Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Apr 12, 2019 8:52:24 GMT
Out of curiosity, is this the same person who bombarded C&RT with FOI requests, and was briefly prevented from submitting any further? I only ask, because a third possibility springs to mind. Not malign influence, not administrative incompetence, but perhaps 'get our own back'. So if you are the same guy, maybe you have been targetted Rog PS Incompetence still looks favourite to me
|
|
|
Post by naughtyfox on Apr 12, 2019 9:03:17 GMT
You don't read before writing, do you? They already have a copy of the insurance certificate. Yes I do read before writing - " When we placed boat our boat " Pity you don't read what you write yourself before sending!
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Apr 12, 2019 9:09:52 GMT
Usually around 4.30pm.
|
|
|
Post by JohnV on Apr 12, 2019 9:14:14 GMT
Are insurance companies allowed to provide the info to CRT without seeking permission from the policy holder? Maybe that’s why CRT are asking the policy holder to provide the evidence via these spot checks? I suppose from CRT’s point of view they don’t have the same powers, as say the DVLC, and have to assert authority and make checks by other means. That doesn’t necessarily mean that ‘authority’ is always wrong. The danger is that in the future CRT (or whatever it will be called in the future) will be given the same powers we are all subjected to by the DVLC. It could end up being policed the same way too with cameras and direct automated links between BSC, insurance and licence. The waterways are one of the last places left that we can all get some peace, quiet and well being. Those, maybe who haven’t retired yet, perhaps should ask themselves, do you want to see OUR waterways go that way? I thought the BSC already was available to them on line
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Apr 12, 2019 9:17:42 GMT
It is.
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Apr 12, 2019 9:18:26 GMT
A reasonable question i would say. Obviously motor insurance companies can supply cover information to the police but can boat insurers supply such information to a body like CRT without your permission? Questionable at the very least? All car insurance is on a MID [[motor insurance database] so police know you are insured, MOTd and Taxed before they stop you Indeed.
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Apr 12, 2019 9:19:50 GMT
No it doesnt, stop being an idiot. It suggests he has been randomnly selected just like Patty was (I take it you missed her post). Yes I saw Patty's post - when she first got her boat. Which is reasonable. You are being deliberately opaque this morning, and you know it.Nonsense.
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Apr 12, 2019 9:20:44 GMT
Yes I do read before writing - " When we placed boat our boat " Pity you don't read what you write yourself before sending!Coming from you Foxy that is pretty priceless.
|
|
|
Post by JohnV on Apr 12, 2019 9:21:26 GMT
No it doesnt, stop being an idiot. It suggests he has been randomnly selected just like Patty was (I take it you missed her post). You are being deliberately opaque this morning, and you know it. No .... his motives are transparent .... as normal
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Apr 12, 2019 9:21:37 GMT
Out of curiosity, is this the same person who bombarded C&RT with FOI requests, and was briefly prevented from submitting any further? Yes it is.
|
|
|
Post by thebfg on Apr 12, 2019 9:48:26 GMT
A reasonable question i would say. Obviously motor insurance companies can supply cover information to the police but can boat insurers supply such information to a body like CRT without your permission? Questionable at the very least? All car insurance is on a MID [[motor insurance database] so police know you are insured, MOTd and Taxed before they stop you Yes that is legally allowed and required. My guess is there would be something about sharing data in insurance t&c's because they will share data in the event of a claim if it's not then it would be a breach of gdpr.
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Apr 12, 2019 10:06:55 GMT
Maybe that’s why CRT are asking the policy holder to provide the evidence via these spot checks? I suppose from CRT’s point of view they don’t have the same powers, as say the DVLC, and have to assert authority and make checks by other means. That doesn’t necessarily mean that ‘authority’ is always wrong. The danger is that in the future CRT (or whatever it will be called in the future) will be given the same powers we are all subjected to by the DVLC. It could end up being policed the same way too with cameras and direct automated links between BSC, insurance and licence. The waterways are one of the last places left that we can all get some peace, quiet and well being. Those, maybe who haven’t retired yet, perhaps should ask themselves, do you want to see OUR waterways go that way? I thought the BSC already was available to them on line It is but my point was about whether it will be automatically linked with the insurance and boat licence in the future as it is with the MID.
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Apr 12, 2019 10:17:02 GMT
You are being deliberately opaque this morning, and you know it. No .... his motives are transparent .... as normal I realise disagreeing with the Thunderboat 'massif' doesn't go down well with some members and marks me out for stupid comments like that but I'm afraid if I disagree with someone I will say so, regardless of yours (and others) efforts to suppress them. In this instance I generally find people go through life wanting to be or play the 'down trodden victim' or 'hard done by' or they take some personal responsibility and address the shortcomings in bureaucratic organisations like CRT themselves. Social media and forums are filled with examples of people playing the victim when in fact if they just looked at stuff more objectively and dealt with stuff they would find the issue evaporates. By way of example - a few years ago I was accused of not paying the Dart charge when I crossed the Thames. I knew I had paid it but none the less they said I hadn't. I did recall their system crashed when I paid it but I knew the money had been taken from my account as I could see it the next day on my on line banking. Now I could have taken the MagnetMan route and just ignored it hoping it would go away but I didn't, I couldn't provide a receipt so I printed off a copy of my statement and sent it to them as part of the appeal and both fines (out and back) were cancelled. Had I ignored it or played the 'down trodden hard done by victim' I no doubt would have ended up fighting them in a court or have bailiffs sent to recover goods to cover the ever escalating penalty charge. Of course if it had got to court I have no doubt I would have won, but at what cost in terms of time? and probably money too. In short like Allan knows he has sent them an insurance certificate I knew I had paid the charge but because of Sanef's failings they believed I hadn't so I knew they needed me to confirm it, so I did to prevent a perfectly avoidable situation escalating. Simple.
|
|
|
Post by TonyDunkley on Apr 12, 2019 10:44:18 GMT
At this juncture it is appropriate to quote the exact wording of clause 5.3 in C&RT's 'wish list' T&C's : 5.3 You agree that we may contact your insurance provider to check the validity of your policy, and you consent to the insurance provider giving us such information as we may reasonably require.Having made the issuing of a boat Licence conditional on agreement to this clause one has to ask why C&RT's Customer Services (sic) have now chosen to adopt the quite different approach of e-mailing the Licence holder with what amounts to an implied assumption that the boat owner/keeper doesn't have current, valid 3rd party insurance cover, . . and backing up that assumption with the threat of unlawfully revoking the current Licence. For those who still can't see the significance of the above, and just what C&RT are playing here, think carefully about what's being said, and what it could well lead to, in these two sentences from the e-mail sent to Allan : We have not received a copy of your boat insurance certificate that we requested on 13/03/2019. If you don’t send this to us within 28 days of this letter, you will be in breach of our Licensing Terms and Conditions and we will have to terminate your boat licence.and : If we don’t receive a copy of your insurance policy within 28 days, your licence will be terminated and you will need to remove your boat from our waterways._______________________________________________ Back in 1995 it needed the authority and powers conferred on British Waterways in an Act of Parliament to 'terminate' a boat Licence, and then it had to be a failure to meet one or any of three specific conditions laid down in Section 17 of the Act, and compliance with procedures and specified periods of notice, before such action could be taken. How much of that protection against unreasonable and unlawful excesses on the part of the Navigation Authority will be left to people, AND their boats, if the authority, and the decision, to threaten or take such action has been watered down to the extent that it now resides with a 'Licence Support Advisor' sitting at a desk in Milton Keynes who can't be bothered to look up and use the insurance details you disclosed in your licence application ? Any pennies dropping, . . or any warning bells ringing yet ?
|
|
|
Post by patty on Apr 12, 2019 10:54:02 GMT
A reasonable question i would say. Obviously motor insurance companies can supply cover information to the police but can boat insurers supply such information to a body like CRT without your permission? Questionable at the very least? All car insurance is on a MID [[motor insurance database] so police know you are insured, MOTd and Taxed before they stop you Perhaps a similar system ought to be in place for boats so that automatic checking available..covering license, insurance, BSC, and where CC or not.. could stop lot of unnecessary hassle.. I think ATM with the data laws it perhaps would be difficult for insurance cranes to share with CRT without boaters permission...anyway there are so many insurance companies they'd need to know which one. Much as I hate to say it, technology is the way forward and the means to provide automatic instant clarification. As to Foxy saying 'reasonable' I was targeted..is it?..Is every new boat owner targeted to produce insurance details..When I rang regarding it I do remember them saying it was a random thing...
|
|