Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Oct 8, 2016 9:47:07 GMT
Firsly sorry Tony for being a bit worse for wear last night. As Foxy says, it is good that there are people like you and Nigel who stand up against large organisations.
I vaguely remember suggesting on CWF a couple of years ago that it would be good to keep a record of your case (and others) on the forum.
What concerns me though is the amount of cost and effort being diverted by CRT to deal with individual cases like yours when issues like lack of dredging and general maintenance affect all boaters.
I also think the issue of over enforcement is affecting everyones enjoyment and is one which is equally important.
e.g
- People with e-pads staring through our windows and invading our privacy.
- Signs threatening fines for overstaying on 24h/ 48h moorings which are arguably legally 14 day.
- Charging for mooring on the tow path where arguably there are no facilities.
- Being worried that we will end up on their radar due to a rubbish logging system.
The other problem is that CRT are not entirely to blame. On one side there are the piss takers who rarely take their boats out who lobby CRT at meetings with biased (and incorrect) second hand information. On the other side there are piss takers who push the limits and spirit of the law.
To a certain extent we all have a responsibility to encourage fairness on the system.
|
|
|
Post by kris on Oct 8, 2016 10:05:17 GMT
Firsly sorry Tony for being a bit worse for wear last night. As Foxy says, it is good that there are people like you and Nigel who stand up against large organisations. I vaguely remember suggesting on CWF a couple of years ago that it would be good to keep a record of your case (and others) on the forum. What concerns me though is the amount of cost and effort being diverted by CRT to deal with individual cases like yours when issues like lack of dredging and general maintenance affect all boaters. I also think the issue of over enforcement is affecting everyones enjoyment and is one which is equally important. e.g - People with e-pads staring through our windows and invading our privacy. - Signs threatening fines for overstaying on 24h/ 48h moorings which are arguably legally 14 day. - Charging for mooring on the tow path where arguably there are no facilities. - Being worried that we will end up on their radar due to a rubbish logging system. The other problem is that CRT are not entirely to blame. On one side there are the piss takers who rarely take their boats out who lobby CRT at meetings with biased (and incorrect) second hand information. On the other side there are piss takers who push the limits and spirit of the law. To a certain extent we all have a responsibility to encourage fairness on the system. I agree with what you have said, you have summed up the situation pretty well. My opinion is what do we do about it? We all have a responsibility to hold crt accountable for its actions. If we stand together there's a chance, that people may continue to be able to live on the water.
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Oct 8, 2016 10:23:52 GMT
Firsly sorry Tony for being a bit worse for wear last night. As Foxy says, it is good that there are people like you and Nigel who stand up against large organisations. I vaguely remember suggesting on CWF a couple of years ago that it would be good to keep a record of your case (and others) on the forum. What concerns me though is the amount of cost and effort being diverted by CRT to deal with individual cases like yours when issues like lack of dredging and general maintenance affect all boaters. I also think the issue of over enforcement is affecting everyones enjoyment and is one which is equally important. e.g - People with e-pads staring through our windows and invading our privacy. - Signs threatening fines for overstaying on 24h/ 48h moorings which are arguably legally 14 day. - Charging for mooring on the tow path where arguably there are no facilities. - Being worried that we will end up on their radar due to a rubbish logging system. The other problem is that CRT are not entirely to blame. On one side there are the piss takers who rarely take their boats out who lobby CRT at meetings with biased (and incorrect) second hand information. On the other side there are piss takers who push the limits and spirit of the law. To a certain extent we all have a responsibility to encourage fairness on the system. I agree with what you have said, you have summed up the situation pretty well. My opinion is what do we do about it? We all have a responsibility to hold crt accountable for its actions. If we stand together there's a chance, that people may continue to be able to live on the water. I think crowd funding is the way forward. It would be interesting to fund an independent lawyer, who has the right knowledge and an interest in the future of waterways, to look into these issues and see if there is a case to be heard. Peraonally I'd like to see more and more of the boating functions taken over and managed by volunteers. As I've said before, the hard bit of renovating the network was carried out by volunteers so we should be able to maintain and manage it without cooperations trying to make a fast buck out of it. The lawsuit and heath and safety culture might get in the way though!
|
|
|
Post by Graham on Oct 8, 2016 10:42:22 GMT
I agree with what you have said, you have summed up the situation pretty well. My opinion is what do we do about it? We all have a responsibility to hold crt accountable for its actions. If we stand together there's a chance, that people may continue to be able to live on the water. I think crowd funding is the way forward. It would be interesting to fund an independent lawyer, who has the right knowledge and an interest in the future of waterways, to look into these issues and see if there is a case to be heard. Peraonally I'd like to see more and more of the boating functions taken over and managed by volunteers. As I've said before, the hard bit of renovating the network was carried out by volunteers so we should be able to maintain and manage it without cooperations trying to make a fast buck out of it. The lawsuit and heath and safety culture might get in the way though! There is no reason why volunteers should not take over and manage more of the boating functions. After all the trustees of CRT are volunteers and not, to the best of my knowledge, paid for their services, well maybe some expenses. As to crowd funding a lawyer that is something I would be interested in, particularly a direct access barrister. I believe that Nigel M did some research and there were a couple of possibilities but know no more than that, maybe he would let the info out.
|
|
|
Post by TonyDunkley on Oct 8, 2016 10:47:54 GMT
Firsly sorry Tony for being a bit worse for wear last night. As Foxy says, it is good that there are people like you and Nigel who stand up against large organisations. I vaguely remember suggesting on CWF a couple of years ago that it would be good to keep a record of your case (and others) on the forum. What concerns me though is the amount of cost and effort being diverted by CRT to deal with individual cases like yours when issues like lack of dredging and general maintenance affect all boaters. I knew what you meant really, . . no apology needed. When I joined CWDF almost two and a half years ago it was just one way to try if possible to make folks aware of the way C&RT were going in the hope that it might encourage others not to be afraid of standing up to them. Truth to tell, it's had little or no effect and if anything boaters seem to be even more intimidated by them now than back then. But, I'm not going to give up, and episodes such as the goings on in Liverpool over the last two weeks leave me all the more convinced that C&RT has got to be reined in and their attention and efforts focused on becoming a well run, competent and effective Navigation Authority, instead of the unmitigated disaster it is at the moment.
|
|
|
Post by JohnV on Oct 8, 2016 11:18:22 GMT
SNIP< When I joined CWDF almost two and a half years ago it was just one way to try if possible to make folks aware of the way C&RT were going in the hope that it might encourage others not to be afraid of standing up to them. Truth to tell, it's had little or no effect >SNIP Don't be too sure of that. When years back I used to read your posts and think "Nah !!! Can't be right it must be a one off case maybe personality clashes or one particular individual at BW, He's getting his knickers in a twist about nothing" Gradually my views have changed, I freely admit I used to believe it was a very small number of cases involved and that it could not possibly be a case of an endemic attitude. As time has gone on I have come to realise that there is a lot in what you and others have been saying. When the change came to CRT I had high hopes that attitudes would change ..... and it seems they have ..... but for the worse. I might be just one individual boater but I suspect many others now look sideways at CRT's actions with disquiet ....... and that is mainly due to you and Nigel.
|
|
|
Post by Phil on Oct 8, 2016 11:52:05 GMT
SNIP< When I joined CWDF almost two and a half years ago it was just one way to try if possible to make folks aware of the way C&RT were going in the hope that it might encourage others not to be afraid of standing up to them. Truth to tell, it's had little or no effect >SNIP Don't be too sure of that. When years back I used to read your posts and think "Nah !!! Can't be right it must be a one off case maybe personality clashes or one particular individual at BW, He's getting his knickers in a twist about nothing" Gradually my views have changed, I freely admit I used to believe it was a very small number of cases involved and that it could not possibly be a case of an endemic attitude. As time has gone on I have come to realise that there is a lot in what you and others have been saying. When the change came to CRT I had high hopes that attitudes would change ..... and it seems they have ..... but for the worse. I might be just one individual boater but I suspect many others now look sideways at CRT's actions with disquiet ....... and that is mainly due to you and Nigel.
|
|
|
Post by TonyDunkley on Oct 8, 2016 11:58:20 GMT
SNIP< When I joined CWDF almost two and a half years ago it was just one way to try if possible to make folks aware of the way C&RT were going in the hope that it might encourage others not to be afraid of standing up to them. Truth to tell, it's had little or no effect >SNIP Don't be too sure of that. When years back I used to read your posts and think "Nah !!! Can't be right it must be a one off case maybe personality clashes or one particular individual at BW, He's getting his knickers in a twist about nothing" Gradually my views have changed, I freely admit I used to believe it was a very small number of cases involved and that it could not possibly be a case of an endemic attitude. As time has gone on I have come to realise that there is a lot in what you and others have been saying. When the change came to CRT I had high hopes that attitudes would change ..... and it seems they have ..... but for the worse. I might be just one individual boater but I suspect many others now look sideways at CRT's actions with disquiet ....... and that is mainly due to you and Nigel. Thanks John, it's kind of you to say so. Back in 2012 I welcomed the change from BW to C&RT with cautious optimism after watching several versions of British Waterways in their progressively worsening guises presiding over our waterways, but as you say, the changes that accompanied C&RT turned out not to be for the better. It's very difficult to understand the thinking behind these money wasting and pointless excesses, such as the latest debacle in Liverpool, but I really don't see that they can be anything more than ill-considered attempts to create the appearance of resolute and sound administrators, with the added perk of possibly diverting some attention away from the reality of the shambles that the waterways are becoming under their stewardship.
|
|
|
Post by Phil on Oct 8, 2016 12:00:21 GMT
As above I agree with johnv, it is important to highlight abuse of authority when it occurs otherwise it will result in increasing instances of bad behaviour. I have no problem CRT enforcing the rules but only if they do so legally. It would appear that they are currently stretching the legal interpretation beyond the scope of what was originally intended and the posts of Tony and Nigel are a valuable resource. Just in case Tony's ban becomes permanent hopefully he will start a new thread here to keep us updated with progress and if someone know Nigel get him to do likewise.
As for Wrigglefingers, stop being an irritating pussy and unlock the most informative thread on CWDF. ( just in case she views this forum, or if she doesn't perhaps one of her mates who does will pass the sentiment on )
|
|
|
Post by kris on Oct 8, 2016 12:48:53 GMT
I think most boaters welcomed the change to crt and looked forward to new direction. Unfortunately it looks like the old entrenched attitudes have remained in the legal and enforcement depts. let's hope a change in the leadership of the legal dept, along with a change of name of the enforcement dept signals a change. Although you would think a change in personal in the enforcement dept was needed, to ensure a change in direction. although I understand the waterways manager of the area can take responsibility in the recent incident in Liverpool.
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Oct 8, 2016 14:29:54 GMT
Cwdf has become an old farts cesspit, run by nasty vindictive and pathetic idiots. I really hope it dies soon.
|
|
|
Post by tomsk on Oct 8, 2016 14:42:30 GMT
And perhaps D9 can fix things so that tomsk is locked in 'The Pit' ! Twat.
|
|
|
Post by Graham on Oct 8, 2016 15:58:27 GMT
I think most boaters welcomed the change to crt and looked forward to new direction. Unfortunately it looks like the old entrenched attitudes have remained in the legal and enforcement depts. let's hope a change in the leadership of the legal dept, along with a change of name of the enforcement dept signals a change. Although you would think a change in personal in the enforcement dept was needed, to ensure a change in direction. although I understand the waterways manager of the area can take responsibility in the recent incident in Liverpool. Without changing the staff not a chance, the staff saw a chance of getting out from under the yoke of being responsible to government when CRT came along and a green set of over managers the trustees. And boy did they take thier chances.
|
|
|
Post by naughtyfox on Oct 8, 2016 17:52:15 GMT
Outside the Bull's Bridge CRT office, the door to the Elsan disposal doesn't even stay open - so it swings shut and you're left in the dark to suffocate.
|
|
|
Post by tadworth on Oct 8, 2016 17:56:33 GMT
Jackie Smith was involved in the attempt to refuse to licence Tadworth, she certainly knew all about it, and tried to provide bullshit legal justification for their illegal actions. She is far from honest in my personal opinion.
|
|