|
Post by thebfg on Apr 7, 2019 16:30:27 GMT
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Apr 7, 2019 16:42:11 GMT
I'd be interested to see C&RT's views.
One would hope there'd be a reason they feel it is unsafe, but the article suggests it has a current BSSC.
I'm not sure we've got the full story yet.
Rog
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Apr 7, 2019 16:50:16 GMT
Two words.
Oh
Dear
|
|
|
Post by Jim on Apr 7, 2019 16:52:06 GMT
I expect its "pour discourager les autres". Londonland will be full of them otherwise. Is there a definition of "boat" crt can rely on, if not and the floating shed has a survey and bsc they are chancing their arm, as usual.
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Apr 7, 2019 16:52:36 GMT
I saw this on one of my Facebook groups. Personally I think this is concerning if indeed CRT are attempting to undermine the boat safety. I don't have the full story as yet, so will have to wait and see what comes out.
|
|
|
Post by JohnV on Apr 7, 2019 17:11:55 GMT
I'm no legal eagle but if CRT are deeming a vessel unsafe although it has a BSS ...........
Hmmmmmm I would have thought they would need a full surveyors report to determine if it was in dangerous ie in imminent danger of capsizing or sinking, (which I would have thought would also need tests to determine it's metacentric height to show lack of stability).
I would also think that they lack the legal right to demand such a survey and tests.... if it was a sea going vessel then possibly the MCA could cause problems for a boat but otherwise I would have thought that yet again they are inventing their own laws
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Apr 7, 2019 17:13:41 GMT
I'm no legal eagle but if CRT are deeming a vessel unsafe although it has a BSS ........... Hmmmmmm I would have thought if they would need a full surveyors report to determine if it was in dangerous ie in imminent danger of capsizing or sinking, (which I would have thought would also need tests to determine it's metacentric height to show lack of stability). I would also think that they lack the legal right to demand such a survey and tests.... if it was a sea going vessel then possibly the MCA could cause problems for a boat but otherwise I would have thought that yet again they are inventing their own laws Tadworth all over again.....
|
|
|
Post by thebfg on Apr 7, 2019 17:14:31 GMT
I'm no legal eagle but if CRT are deeming a vessel unsafe although it has a BSS ........... Hmmmmmm I would have thought if they would need a full surveyors report to determine if it was in dangerous ie in imminent danger of capsizing or sinking, (which I would have thought would also need tests to determine it's metacentric height to show lack of stability). I would also think that they lack the legal right to demand such a survey and tests.... if it was a sea going vessel then possibly the MCA could cause problems for a boat but otherwise I would have thought that yet again they are inventing their own laws Tadworth all over again..... That was my first thought.
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Apr 7, 2019 17:18:14 GMT
The boat safety scheme is irrelevant at the end of the day. It is simply the status of the vessel when examined. Likr a car MoT the vehicle could be illegal the next day. Everyone knows that countless boats are given BS certs when they do not meet the written criteria or items (usually gas) have been removed. A BS cert will say "gas system not present" if no gas. Its not rocket science and I believe* that the navigation authority realises this and reserves the right to decline consent for vessels which fall foul of the safety requirements. Regardless of BSS status. Interesting that they have named Pete in the story. What I want to know is who are nbta working for. *maybe one for NigelMoore to comment on Eta maybe inclusion of the BS scheme in the '95 act as a requirement has removed the navigation authorities right to require vessels to be safe. I thought there was something in there about them reserving the right but could be wrong about that.
|
|
|
Post by thebfg on Apr 7, 2019 17:31:39 GMT
I'd be interested to see C&RT's views. One would hope there'd be a reason they feel is is unsafe, but the article suggests it has a current BSSC. I'm not sure we've got the full story yet. Rog I'm interested too, I'm also keen to find out if they have even been on board One we will have to wait and see.
|
|
|
Post by JohnV on Apr 7, 2019 17:37:35 GMT
I would have thought the only way they could introduce this would be to demand all boats have a full survey. (in the same way that Insurers demand one for fully com)
I would have thought that boat owners having an extra £1k stuck on their costs every 3 years or so would cause absolute outrage .... even among the CRT supporters and the cba's
answer to Andrews post
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Apr 7, 2019 17:42:59 GMT
CRT aren't going to be happy until they have sterilised the canals, and cut boat numbers in half.
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Apr 7, 2019 17:45:48 GMT
But if (I say if) C&RT can say a boat is unsafe DESPITE a boat safety certificate, because as mm sugests, the boat safety is meaningless other than on the day issued, surely the same could apply to a survey, or indeed any other qualification you care to put forward.
I think more info is needed, but on face value it seems C&RT making it up again.
Rog
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Apr 7, 2019 17:53:05 GMT
I would have thought the only way they could introduce this would be to demand all boats have a full survey. (in the same way that Insurers demand one for fully com) I would have thought that boat owners having an extra £1k stuck on their costs every 3 years or so would cause absolute outrage .... even among the CRT supporters and the cba's answer to Andrews post I've got a Thames Launch Digest from 1979 which says boats must have safe installations. I know that's not CRT or BW but point being that the BSS is on top of the navigation authority's right to demand safe installations. Or did the BSS override it. Maybe nav authorities do not have the separate right to require safe installations and/or board vessels for inspection if they think they are unsafe. I dislike the BS scheme enormously.
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Apr 7, 2019 17:54:26 GMT
CRT aren't going to be happy until they have sterilised the canals, and cut boat numbers in half. That was the original aim of the BS scheme but it didn't quite work.
|
|