT is a housing authority by default due to its history. This can not be denied by anyone but at the end of the day it is also responsible for enforcement of navigation licensing requirements so they are in a slightly dodgy position in my worthless opinion.
|
|
|
Post by lollygagger on Mar 28, 2018 13:59:37 GMT
I doubt any mortgage company or landlord would notify local authority if they chucked someone out of a house. In fact I'm not sure they would do anything untill they were actually homeless. Hmm. A home owner that 100% owns his home? He wasn't mortgaged or renting. On land in that situation everything else can be claimed for. Assuming the bloke is skint, the taxpayer in one way or another is picking up his living expenses. While he's on a boat that he owns he would be comparatively cheap to support. No doubt the taxpayer will now be putting him up in a b&b at far more expense. Whatever the arguing over exactly which budget this money comes from it will be taxpayers who provided it. There's not even logic to prop up what is an immoral act as I see it.
|
|
|
Post by lollygagger on Mar 28, 2018 14:12:36 GMT
Do CRT have to notify Social Services when then make someone homeless? If so it's a failure for them not to sort it on his behalf. Hard to credit that £1k a year from somewhere couldn't be found, along with an hour or two from a social worker, per year. Wouldn't that be a bargain to keep a pensioner in the home he's clearly had the resourcefulness to buy at some point? I feel CRT could very easily have liased with social services and sorted this out and the fact that they are not a housing authority is a red herring. They chose draconian route and I find it difficult to find a reason for it other than exercising maximum power just because they can. It serves nobody. I agree it serves nobody but the problem is what would happen if nothing was done and suddenly there was a massive influx of scrappy boats. This would definitely happen in some areas. Obviously an unlicensed boat is never obliged to move so the 2 week rule does not apply. Do you just let the place fill up and turn into slum housing? CRT is a housing authority by default due to its history. This can not be denied by anyone but at the end of the day it is also responsible for enforcement of navigation licensing requirements so they are in a slightly dodgy position in my worthless opinion. I'm not suggusting boats should get away with not being licenced, I'm suggesting that for the sake of £1k and a few phone calls an old man has had his wholly owned home, slum boat or othwise, confiscated. Had he had simple help from wherever it came he'd now be licenced and legally pushed about every 14 days like everyone else without a mooring. Instead of that his life has been destroyed. I don't care if he spent every penny he could find on cider, this needn't have hapened, someone chose to destroy his life instead of offering a tiny bit of assistance.
|
|
|
Post by Andyberg on Mar 28, 2018 14:15:12 GMT
I agree it serves nobody but the problem is what would happen if nothing was done and suddenly there was a massive influx of scrappy boats. This would definitely happen in some areas. Obviously an unlicensed boat is never obliged to move so the 2 week rule does not apply. Do you just let the place fill up and turn into slum housing? CRT is a housing authority by default due to its history. This can not be denied by anyone but at the end of the day it is also responsible for enforcement of navigation licensing requirements so they are in a slightly dodgy position in my worthless opinion. I'm not suggusting boats should get away with not being licenced, I'm suggesting that for the sake of £1k and a few phone calls an old man has had his wholly owned home, slum boat or othwise, confiscated. Had he had simple help from wherever it came he'd now be licenced and legally pushed about every 14 days like everyone else without a mooring. Instead of that his life has been destroyed. I don't care if he spent every penny he could find on cider, this needn't have hapened, someone chose to destroy his life instead of offering a tiny bit of assistance. So who are you suggesting pays for him?
|
|
|
Post by lollygagger on Mar 28, 2018 14:23:00 GMT
I'm not suggusting boats should get away with not being licenced, I'm suggesting that for the sake of £1k and a few phone calls an old man has had his wholly owned home, slum boat or othwise, confiscated. Had he had simple help from wherever it came he'd now be licenced and legally pushed about every 14 days like everyone else without a mooring. Instead of that his life has been destroyed. I don't care if he spent every penny he could find on cider, this needn't have hapened, someone chose to destroy his life instead of offering a tiny bit of assistance. So what are you suggesting? I'm suggesting that he could probably claimed for his licence if someone pointed him in the right direction so the problem was probably bss and as they don't care if it's about to sink or whether it goes that doesn't leave a lot to sort out. I bet you'd have helped if he was your neighbour and you could see he was in a fix? I just can't square losing your boat and home over such a simply sorted situation, it smacks of punishment and it's not helping anyone in the long run. 👍
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Mar 28, 2018 14:29:40 GMT
Our tax money.
The local authority.
It remains shameful in 2018 that we have so many homeless people, people with health issues, and people without hope or a stake in our society.
The rights and wrongs, and who should do whats, are irrelevant.
Those that can pay should.
Those that need a hand should get it.
That's what the welfare state is about isn't it?
Jenlyn may have tourettes, but he's bang right on this.
Rog
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Mar 28, 2018 14:48:39 GMT
I agree it serves nobody but the problem is what would happen if nothing was done and suddenly there was a massive influx of scrappy boats. This would definitely happen in some areas. Obviously an unlicensed boat is never obliged to move so the 2 week rule does not apply. Do you just let the place fill up and turn into slum housing? CRT is a housing authority by default due to its history. This can not be denied by anyone but at the end of the day it is also responsible for enforcement of navigation licensing requirements so they are in a slightly dodgy position in my worthless opinion. I'm not suggusting boats should get away with not being licenced, I'm suggesting that for the sake of £1k and a few phone calls an old man has had his wholly owned home, slum boat or othwise, confiscated. Had he had simple help from wherever it came he'd now be licenced and legally pushed about every 14 days like everyone else without a mooring. Instead of that his life has been destroyed. I don't care if he spent every penny he could find on cider, this needn't have hapened, someone chose to destroy his life instead of offering a tiny bit of assistance. There are obviously more factual details about this case which I am unaware of. Facebook maybe ?
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Mar 28, 2018 14:50:07 GMT
So what are you suggesting? I'm suggesting that he could probably claimed for his licence if someone pointed him in the right direction so the problem was probably bss and as they don't care if it's about to sink or whether it goes that doesn't leave a lot to sort out. I bet you'd have helped if he was your neighbour and you could see he was in a fix? I just can't square losing your boat and home over such a simply sorted situation, it smacks of punishment and it's not helping anyone in the long run. 👍 Bang on the money with your comment about punishment. There are those within the top of enforcement who ultimately thrive on punishment and acts of inhumanity. I even have a digital recording of one making horrendous comments about a boat owner at a dwp meeting, and the bastard still works there.
|
|