|
Post by kris on May 22, 2017 16:03:45 GMT
My guess is CRT are looking to turn this into a Good News story by bringing the vessel back to Liverpool having been restored, so they may have sold it to one of their mates. I get a feeling it's not a done deal yet and the legal wranglings may last years
|
|
|
Post by TonyDunkley on May 22, 2017 16:49:30 GMT
Sorry I seem to have missed a post, planet has been sold? For how much? Sorry. I've had no internet for a while. You've missed quite a few Kris, . . . I put up a post on page 51 of this thread on the 20th of May, after Comical Boat Services took down the advert for the ship from the Boats & Outboards website on the 17th. There have been some more developments today, and there's also some more news about the ship from late April that can be posted now. I hope to be able to bring everybody up to date with the details later on this evening. By the way, I think you're spot on about it not being a done deal, but after today's progress with further, additional action to get the ship back into the owner's hands, I doubt that the legal wranglings will go on for too much longer. My view is that this so-called 'sale' should not be accepted at face value, . . . my belief is that C&RT have hatched some sort of half-arsed and ill thought out scheme to get the ship back to Liverpool under their control and/or ownership, but only time will tell !
|
|
|
Post by bargemast on May 22, 2017 17:10:39 GMT
Sorry I seem to have missed a post, planet has been sold? For how much? Sorry. I've had no internet for a while. You've missed quite a few Kris, . . . I put up a post on page 51 of this thread on the 20th of May, after Comical Boat Services took down the advert for the ship from the Boats & Outboards website on the 17th. There have been some more developments today, and there's also some more news about the ship from late April that can be posted now. I hope to be able to bring everybody up to date with the details later on this evening. By the way, I think you're spot on about it not being a done deal, but after today's progress with further, additional action to get the ship back into the owner's hands, I doubt that the legal wranglings will go on for too much longer. Hi Tony, I sincerely hope that you can find the time to bring us up to date later tonight, or I will be having another sleepless night.
I would so much love to read the start of good news about the smelly "Planet" story, and will sing and dance around my table (not to be seen by anyone) when the boat is returned to Alan Roberts, and then preferably accompanied by a pretty hefty Financial compensation for their illegal action.
Peter.
|
|
|
Post by TonyDunkley on May 22, 2017 17:22:17 GMT
You've missed quite a few Kris, . . . I put up a post on page 51 of this thread on the 20th of May, after Comical Boat Services took down the advert for the ship from the Boats & Outboards website on the 17th. There have been some more developments today, and there's also some more news about the ship from late April that can be posted now. I hope to be able to bring everybody up to date with the details later on this evening. By the way, I think you're spot on about it not being a done deal, but after today's progress with further, additional action to get the ship back into the owner's hands, I doubt that the legal wranglings will go on for too much longer. Hi Tony, I sincerely hope that you can find the time to bring us up to date later tonight, or I will be having another sleepless night.
I would so much love to read the start of good news about the smelly "Planet" story, and will sing and dance around my table (not to be seen by anyone) when the boat is returned to Alan Roberts, and then preferably accompanied by a pretty hefty Financial compensation for their illegal action.
Peter.
Thank you, on behalf of Alan Roberts and from me, for your good wishes and support, Peter. I'll do my best !
|
|
|
Post by kris on May 22, 2017 17:32:34 GMT
Sorry I seem to have missed a post, planet has been sold? For how much? Sorry. I've had no internet for a while. You've missed quite a few Kris, . . . I put up a post on page 51 of this thread on the 20th of May, after Comical Boat Services took down the advert for the ship from the Boats & Outboards website on the 17th. There have been some more developments today, and there's also some more news about the ship from late April that can be posted now. I hope to be able to bring everybody up to date with the details later on this evening. By the way, I think you're spot on about it not being a done deal, but after today's progress with further, additional action to get the ship back into the owner's hands, I doubt that the legal wranglings will go on for too much longer. My view is that this so-called 'sale' should not be accepted at face value, . . . my belief is that C&RT have hatched some sort of half-arsed and ill thought out scheme to get the ship back to Liverpool under their control and/or ownership, but only time will tell ! That would make sense Tony, as I believe shantell seaborn has wanted some sort of heritage boat for a while. She is jealous of Kennets success. Pity crt/Bw didn't look after the "heritage" boats when they had lots in their care.
|
|
|
Post by bargemast on May 22, 2017 18:12:05 GMT
You've missed quite a few Kris, . . . I put up a post on page 51 of this thread on the 20th of May, after Comical Boat Services took down the advert for the ship from the Boats & Outboards website on the 17th. There have been some more developments today, and there's also some more news about the ship from late April that can be posted now. I hope to be able to bring everybody up to date with the details later on this evening. By the way, I think you're spot on about it not being a done deal, but after today's progress with further, additional action to get the ship back into the owner's hands, I doubt that the legal wranglings will go on for too much longer. My view is that this so-called 'sale' should not be accepted at face value, . . . my belief is that C&RT have hatched some sort of half-arsed and ill thought out scheme to get the ship back to Liverpool under their control and/or ownership, but only time will tell ! That would make sense Tony, as I believe shantell seaborn has wanted some sort of heritage boat for a while. She is jealous of Kennets success. Pity crt/Bw didn't look after the "heritage" boats when they had lots in their care.That is very true and very sad Kris, it's often when it's too late to do something about it, that this kind of (fairly useless) officials finally open their eyes.
What they should do then is, try to help as much as they can the private people that are trying as good as they can to restore and maintain this valuable heritage.
They have eyes, but don't seem to see, all they're trying to do is to kill peoples enthousiasm to do what B-W an C&RT should have been doing.
But they are masters in wasting fortunes in lawcases that aren't very important, I often wonder if they (the ones high on the ladder) get a percentage of the monies paid to the law-businesses they employ on top of their bonusses, the more money they manage to trow away, the higher their bonus is.
Peter.
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on May 22, 2017 18:15:43 GMT
I think its likely but also a bit odd as a lightship is not really very canal related and also its a very large vessel with high upkeep costs.
I would have thought CRT would have been better off nicking an old historic narrow boat off a non payer.
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on May 22, 2017 18:18:34 GMT
That would make sense Tony, as I believe shantell seaborn has wanted some sort of heritage boat for a while. She is jealous of Kennets success. Pity crt/Bw didn't look after the "heritage" boats when they had lots in their care.That is very true and very sad Kris, it's often when it's too late to do something about it, that this kind of (fairly useless) officials finally open their eyes.
What they should do then is, try to help as much as they can the private people that are trying as good as they can to restore and maintain this valuable heritage.
They have eyes, but don't seem to see, all they're trying to do is to kill peoples enthousiasm to do what B-W an C&RT should have been doing.
But they are masters in wasting fortunes in lawcases that aren't very important, I often wonder if they (the ones high on the ladder)Β get a percentage of the monies paid to the law-businesses they employ on top of their bonusses, the more money they manage to trow away, the higher their bonus is.
Peter.
Seems to feed my conspiracy theory that CRT were designed to fail followed by a sell-off of the system to marina owners.
|
|
|
Post by TonyDunkley on May 23, 2017 8:33:23 GMT
Late March and the first 3 weeks of April were taken up mainly in trying to foment unease and mistrust between C&RT and their agents, CBS and Sharpness Shipyard, and in attempting to draw C&RT into written admissions as to the truth of their reasons for taking possession of "Planet" in Liverpool last September, as opposed to the lies and cover story circulated at the time saying that it was a dispute over 'unpaid berthing fees of Β£10,000'.
This was quite successful, and Alan Roberts now has several communications from C&RT to the effect that they took possession of the ship for no other, or better, reason than they had a contractual right so to do, and making no mention whatsoever of either the mythical debt in respect of berthing fees or the 'High Court warrant' they claimed to be enforcing on the morning of 19 September 2016 when the ship was forcibly seized by their 'Harbour Manager' and a couple of nightclub bouncers/football match stewards impersonating 'Bailiffs'. Here's one example of one of these communications below :-
Dear Mr Dunkley
I refer to your email below to Commercial Boat Services.
We have notified you and Mr Roberts, time and time again, of the lawful basis upon which the Trust took possession of the lightship vessel ,βPlanetβ. This right arises as a result of Mr Roberts persistent failure to comply with the attached berthing agreement, and we have written to Mr Roberts on many occasions, over a considerable period of time, setting out in detail the nature of the non-compliance. As a result of Mr Robertβs breach of the berthing agreement, the Trust has enforced its rights to take possession of the vessel and is entitled to proceed to sell it on the basis of its rights under clause 10.1.2 of the berthing agreement. The Trust has instructed CBS as our contractor to sell the vessel.
You have no authority to instruct CBS as to what it may or may not do and notwithstanding your email, we are confirming to CBS, by this email, that they should proceed with the instructions we have given to them as regards the sale.
Kind Regards Thami Nomvete Senior Contracts Lawyer _______________________________________________________________________
On Sunday 23 April 2017 an unsuccessful attempt was made to repossess the ship in Sharpness. The shipyard was notified in advance and the Police were asked to attend. The first of the following two e-mails was to Mr S. Beacham, operations director of Sharpness Shipyard, and the comment (underlined and highlighted below) he made during a phone call on the previous day is quite informative and revealing as to the extent of the truth, as known to C&RT and their agents, with regard to who really owns the ship. As further evidence of this, we also have an e-mail from CBS, to a prospective buyer who had refused to do business with them or C&RT, acknowledging that there was no reason which could prevent the prospective buyer dealing directly with Alan Roberts, who was quite entitled to sell the ship to him if he so wished - so much for C&RT's oft repeated mantra about him being the "former owner" !! The e-mail to Sharpness Shipyard :-
Dear Mr Beacham,
Further to our telephone conversation of yesterday evening following up your earlier e-mail, I write to confirm that the owner of the above named vessel, Mr Alan Roberts of 1 Day Street, Liverpool, L13 2DS, will be visiting your premises at Sharpness today, Sunday 23 April 2017, in order to repossess and inspect the ship.
It would seem, from our recording of yesterday's telephone conversation, that you have documentation and/or paperwork from C&RT, the organization responsible for the unlawful removal of "Planet" from the river Mersey/Liverpool, instructing and authorizing the subsequent unlawful impoundment in your yard at Sharpness. Please arrange for copies of this documentation/paperwork to be available for the ship's owner, Mr Roberts, later today.
You also made reference to an unspecified number of Invoices ('bills' was the actual word you used) which you stated would have to be settled - quote "before the owner can have his ship back". Please ensure that copies of these invoices, or bills, are also available to be given to Mr Roberts.
In light of your generally unhelpful and threatening manner in the course of yesterdays telephone conversation we are requesting that Gloucestershire Police attend today's boarding and repossession
Yours faithfully,
A.K.Dunkley (Shipowner's Representative) ___________________________________________________________________________________
The e-mail to Gloucestershire Police :-
FAO. The senior Duty Officer.
Dear Sir or Ma'am,
I act for and represent Mr Alan Roberts of 1 Day Street, Liverpool L13 2DS, the owner of an unlawfully impounded ex-Lightvessel LV23 "Planet" which is to be boarded and repossessed by the owner later today at Sharpness Shipyard.
The shipyard operators have been informed of the shipowner's intentions, but have stated their intention to refuse Mr Roberts access to his ship whilst it is located within their premises.
With a view to ensuring that today's repossession can be accomplished peacefully and without incident, Mr Roberts has asked me to request that one or more of your Officers attend at a mutually agreed and convenient time later on today.
I have copied you into today's e-mail confirmation to Mr S. Beacham at Sharpness Shipyard.
Yours faithfully,
A.K.Dunkley (Shipowner's Representative) __________________________________________________________________________________
Alan Roberts and his party were refused entry at the shipyard gates, despite having ID and ship's papers proving ownership, copies of which were shown to the Police and shown/offered to Mr Beacham, the shipyard proprietor. The entire process was videoed and recorded, and consisted predominantly of Mr Beacham making himself look rather foolish by spouting gibberish through and from behind the locked shipyard gates and repeatedly asking Alan Roberts if he was going to hit him. He refused to look at or accept any of the documentation/papers offered whilst at the same time denying that he had any of the documentation or 'bills' that he had stated to have during the previous day's telephone conversation.
The matter was formally reported to the Police as a theft yesterday by way of the below e-mail, and an incident/crime number has been allocated. We now await further advice from the Police as to how, and if, they will be investigating. In the not unlikely event that they decline to do so and dismiss it as a 'civil' matter, arrangements which could see a Magistrate's Summons landing on a few C&RT desks before the week is out are in place with a law firm to pursue a private criminal prosecution which will run alongside and concurrent with the civil proceedings already in hand.
E-mailed report of theft to Gloucestershire Constabulary :-
FAO. The Duty Officer.
Dear Sir or Ma'am,
You will find from your records for Sunday 23 April 2017 that I made an unsuccessful attempt to repossess my ship, ex-Lightvessel LV23 "Planet", which is being held without lawful authority or my consent by Sharpness Shipyard and Drydock Ltd at their yard in Sharpness Dock, Gloucestershire. The attempted repossession was attended at my request by PC Simon Greenfield, who was present throughout.
The ship was forcibly taken from my possession in Liverpool at 0830hrs on 19 September 2016 by an employee of the Canal & River Trust, a Mr Andrew Goudie acting on the instructions of another C&RT employee, Ms Chantelle Seaborn, and two men from a local security and stewarding company posing as 'Enforcement Agents' and claiming to be seizing the vessel pursuant to a 'High Court Warrant' and in lieu of a debt in respect of unpaid berthing fees.
No Warrant, Court Order or any form of documentation was produced or handed over at the time of the forcible seizure or since, and it is now known that no such Warrant or Court Order had been issued at the time, or has been issued since. The ship was subsequently delivered into the keeping of Mr S.Beacham at Sharpness Shipyard & Drydock Ltd who, in addition to refusing entry into the yard to board and inspect the vessel at the time of the attempted repossession on 23 April 2017, was unable to produce any form of documentation authorizing him to be in possession of my ship, and declined to either examine or accept copies of my ship's papers as proof of my ownership and title.
The situation with regard to my ship became more serious and urgent on the afternoon of Friday last when a third employee of C&RT, a Ms Thami Nomvete, informed me by e-mail that my ship had been sold to an unnamed and undisclosed third party.
I believe that from the very outset in September of last year it was the intention of at least the three above named employees of Canal & River Trust to permanently deprive me of my ship and that in light of the above mentioned e-mail they have now demonstrated and proved that intent. I am, therefore, now formally reporting this matter as a theft.
Yours faithfully,
Alan Roberts (Vessel owner) ____________________________________________________________________________
|
|
|
Post by bargemast on May 23, 2017 15:38:24 GMT
Hi Tony, thank you very much for the posting of everything that has happened since the last posting about "Planet", it's hard to believe that this sort of thing is possible in a land of law and order.
If this had happened in a banana state I could have understood, as there they don't know any better, but in a country like the UK, it is absolutely unbelievable.
But with all the crap they've supplied you with, you should have plenty of evidence about their abusive and unlawful actions.
It's too bad that nobody of the C&RT staff can be put in prison for their lies and threatenings.
Peter.
|
|
|
Post by peterboat on May 23, 2017 15:51:44 GMT
I thought the courts had ruled against you and you were appealing the decision? Or have I picked it up wrong it has been a longish thread
|
|
|
Post by TonyDunkley on May 23, 2017 16:57:30 GMT
I thought the courts had ruled against you and you were appealing the decision? Or have I picked it up wrong it has been a longish thread There was a Court ruling against Alan Roberts last December, Peter, but that was simply C&RT opposing the Injunction that was preventing them from attempting to sell or otherwise disposing of the ship that the owner had obtained. There was no ruling on anything else, the hearing was limited to dealing with the question of the Injunction and nothing else. There was some consideration given to appealing the decision, but on balance it was decided that there was little point in doing so and that a better route to go would be to let C&RT get themselves even deeper in it by letting them get on with the criminal act of trying to sell a vessel to which they had no lawful claim or title.
|
|
|
Post by peterboat on May 23, 2017 17:10:17 GMT
I thought the courts had ruled against you and you were appealing the decision? Or have I picked it up wrong it has been a longish thread There was a Court ruling against Alan Roberts last December, Peter, but that was simply C&RT opposing the Injunction that was preventing them from attempting to sell or otherwise disposing of the ship that the owner had obtained. There was no ruling on anything else, the hearing was limited to dealing with the question of the Injunction and nothing else. There was some consideration given to appealing the decision, but on balance it was decided that there was little point in doing so and that a better route to go would be to let C&RT get themselves even deeper in it by letting them get on with the criminal act of trying to sell a vessel to which they had no lawful claim or title. Cheers Tony it is a very log story to go through so I take it you now go to court to get the monies owed for selling something that doesnt belong to them?
|
|
|
Post by TonyDunkley on May 23, 2017 17:33:18 GMT
"Mr Beacham making himself look rather foolish by spouting gibberish through and from behind the locked shipyard gates and repeatedly asking Alan Roberts if he was going to hit him" Isn't this incitement? Why did Mr Beacham think Alan was going to hit him? Was he deliberately trying to provoke Alan into whacking him? "He refused to look at or accept any of the documentation/papers offered" - did he give a reason for this? "at the same time denying that he had any of the documentation or 'bills' that he had stated to have during the previous day's telephone conversation." - telephone call recorded? Looks like Mr Beacham is a bit of a fibber? This kind of thing is not good for the reputation of 'Commercial Boat Services', surely? "The entire process was videoed and recorded" - when can we see this? I wonder why the Policeman did not demand to see evidence that Mr Beacham had the right to possess the ship, if Alan's papers checked out that he was indeed the owner, and especially with Mr Beacham himself having stated that Alan was the owner!!I think Beacham is just a rather pathetic little twerp who has been dragged into all this by C&RT, who, I believe are his landlords of the shipyard premises from which he runs his business. It is very apparent when speaking with him that he exists in state of fear and dread of displeasing or disobeying them in any way. The Police conducted their involvement precisely as they should in doing nothing more than establishing/checking everyone's bona fides and ensuring that there was no breach of the peace, and it has to be said that if the police in Liverpool had done similarly on the morning of 19 September last then the theft of the ship from it's rightful owner would almost certainly never have happened, and C&RT would have had to content themselves with recovering the berthing fee arrears they were already well on the way to getting via the County Court claim which was heard whilst the ship was already at sea bound for Sharpness. There was also, of course, the option of legitimately taking possession of the ship in Canning Dock, Liverpool and subsequently selling it from that location in the event that the owner continued to fail to remove it and also refused/failed to pay the berthing fees that continued to accrue whilst the vessel remained.
|
|
|
Post by TonyDunkley on May 23, 2017 17:50:22 GMT
There was a Court ruling against Alan Roberts last December, Peter, but that was simply C&RT opposing the Injunction that was preventing them from attempting to sell or otherwise disposing of the ship that the owner had obtained. There was no ruling on anything else, the hearing was limited to dealing with the question of the Injunction and nothing else. There was some consideration given to appealing the decision, but on balance it was decided that there was little point in doing so and that a better route to go would be to let C&RT get themselves even deeper in it by letting them get on with the criminal act of trying to sell a vessel to which they had no lawful claim or title. Cheers Tony it is a very log story to go through so I take it you now go to court to get the monies owed for selling something that doesnt belong to them? No, Peter, the next step is a criminal prosecution for theft, by either the Police or the owner, proceeding alongside the civil action for a Court Order for the return of the ship to the owner plus appropriate damages. From a purely legal/technical standpoint C&RT have not 'sold' the ship at all - they can't, simply because they don't have title (in the sense of owning it) and so cannot transfer what lawyers call 'good title' to a third party. As I've indicated in the post above replying to Foxy, had they taken possession and kept the ship in their Docks in Liverpool they could have legitimately sold it, not as owners with 'title' to it but as 'involuntary bailees' under both their Berthing Agreement and the 1977 Torts (Interference with Goods) Act. C&RT have only 'sold' the ship in precisely the same sense that a burglar 'sells' the proceeds of his crimes to someone who handles and deals in stolen goods. In this instance C&RT were the 'burglars' and Comical Boat Services 'fenced' the stolen goods for them !
|
|