|
Post by naughtyfox on Apr 12, 2019 14:03:35 GMT
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... I don't think you were 'targeted' as a new boat owner, Patsy - it just seems a normal sort of thing to me. New boat? New owner? Well, let's have a quick sweep through to see if everything is in order. As I remember, when we bought our boat, I wrote to CRT and summed up the whole situation, and even told them of the plan we had for slowly going round the whole country. Not that where we go is their business - I mean, if you want to drive your car from Exeter to Dumfries, do you inform the DVLA of your intention and ask them is it OK to do so? Fuck no! You've paid your road tax and MoT and everything, and you go where you fancy. I'd say all in all, that as Allan has been a thorn in their side, CRT may be abusing their powers and teasing him a bit. He is right to adopt his present stance and tell them to stop their stroppiness pronto. Perhaps CRT should get their own house in order first and go round fixing all the broken lock paddles, and do a bit of dredging, and pull out all of those half-sunken/sunken heaps of shit, before they start attacking people who are keeping tabs on them. But where's the fun in that?
|
|
|
Post by naughtyfox on Apr 12, 2019 14:11:10 GMT
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. You take it as an attack on you. Well, it was! 'Transparent' as in Martin's up to his usual game. I got it. My outlook this morning, when I was relatively bright, was that Martin had woken up too early and entered the arena before he was ready. Yes, Allan could have just sent a copies of his insurance papers to avoid bother - but, there may be something darker here, and that's what this is all about. When someone tells Martin to jump, he jumps! When someone tells Allan to jump, he says why? When someone tells me to jump, I say "Jump yourself!"
|
|
|
Post by naughtyfox on Apr 12, 2019 14:17:39 GMT
This sort of behaviour fits in with my pet conspiracy theory that CRT were originally intended to be an organisation meant to fail. I think Capita will be running the show shortly.
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Apr 12, 2019 17:00:32 GMT
You take it as an attack on you. Well, it was! 'Transparent' as in Martin's up to his usual game. I got it. My outlook this morning, when I was relatively bright, was that Martin had woken up too early and entered the arena before he was ready. Yes, Allan could have just sent a copies of his insurance papers to avoid bother - but, there may be something darker here, and that's what this is all about. When someone tells Martin to jump, he jumps!When someone tells Allan to jump, he says why? When someone tells me to jump, I say "Jump yourself!" Couldnt be further from the truth Foxy.
|
|
|
Post by TonyDunkley on Apr 12, 2019 22:56:42 GMT
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 ? That's why I would leave it IF I was 100% confident that I did have valid insurance. However I now see that would not be appropriate having read the '95 act. From the 1995 act : "An insurance policy is in force in respect of the vessel and a copy of the policy, or evidence that it exists and is in force, has been produced to the Board; "However the requirement has changed over the years to be simply that you put the number and provider name on the application form. So which is it, 1995 act or T&C's ? I can see the point you're making, but in fact the requirement has not changed at all since the 1995 Act went onto the Statute book. Parliament has not approved any such amendment, it is only ''the Board's'' - now C&RT's - implementation of that clause which has changed, in that they have now chosen not to insist that proof of insurance cover is produced with every application for a PBL or a PBC. On the other hand, of course, whilst electing to forego their right to insist on the production of insurance documents with every application, they have dishonestly and unlawfully extended their apparent powers of refusal or termination into a newly introduced set of T&C's which they alone have dreamed up and wheeled out ! Based on their track record, and the additional fictitious, self-conferred 'powers' which were sneaked into the latest edition of the Licence T&C's, I believe that in the e-mail sent to Allan C&RT are now testing, or possibly even seeking to extend, the boating public's acceptance of the, unlawful, means by which they can 'get away' with arbitrarily terminating a 'relevant consent' (in this instance a PBL) outwith their genuine statutory powers to terminate under Section 17(4)&(5) of the 1995 Act.
|
|
|
Post by Mr Stabby on Apr 12, 2019 23:11:21 GMT
Anyone who thinks CRT are difficult to deal with should try operating a truck and dealing with DVSA.
|
|
|
Post by Allan on Apr 12, 2019 23:44:00 GMT
That's why I would leave it IF I was 100% confident that I did have valid insurance. However I now see that would not be appropriate having read the '95 act. From the 1995 act : "An insurance policy is in force in respect of the vessel and a copy of the policy, or evidence that it exists and is in force, has been produced to the Board; "However the requirement has changed over the years to be simply that you put the number and provider name on the application form. So which is it, 1995 act or T&C's ? I can see the point you're making, but in fact the requirement has not changed at all since the 1995 Act went onto the Statute book. Parliament has not approved any such amendment, it is only ''the Board's'' - now C&RT's - implementation of that clause which has changed, in that they have now chosen not to insist that proof of insurance cover is produced with every application for a PBL or a PBC. On the other hand, of course, whilst electing to forego their right to insist on the production of insurance documents with every application, they have dishonestly and unlawfully extended their apparent powers of refusal or termination into a newly introduced set of T&C's which they alone have dreamed up and wheeled out ! Based on their track record, and the additional fictitious, self-conferred 'powers' which were sneaked into the latest edition of the Licence T&C's, I believe that in the e-mail sent to Allan C&RT are now testing, or possibly even seeking to extend, the boating public's acceptance of the, unlawful, means by which they can 'get away' with arbitrarily terminating a 'relevant consent' (in this instance a PBL) outwith their genuine statutory powers to terminate under Section 17(4)&(5) of the 1995 Act. I think that the information I provide satisfies both the 1995 Act and C&RT's rather dubious Terms and Conditions. What I do is provide Insurance Provider, Insurance Policy Number and Insurance Expiry Date, together with a link to the boats insurance certificate (held in the 'Insurance Provider' field). This means that C&RT can check license details prior to grant of a licence and during the licence period.
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Apr 12, 2019 23:54:19 GMT
I can see the point you're making, but in fact the requirement has not changed at all since the 1995 Act went onto the Statute book. Parliament has not approved any such amendment, it is only ''the Board's'' - now C&RT's - implementation of that clause which has changed, in that they have now chosen not to insist that proof of insurance cover is produced with every application for a PBL or a PBC. On the other hand, of course, whilst electing to forego their right to insist on the production of insurance documents with every application, they have dishonestly and unlawfully extended their apparent powers of refusal or termination into a newly introduced set of T&C's which they alone have dreamed up and wheeled out ! Based on their track record, and the additional fictitious, self-conferred 'powers' which were sneaked into the latest edition of the Licence T&C's, I believe that in the e-mail sent to Allan C&RT are now testing, or possibly even seeking to extend, the boating public's acceptance of the, unlawful, means by which they can 'get away' with arbitrarily terminating a 'relevant consent' (in this instance a PBL) outwith their genuine statutory powers to terminate under Section 17(4)&(5) of the 1995 Act. I think that the information I provide satisfies both the 1995 Act and C&RT's rather dubious Terms and Conditions. What I do is provide Insurance Provider, Insurance Policy Number and Insurance Expiry Date, together with a link to the boats insurance certificate (held in the 'Insurance Provider' field). This means that C&RT can check license details prior to grant of a licence and during the licence period. Fab, so you have now re sent the info. CRT asked for? Or have you just spent (wasted) more time posting on here?
|
|
|
Post by TonyDunkley on Apr 13, 2019 0:08:52 GMT
Anyone who thinks CRT are difficult to deal with should try operating a truck and dealing with DVSA. This isn't about C&RT being 'difficult' to deal with, . . it's about megalomania and corporate dishonesty !
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Apr 13, 2019 0:19:30 GMT
Anyone who thinks CRT are difficult to deal with should try operating a truck and dealing with DVSA. This isn't about C&RT being 'difficult' to deal with, . . it's about megalomania and corporate dishonesty ! No its about some twit who for whatever reason seems unable to comply with a very simple request to re send some very basic information.
|
|
|
Post by Allan on Apr 13, 2019 5:52:35 GMT
Anyone who thinks CRT are difficult to deal with should try operating a truck and dealing with DVSA. This isn't about C&RT being 'difficult' to deal with, . . it's about megalomania and corporate dishonesty ! Certainly they seem to have inherited much of BW's corporate dishonesty..
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Apr 13, 2019 7:14:29 GMT
I can see the point you're making, but in fact the requirement has not changed at all since the 1995 Act went onto the Statute book. Parliament has not approved any such amendment, it is only ''the Board's'' - now C&RT's - implementation of that clause which has changed, in that they have now chosen not to insist that proof of insurance cover is produced with every application for a PBL or a PBC. On the other hand, of course, whilst electing to forego their right to insist on the production of insurance documents with every application, they have dishonestly and unlawfully extended their apparent powers of refusal or termination into a newly introduced set of T&C's which they alone have dreamed up and wheeled out ! Based on their track record, and the additional fictitious, self-conferred 'powers' which were sneaked into the latest edition of the Licence T&C's, I believe that in the e-mail sent to Allan C&RT are now testing, or possibly even seeking to extend, the boating public's acceptance of the, unlawful, means by which they can 'get away' with arbitrarily terminating a 'relevant consent' (in this instance a PBL) outwith their genuine statutory powers to terminate under Section 17(4)&(5) of the 1995 Act. I think that the information I provide satisfies both the 1995 Act and C&RT's rather dubious Terms and Conditions. What I do is provide Insurance Provider, Insurance Policy Number and Insurance Expiry Date, together with a link to the boats insurance certificate (held in the 'Insurance Provider' field). This means that C&RT can check license details prior to grant of a licence and during the licence period. If all you have done is fill in the boxes on their website then that doesnt count as proof of insurance. You could have typed any old shit in there. Send them a copy of the cert (as you would have done before they dropped the requirement) and stop being a twat.
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Apr 13, 2019 7:18:01 GMT
I wouldn't have thought that the link would be operational if inserted into an online form. Maybe it would be.
|
|
|
Post by phil70 on Apr 13, 2019 7:43:40 GMT
Having licenced multiple boats on the Broads and on EA waters providing proof of insurance is a matter of course. I really don't see it as a problem, to do so just requires me to scan and e-mail a copy, a matter of a couple of minutes of my time. Nothing wrong with spot checks unless of course you have something to hide. Just think yourself lucký that Inland Revenue has never picked your name out at random for a spot check, then you would find out what jumping through hoops really means. Business accounts, cheque books, Bank books, statements, personal bank statements, building society books, saving accounts details etc etc. And no you can't claim for the expense of doing all this and for your accountant as it's not tax deductible Just e-mail what they ask for and forget about it Phil
|
|
|
Post by Allan on Apr 13, 2019 10:06:39 GMT
I wouldn't have thought that the link would be operational if inserted into an online form. Maybe it would be. Even if it was you get a 404 error. I assume you have tried typing the link into your browser. You get a 404 because you can't see the full link - some of it is to the right of the box. C&RT can simply cut and paste the link into a Browser (or type it in if computer illiterate).
|
|