Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Sept 28, 2020 18:48:41 GMT
Too long !
|
|
|
Post by kris on Sept 28, 2020 18:52:35 GMT
Who’s the current Home Secretary? I lose track. Because they are the politician who is supposed to have some oversight of cart through there role as head of defra.
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Sept 28, 2020 19:05:44 GMT
It's a woman with the same name as the local newsagent when I was a teenager. That was in Hampton Wick. Patel's it was called. Interesting to note that her parents did in fact establish a chain of newsagents in London. Usually this sort of comment may be seen as a bit racist "Patel means newsagents" but in this case it is factually correct. en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Priti_Patel
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Sept 28, 2020 19:08:50 GMT
Who’s the current Home Secretary? I lose track. Because they are the politician who is supposed to have some oversight of cart through there role as head of defra. FFS please don't contact her - we will all be shipped of to somewhere undesirable pronto.
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Sept 28, 2020 19:10:49 GMT
Who’s the current Home Secretary? I lose track. Because they are the politician who is supposed to have some oversight of cart through there role as head of defra. FFS please don't contact her - we will all be shipped of to somewhere undesirable pronto. Actually forget that. Australia seems not an unpleasant place.
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Sept 28, 2020 19:12:27 GMT
Who’s the current Home Secretary? I lose track. Because they are the politician who is supposed to have some oversight of cart through there role as head of defra. It's not the home Secretary. It's the Secretary of state, George Eustice. I've previously had better replies from Rebecca Pow, the under Secretary.
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Sept 28, 2020 19:14:25 GMT
FFS please don't contact her - we will all be shipped of to somewhere undesirable pronto. Actually forget that. Australia seems not an unpleasant place. That's where Nigel was from. A ten pound pom, as the Aussies would put it.
|
|
|
Post by kris on Sept 28, 2020 19:25:17 GMT
Who’s the current Home Secretary? I lose track. Because they are the politician who is supposed to have some oversight of cart through there role as head of defra. It's not the home Secretary. It's the Secretary of state, George Eustice. I've previously had better replies from Rebecca Pow, the under Secretary. Thanks
|
|
|
Post by thebfg on Sept 28, 2020 21:38:01 GMT
There is nothing new in C&RT's desire to impose CC'ing rules on boats with a home mooring. They first 'tried it on' back in early 2014, and came away from it with a bloody nose and a costs bill for in excess of £15,000, . . every penny of which the Trust was obliged to bear itself after they were forced into filing a Notice of Discontinuance in the Nottingham County Court in respect of Part 8 Claim No.AOONG769 for Declaratory and Injunctive Relief. They're now 'trying it on' again, . . . probably on the assumption that the highly embarrassing outcome of the 2014 fiasco will have been forgotten. Looks rather as if they were right ! I remembered. Seems logical(but not right) if they can't win using the law they will just write their own rules. Not sure what action if any can be taken. Obviously the government are happy for them to have T&c's. It will probably take expensive legal action to sort out. Class action or judicial review I expect. It will affect a lot of leisure boaters who just Potter about locally but as you imply they will just follow blindly.
|
|
|
Post by thebfg on Sept 28, 2020 21:41:35 GMT
I wonder how share boats will be affected because many of those will constantly be using the same stretch of waterways.
|
|
|
Post by Clinton Cool on Sept 28, 2020 22:21:59 GMT
Actually forget that. Australia seems not an unpleasant place. That's where Nigel was from. A ten pound pom, as the Aussies would put it. Winging pommie bastards is another favourite.
|
|
|
Post by TonyDunkley on Sept 29, 2020 0:18:37 GMT
It is of course utter shite and not legally enforceable. As I took some trouble to explain to them! I understand the sentiment - they don’t want someone with a cheap mooring in a different part of the country, hogging honeypot sites eg central London. It is fair enough in principle, but badly worded and of course not legally enforceable. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . The worrisome thing, is that it looks like cart are trying to remove boats without ever going into a court. As they are claiming it will be an internal process to determine if someone has breached the t&c’s. So, . . more than six years after C&RT were forced for the first time ever into ignominiously withdrawing from one of their regular County Court Section 8 pantomimes, . . and you still believe that the Court hearings to which C&RT have subjected selected pleasure boat owners were part of a process to establish a breach of the Licence T&C's ? As alluded to in an earlier post (page 3 of this thread < thunderboat.boards.net/post/254996/thread >) C&RT rely to a great extent on sieve-like memories and the muddled thinking that is invariably paraded out in response to every public announcement of the next chapter in the now all too familiar saga of the Trust's ever growing corporate megalomania. The staff of C&RT's Legal & Governance Services will no doubt be beside themselves with joy when the ill-informed contents of threads such as this one, and the remarkably similar ill-considered guff that was put up on CWDF yesterday, are reported back to Parry by his appointed snoopers. C&RT, and their predecessors, have had statutory powers enabling them to remove "relevant craft" - defined as - "any vessel which is sunk, stranded or abandoned in any inland waterway or in any reservoir owned or managed by the Board or which is left or moored therein without lawful authority" - without going anywhere near any Court ever since the British Waterways Act of 1983 went onto the statute book. The seizure and removal of boats, at whatever level of illegality it might have been accomplished in the past or will be pursued in the future, is NOT the primary objective of this latest round of wish-list amendments to what are already in the main self-conferred, void and therefore unenforceable Licence T&C's. The Trust's primary objective is to confer upon itself - and 'sell' to the largely gullible pleasure boating public - powers that Parliament declined to allow their predecessors to include or keep in the Bill which became the 1995 British Waterways Act. Neither C&RT, nor the shysters it employs as lawyers, are by any means invincible, but neither their endless scheming nor their outrageous abuse of the legitimate powers C&RT does possess will ever be brought to an end without a well-informed, co-ordinated, and above all, patient campaign targeted on their greatest weaknesses. Nor will anything ever be achieved by ignoring or failing to capitalize on C&RT's past and well documented, failures to get their habitual abuse of process and their outright lies past every Judge in every Court through which they choose to drag their selected targets.
|
|
|
Post by kris on Sept 29, 2020 7:07:55 GMT
. . . . . . . . . . . . . . The worrisome thing, is that it looks like cart are trying to remove boats without ever going into a court. As they are claiming it will be an internal process to determine if someone has breached the t&c’s. So, . . more than six years after C&RT were forced for the first time ever into ignominiously withdrawing from one of their regular County Court Section 8 pantomimes, . . and you still believe that the Court hearings to which C&RT have subjected selected pleasure boat owners were part of a process to establish a breach of the Licence T&C's ? That’s not what I said Tony, maybe try reading what I have posted. While it’s flattering that you feel what I post on a very niche forum is worth following and criticising. It’s a bit worrying you’ve got nothing better to do with your life. Maybe try to direct you ire in the right direction.
|
|
|
Post by patty on Sept 29, 2020 7:31:12 GMT
Does anybody know what a genuine cruise is? Personally I think cart are opening up a whole new legal can of worms. I would think that will be open to interpretation..not just by CRT but also the courts. I think it would be wise for boaters to log their distance travelled. Trouble is there are so many people who will not do anything..same as with any threat to livelihoods. Apathy of boaters is the weapon that CRT rely on to win.
|
|
|
Post by Gone on Sept 29, 2020 7:54:50 GMT
Does anybody know what a genuine cruise is? Personally I think cart are opening up a whole new legal can of worms. I would think that will be open to interpretation..not just by CRT but also the courts. I think it would be wise for boaters to log their distance travelled. Trouble is there are so many people who will not do anything..same as with any threat to livelihoods. Apathy of boaters is the weapon that CRT rely on to win. Rather than apathy it’s more about ‘fear’. By that I mean I might choose to not comply with crt’s new T&Cs which will result in CRT revoking my licence and then because I am now unlicensed issuing a section 8. At this point I can either give in and leave crt waters or I can go to court and fight it. This is potentially very expensive. Even if ‘in the right’ without competent legal representation you may still loose. Others have taken this route and won but my feeling is that most lose and end up with huge legal costs. So for most boaters this is not a fight they wish to undertake as the benefits of ignoring the T&C clauses they don’t like are small compared to the risk. so most boaters will grumble about it but comply anyway.
|
|