|
Post by kris on Oct 19, 2020 17:03:47 GMT
C&RT is a private limited company, whereas their predecessor, BWB was a creation of statute. Only statutory bodies, or the Government and MP's, can promote primary legislation, whereas private companies, or the general public, cannot. Pedant alert! CRT is a Registered Charity and Company Limited by Guarantee, not quite the same as a Private Company. Not that it excuses any of their behaviour. How dare you? You non believer you. You dare to question the word of the great one, who we must all obey?
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Oct 19, 2020 17:08:46 GMT
It's probably the same situation with regards to the legislation thing.
If CRT can not apply for primary legislation then it seems reasonable that they would attempt to do other things.
The game has changed since the last act was enacted.
A new act would potentially help sort things out, but it won't happen.
I wonder what will happen.
|
|
|
Post by peterboat on Oct 19, 2020 17:14:26 GMT
Maybe boaters have to lobby their MPs to bring in a new waterways act to curtail CRTs wasteful court actions?
|
|
|
Post by naughtyfox on Oct 19, 2020 17:17:29 GMT
Pedant alert! CRT is a Registered Charity and Company Limited by Guarantee, not quite the same as a Private Company. Not that it excuses any of their behaviour. How dare you? You non believer you. You dare to question the word of the great one, who we must all obey? You're making yourself look sillier and sillier, kris. You are better than this.
|
|
|
Post by kris on Oct 19, 2020 17:18:07 GMT
I think carts aim is to pressure the government into legislation change. Because at the end of the day, it’s pretty basic that a contracts t&c’s can’t usurp legislation. But if cart can cause fuss and persuade the government they need new powers, they have a chance of getting them.
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Oct 19, 2020 17:32:23 GMT
How dare you? You non believer you. You dare to question the word of the great one, who we must all obey? You're making yourself look sillier and sillier, kris. You are better than this. Well it doesn't bother you any.
|
|
|
Post by kris on Oct 19, 2020 17:34:19 GMT
How dare you? You non believer you. You dare to question the word of the great one, who we must all obey? You're making yourself look sillier and sillier, kris. You are better than this. Pot, kettle?
|
|
|
Post by Allan on Oct 19, 2020 17:45:27 GMT
C&RT is a private limited company, whereas their predecessor, BWB was a creation of statute. Only statutory bodies, or the Government and MP's, can promote primary legislation, whereas private companies, or the general public, cannot. Pedant alert! CRT is a Registered Charity and Company Limited by Guarantee, not quite the same as a Private Company. Not that it excuses any of their behaviour. Pedant Pedant alert! Actually, you are both right (or both wrong). In addition to being a registered and regulated charity (see Charity Commission website), from companies house CRT is a - Private Limited Company by guarantee without share capital use of 'Limited' exemption
Private means not public. A Public Limited Company has share available to the general public.
As you can probably figure from the description, CRT has no shares or shareholders liable for its debts should it become insolvent. Instead it has 'members' who agree to pay its debts up to a certain guarenteed limit (£10 in the case of CRT, I think). These are the Council members.
Use of 'Limited' exemption means that CRT do not have to call themselves Canal & River Trust Limited as normally required by law.
Now waiting for a triple pedant alert.
|
|
|
Post by TonyDunkley on Oct 19, 2020 21:01:10 GMT
I think carts aim is to pressure the government into legislation change. Because at the end of the day, it’s pretty basic that a contracts t&c’s can’t usurp legislation. But if cart can cause fuss and persuade the government they need new powers, they have a chance of getting them. Can you be a little more clear about the changes to the current governing legislation you think C&RT are wanting to pressurize the Government into making, . . . and explain why you think what this latest round of tinkering with the pointless and inconsequential will have any greater practical effect than all the rest of their endless nonsense and half-baked ideas have had ? If your concerns relate to the proposed amendments to C&RT's largely unenforceable Licence T&C's, surely it would be better to continue this in the "Proposed new Terms and Conditions" thread where your main concern was the proposal to impose a requirement for a ''genuine cruise" whenever a boat with a 'home' mooring was away from it's 'home' mooring.
|
|
|
Post by TonyDunkley on Oct 20, 2020 7:04:44 GMT
Pedant alert! CRT is a Registered Charity and Company Limited by Guarantee, not quite the same as a Private Company. Not that it excuses any of their behaviour. Pedant Pedant alert! Actually, you are both right (or both wrong). In addition to being a registered and regulated charity (see Charity Commission website), from companies house CRT is a - Private Limited Company by guarantee without share capital use of 'Limited' exemption
Private means not public. A Public Limited Company has share available to the general public.
As you can probably figure from the description, CRT has no shares or shareholders liable for its debts should it become insolvent. Instead it has 'members' who agree to pay its debts up to a certain guarenteed limit (£10 in the case of CRT, I think). These are the Council members.
Use of 'Limited' exemption means that CRT do not have to call themselves Canal & River Trust Limited as normally required by law.
Now waiting for a triple pedant alert.
Thank's Allan, . . accuracy in detail should never be neglected, even if the omission does nothing to detract from the essential point.
|
|
|
Post by Jim on Oct 20, 2020 8:22:21 GMT
How dare you? You non believer you. You dare to question the word of the great one, who we must all obey? You're making yourself look sillier and sillier, kris. You are better than this. You made me spit out my porridge and marmalade. That's one that isn't in my joke book!
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Oct 24, 2020 22:17:07 GMT
You're making yourself look sillier and sillier, kris. You are better than this. You made me spit out my porridge and marmalade. That's one that isn't in my joke book! Dundee marmalade, I assume.
|
|
|
Post by phil70 on Oct 24, 2020 22:44:46 GMT
You made me spit out my porridge and marmalade. That's one that isn't in my joke book! Dundee marmalade, I assume. Is there any other? Phil
|
|
|
Post by JohnV on Oct 25, 2020 7:23:12 GMT
oddly .... yes ..... La Vieja Fabrica, St Clements marmalade ........ Spanish made, good flavour and texture but fine shred.
|
|
|
Post by Jim on Oct 25, 2020 9:05:18 GMT
You made me spit out my porridge and marmalade. That's one that isn't in my joke book! Dundee marmalade, I assume. Nah. Way better. Homemade chunky cut, low on sugar.
|
|