Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Oct 22, 2020 16:23:26 GMT
|
|
|
Post by naughtyfox on Oct 22, 2020 16:33:36 GMT
As I recall, the court said CRT should issue a PBC. How can you say 'acted with support'? Why have CRT refused to hand out a PBC? Well, I don't know the exact details.... it would be interesting to know every in and out on this. Anyway... Tony seems like a decent bloke to me... you seem a little peculiar. Interesting but odd. Suspect a failure to allow a BS inspection for proof of exemption may be something to do with it. I'm guessing 'River Only Licences' bring in more £££ than PBCs.
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Oct 22, 2020 16:41:36 GMT
Suspect a failure to allow a BS inspection for proof of exemption may be something to do with it. I'm guessing 'River Only Licences' bring in more £££ than PBCs. Try not to think. Its better for everyone.
|
|
|
Post by kris on Oct 22, 2020 16:43:51 GMT
As I recall, the court said CRT should issue a PBC. How can you say 'acted with support'? Why have CRT refused to hand out a PBC? Well, I don't know the exact details.... it would be interesting to know every in and out on this. Anyway... Tony seems like a decent bloke to me... you seem a little peculiar. Interesting but odd. Suspect a failure to allow a BS inspection for proof of exemption may be something to do with it. I think by not getting an independent safety guy in to certify the boat as a “project.” Tony might have been shooting himself in the foot. But as you say it might all be part of a bigger plan. I just hope he’s alright.
|
|
|
Post by Clinton Cool on Oct 22, 2020 17:39:42 GMT
When I first read the thread I thought it was Tony C who had had his boat lifted by CRT gestapo. And then I saw there wasn't a gangplank, either full length or shortened on the roof, and realised my error.
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Oct 22, 2020 17:42:59 GMT
CRT are going to be adding some t&c to deal with people who do Overt Positive Gesturing so it is possible that Tony C may be in the cross hairs at some stage.
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Oct 22, 2020 18:20:05 GMT
When I first read the thread I thought it was Tony C who had had his boat lifted by CRT gestapo. And then I saw there wasn't a gangplank, either full length or shortened on the roof, and realised my error. I thought the same thing Ricco tbh- only I thought that it was a wind-up, since obviously I'm not in handcuffs and neither is my boat. In fact I'm moored a couple of miles north of wolverhampton (ready to finally get onto the Shroppie some time tomorrow pm), in a location that is a little too rural and isolated even for me. If there are any axe murderers in Staffordshire, this is where they'll be looking. But its such sad news. I can understand that there are people who believe firmly enough in their principles that they will not take the easy route of obeying official bodies who they think are behaving incorrectly or in bad faith. For making that stand for his beliefs I have to admire Tony D, but sadly in so many cases these days the official bodies have the major legal and financial resources required to prevail against individuals who oppose them. That is truly a sight nobody wants to even see, let alone be part of.
|
|
|
Post by Mr Stabby on Oct 22, 2020 18:25:37 GMT
Suspect a failure to allow a BS inspection for proof of exemption may be something to do with it. I think by not getting an independent safety guy in to certify the boat as a “project.” Tony might have been shooting himself in the foot. But as you say it might all be part of a bigger plan. I just hope he’s alright. As I understand it, CRT wanted to inspect the boat to ensure that it did indeed meet the requirements for exemption. To my mind, this is reasonable, given that the purpose of the BSS is to protect third parties rather than the boater having the examination undertaken. At least, that's how the BSS examiner explained it to me during my 2017 inspection. For reasons never fully explained (but almost certainly based on bloody-minded awkwardness) Tony Dunkley refused to allow this, and this is ultimately why the boat was removed. I did try pointing out to Tony Dunkley a few months ago that this would be the inevitable result, but you may as well sit a cabbage on the table and try explaining advanced algebra to it. So yes, it is sad but he really has asked for this. The only saving grace is that if it was indeed exempt from the BSS requirements then almost by definition he cannot have been living on it.
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Oct 22, 2020 18:27:12 GMT
CRT are going to be adding some t&c to deal with people who do Overt Positive Gesturing so it is possible that Tony C may be in the cross hairs at some stage. I am CRTs bitch, basically. If they say jump, they only need to specify the required height. But that said, if manic waving (aka OPG) is banned by CRT, I shall seek ever more subtle ways of tormenting my fellow boaters... I'm already considering a slightly louder horn...
|
|
|
Post by metanoia on Oct 22, 2020 18:40:31 GMT
When I first read the thread I thought it was Tony C who had had his boat lifted by CRT gestapo. And then I saw there wasn't a gangplank, either full length or shortened on the roof, and realised my error. I thought the same thing Ricco tbh- only I thought that it was a wind-up, since obviously I'm not in handcuffs and neither is my boat. In fact I'm moored a couple of miles north of wolverhampton (ready to finally get onto the Shroppie some time tomorrow pm), in a location that is a little too rural and isolated even for me. If there are any axe murderers in Staffordshire, this is where they'll be looking. But its such sad news. I can understand that there are people who believe firmly enough in their principles that they will not take the easy route of obeying official bodies who they think are behaving incorrectly or in bad faith. For making that stand for his beliefs I have to admire Tony D, but sadly in so many cases these days the official bodies have the major legal and financial resources required to prevail against individuals who oppose them. That is truly a sight nobody wants to even see, let alone be part of. Good luck and all the very best to Tony D, indeed. However, all hail the Tricorn and Tony Hornblower as he creeps through Pendeford Rockin tomorrow to join the great Shropshire Union! You've made amazing progress and we wish you well - waterpoint, overflowing bins and a Morrisons at the junction, together with a great DIY/hardware/spares shop (Fram parts within hours). You should be fine tonight @tonyc - sounds like you're on the Coven heath (pikey and sewage alert but...) Brewood is well worth a visit as you pass through (butchers, bakers, shops and interesting architecture) but you'll probably be aiming for Wheaton Aston for cheap diesel - say hello to Stuart! Enjoy your journey. Met x
|
|
|
Post by kris on Oct 22, 2020 18:42:14 GMT
I think by not getting an independent safety guy in to certify the boat as a “project.” Tony might have been shooting himself in the foot. But as you say it might all be part of a bigger plan. I just hope he’s alright. As I understand it, CRT wanted to inspect the boat to ensure that it did indeed meet the requirements for exemption. To my mind, this is reasonable, given that the purpose of the BSS is to protect third parties rather than the boater having the examination undertaken. At least, that's how the BSS examiner explained it to me during my 2017 inspection. For reasons never fully explained (but almost certainly based on bloody-minded awkwardness) Tony Dunkley refused to allow this, and this is ultimately why the boat was removed. I did try pointing out to Tony Dunkley a few months ago that this would be the inevitable result, but you may as well sit a cabbage on the table and try explaining advanced algebra to it. So yes, it is sad but he really has asked for this. The only saving grace is that if it was indeed exempt from the BSS requirements then almost by definition he cannot have been living on it. Tony is always going to be Tony, so no one would be able to get him to change his mind.
|
|
|
Post by metanoia on Oct 22, 2020 18:49:50 GMT
As I understand it, CRT wanted to inspect the boat to ensure that it did indeed meet the requirements for exemption. To my mind, this is reasonable, given that the purpose of the BSS is to protect third parties rather than the boater having the examination undertaken. At least, that's how the BSS examiner explained it to me during my 2017 inspection. For reasons never fully explained (but almost certainly based on bloody-minded awkwardness) Tony Dunkley refused to allow this, and this is ultimately why the boat was removed. I did try pointing out to Tony Dunkley a few months ago that this would be the inevitable result, but you may as well sit a cabbage on the table and try explaining advanced algebra to it. So yes, it is sad but he really has asked for this. The only saving grace is that if it was indeed exempt from the BSS requirements then almost by definition he cannot have been living on it. Tony is always going to be Tony, so no one would be able to get him to change his mind. Yes - respect where respect is due. Whatever one's personal opinion no-one can be considered wrong to make a stand for what they believe to be right and true.
|
|
|
Post by naughtyfox on Oct 22, 2020 18:54:49 GMT
When I first read the thread I thought it was Tony C who had had his boat lifted by CRT gestapo. And then I saw there wasn't a gangplank, either full length or shortened on the roof, and realised my error. I can understand that there are people who that they will not take the easy route of obeying official bodies "believe firmly enough in their principles" - did you mean 'believe in Acts of Parliament that govern the use of the navigable waterways'? "who they think are behaving incorrectly or in bad faith." - did you mean 'who are behaving incorrectly'? Tony has tried very hard to show folk what's going on - boaters getting shafted. It seems some like it up 'em. I'm not surprised in a country of people who are letting foreign governments run their railways, and having their economy ruined and National Debt risen to astronomical levels by scare tactics and 'lockdowns' founded on a virus that might, possibly be a slight inconvenience to 0.03% of the population.
|
|
|
Post by naughtyfox on Oct 22, 2020 18:55:29 GMT
As I understand it, CRT wanted to inspect the boat to ensure that it did indeed meet the requirements for exemption. To my mind, this is reasonable, given that the purpose of the BSS is to protect third parties rather than the boater having the examination undertaken. At least, that's how the BSS examiner explained it to me during my 2017 inspection. For reasons never fully explained (but almost certainly based on bloody-minded awkwardness) Tony Dunkley refused to allow this, and this is ultimately why the boat was removed. I did try pointing out to Tony Dunkley a few months ago that this would be the inevitable result, but you may as well sit a cabbage on the table and try explaining advanced algebra to it. So yes, it is sad but he really has asked for this. The only saving grace is that if it was indeed exempt from the BSS requirements then almost by definition he cannot have been living on it. Tony is always going to be Tony, so no one would be able to get him to change his mind. And why should one change one's mind when one is in the right?
|
|
|
Post by naughtyfox on Oct 22, 2020 18:58:41 GMT
I think by not getting an independent safety guy in to certify the boat as a “project.” Tony might have been shooting himself in the foot. But as you say it might all be part of a bigger plan. I just hope he’s alright. if it was indeed exempt from the BSS requirements then almost by definition he cannot have been living on it. Eh? Why can't you live on a boat with no gas and no working engine? And no stove, I guess. I have slept in tents and survived.
|
|