|
Post by JohnV on Nov 18, 2021 8:51:16 GMT
This is not arguing with you this a trying to find out excersize
(The bit about GJW in the post was more for loddon, was just trying to cut down on the typing)
Now that @loddon and I now understand the difference in our GJW policies, something that is still bugging me is why peterboat Craftinsure insurance is different from yours. You did mention widebeam as opposed to narrowbeam as a possibility but I was also wondering if it is because Peter based in an area that uses rivers including tidal ones as a matter of course and yours possibly isn't ......(my home moorings have always been on tidal waters for both boats, loddon isn't) that made me then wonder if your insurance covers rivers just as a junction between canal or canalised section. If that is the case, I'm wondering if the normal includes tidal sections, or has limitations.
Can you remember off hand what yours says about tidal waters ? If you can't that's fine don't bother yourself with it ..... I was jusr wondering
(I suspect you probably checked before doing the Ouse)
(I don't think I am quite as anal-retentive as the Fox, but I do like to understand the whys and wherefores of things)
“Territorial Scope: Ashore or afloat on inland non tidal waters and interconnecting tidal waterways of the UK, including the Broads, and the river Thames not seaward of the Thames Barrier.” I think if we ever decided to go north of Keadby on the Trent or SE of Selby on the Ouse I’d check with them because that is not really an interconnecting tidal passage. But we don’t have any plans or desire to do that in a narrowboat. Thanks for that Nick ...... As I said I like to understand these things, doesn't matter so much if I am right or wrong beforehand .... I just like to know
|
|
|
Post by Tony Dunkley on Nov 18, 2021 9:22:16 GMT
Turning to the question of the insurance claim. In light of the cause of the rudder stock breakage being almost certainly down to a sub-standard weld at the point where the rudder stock was unnecessarily cut to facilitate pre-purchase stern bush replacement, and the fact that the necessary repairs and inspection for any other incidental damage can all be completed where the boat is currently located, . . it is highly unlikely that any insurance claim covering the overall cost of repairs -- including towage, craning out, and labour and materials -- will be met in full, . . if at all ! The circumstances under which the damage to the boat came about will also come under scrutiny by the insurers. They will NOT look kindly on the fact that it occurred whilst the boat was being single-handed through locks in the dark. The information with regard to the rudder stock being reportedly cut and re-joined by some method that has subsequently failed in service, cannot be confirmed until the boat's rudder and stock assembly has been removed and inspected. This has led some people to the mistaken conclusion that the only way to proceed with repairs is for the boat to be drydocked or craned out of the water, . . which is utter nonsense. It is NOT the boat that's in need of repair, . . it's the boats rudder !The fact that the rudder stock is known to have parted between the upper edge of the rudder and the counter bottom plating means in effect that the rudder failure itself has facilitated the quick and easy removal of the whole rudder, stock, and ramshead assembly from the boat, . . with the boat afloat at Barrowford, where it has remained ever since the rudder failed, a week ago today. The two separate parts of the whole broken rudder, stock and ramshead assembly can then be taken away for repair, and returned and refitted to the boat, . . all with the boat still afloat at Barrowford. There is no way that the boat's insurers will pay out for towage to Barlick and craning out merely in order to effect simple straightforward repairs to a part of the boat that is easily removeable and can be taken away to a fabricator/welder for repair or replacement. If the damage to the boat had been inspected last Friday by a competent engineer who knows his job, the necessary repairs could have been wrapped up and completed by now. RCR are making their usual, and very costly, unnecessary song and dance about what is in fact a perfectly simple minor repair job of a sort that I have organized and completed countless times to both pleasure and commercial craft since the late 1960's.
|
|
|
Post by patty on Nov 18, 2021 9:28:37 GMT
This place is getting more and more like CWDF every day, TD may not do himself many favours but he has forgotten more than his detractors are ever likely to know. Im off, good luck Its a shame that people continue to go Hope u return Getting round to thinking maybe time I took another few days off I won't leave permanently as there are folk on here I think of as friends but its become a bit grim I guess its a case of I'll be back.....
|
|
|
Post by Tony Dunkley on Nov 18, 2021 10:50:08 GMT
Good to see CWDF managed to sort the issue and take the credit with their excellent, knowledgable posters advice! 👍 Talking through your arse, as usual, . . nobody on CWDF, or here, has sorted out anything ! There is nothing apart from more incorrect presumptions about the boat having to be docked or craned out, . . and those are down to stupidity and ignorance. The information with regard to the rudder stock being reportedly cut and re-joined by some method that has subsequently failed in service, cannot be confirmed until the boat's rudder and stock assembly has been removed and inspected. This has led some people to the mistaken conclusion that the only way to proceed with repairs is for the boat to be drydocked or craned out of the water, . . which is utter nonsense. It is NOT the boat that's in need of repair, . . it's the boats rudder ! The fact that the rudder stock is known to have parted between the upper edge of the rudder and the counter bottom plating means in effect that the rudder failure itself has facilitated the quick and easy removal of the whole rudder, stock, and ramshead assembly from the boat, . . with the boat afloat at Barrowford, where it has remained ever since the rudder failed, a week ago today. The two separate parts of the whole broken rudder, stock and ramshead assembly can then be taken away for repair, and returned and refitted to the boat, . . all with the boat still afloat at Barrowford. There is no way that the boat's insurers will pay out for towage to Barlick and craning out merely in order to effect simple straightforward repairs to a part of the boat that is easily removeable and can be taken away to a fabricator/welder for repair or replacement. If the damage to the boat had been inspected last Friday by a competent engineer who knows his job, the necessary repairs could have been wrapped up and completed by now at minimal cost. RCR are making their customary, very costly, and unnecessary song and dance about what is in fact a perfectly simple minor repair job of a sort that I have organized and completed countless times to both pleasure and commercial craft since the late 1960's.
|
|
|
Post by Jim on Nov 18, 2021 10:58:10 GMT
You won't be getting any legal papers, it's just more of his endless lies. Recorded and added to the rest (prior to deleting this reply) It's still risible. Oops, naughty spill chucker. Visible.
|
|
|
Post by Jim on Nov 18, 2021 11:05:51 GMT
Good to see CWDF managed to sort the issue and take the credit with their excellent, knowledgable posters advice! 👍 Talking through your arse, as usual, . . nobody on CWDF, or here, has sorted out anything ! There is nothing apart from more incorrect presumptions about the boat having to be docked or craned out, . . So the info from the previous owner, who had work done on the rudder, isn't proof enough? I know underwater welding is possible, but probably cheaper to lift the boat out to do it.
|
|
|
Post by cygnus on Nov 18, 2021 11:15:05 GMT
Turning to the question of the insurance claim. In light of the cause of the rudder stock breakage being almost certainly down to a sub-standard weld at the point where the rudder stock was unnecessarily cut to facilitate pre-purchase stern bush replacement, and the fact that the necessary repairs and inspection for any other incidental damage can all be completed where the boat is currently located, . . it is highly unlikely that any insurance claim covering the overall cost of repairs -- including towage, craning out, and labour and materials -- will be met in full, . . if at all ! The circumstances under which the damage to the boat came about will also come under scrutiny by the insurers. They will NOT look kindly on the fact that it occurred whilst the boat was being single-handed through locks in the dark. The information with regard to the rudder stock being reportedly cut and re-joined by some method that has subsequently failed in service, cannot be confirmed until the boat's rudder and stock assembly has been removed and inspected. This has led some people to the mistaken conclusion that the only way to proceed with repairs is for the boat to be drydocked or craned out of the water, . . which is utter nonsense. It is NOT the boat that's in need of repair, . . it's the boats rudder !The fact that the rudder stock is known to have parted between the upper edge of the rudder and the counter bottom plating means in effect that the rudder failure itself has facilitated the quick and easy removal of the whole rudder, stock, and ramshead assembly from the boat, . . with the boat afloat at Barrowford, where it has remained ever since the rudder failed, a week ago today. The two separate parts of the whole broken rudder, stock and ramshead assembly can then be taken away for repair, and returned and refitted to the boat, . . all with the boat still afloat at Barrowford. There is no way that the boat's insurers will pay out for towage to Barlick and craning out merely in order to effect simple straightforward repairs to a part of the boat that is easily removeable and can be taken away to a fabricator/welder for repair or replacement. If the damage to the boat had been inspected last Friday by a competent engineer who knows his job, the necessary repairs could have been wrapped up and completed by now. RCR are making their usual, and very costly, unnecessary song and dance about what is in fact a perfectly simple minor repair job of a sort that I have organized and completed countless times to both pleasure and commercial craft since the late 1960's. With respect..... We aren't there Tony. We haven't had the opportunity to access the damage, and we (mostly) are not elderly lone females, stuck in the middle of nowhere, and relatively new to the inland waterways, stuck with a broken down boat. She has taken advice from someone who has actually turned up and seen the damage. I know we all have our own ideas about the way we would proceed but again we are not in her shoes. Is it just the rudder? Is it still there? Was the propeller damaged? Was the skeg damaged? The insurance company will want a full assessment surely. I got the impression Jo was happy with the plan of action, and I predict the insurance will cover most of it. Was £400 excess mentioned at some point?
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Nov 18, 2021 11:29:51 GMT
23 pages but we got there ... well done cygnusRog
|
|
|
Post by kris on Nov 18, 2021 11:35:58 GMT
If the Engineer in question (Wayne.) is the guy who I think it is, he worked for Ian Clark of Pennine cruisers in skipton for years and he knows what he’s doing.
|
|
|
Post by tonyb on Nov 18, 2021 11:44:53 GMT
If the stock has snapped as stated then Tony D is right that it should be perfectly possible to lift the whole upper assembly out of the boat once the upper bearing has been freed. Either from the stock or from the hull. It should also be possible to lift the blade and bottom part of the stock out of the skeg and get it ashore. Once ashore and at suitable premises the rams head can be freed from the stock and a repair of the stock effected but now I do see a problem.
If the boat is afloat you need a sufficient depth of water to allow the stock to pass under the uxter plate so it can be pushed up. I know on the hire cruisers this was often wetsuit or drysuit time because the boat had to be pushed out into deeper water. maybe f yo are strong enough you could do it by laying on a floating pontoon or a jetty/bank that is sufficiently low to the water but I come back to will there be sufficient depth.
We certainly did such jobs on the hire fleet in the way Tony suggests if the boat was upriver and not near a slipway but often we just slipped the stern as long as the trolley gave us the needed clearance to get the stock under the hull.
|
|
|
Post by Andyberg on Nov 18, 2021 11:49:00 GMT
Good to see CWDF managed to sort the issue and take the credit with their excellent, knowledgable posters advice! 👍 Talking through your arse, as usual, . . nobody on CWDF, or here, has sorted out anything ! Oh just go & fuck yourself dunkley, you miserable old twat🖕 Cant you even see the sarcasm in that post, cantankerous tosser? ..FFS!🙄
|
|
|
Post by JohnV on Nov 18, 2021 11:52:51 GMT
Talking through your arse, as usual, . . nobody on CWDF, or here, has sorted out anything ! Oh just go & fuck yourself dunkley, you miserable old twat🖕 Cant you even see the sarcasm in that post, you cantankerous tosser? ..FFS! I did think when I saw Tony's reply "that's just gone right over your head Tony" too late to say owt then
|
|
|
Post by Andyberg on Nov 18, 2021 11:55:58 GMT
Oh just go & fuck yourself dunkley, you miserable old twat🖕 Cant you even see the sarcasm in that post, you cantankerous tosser? ..FFS! I did think when I saw Tony's reply "that's just gone right over your head Tony" too late to say owt then Well he's hardly the sharpest knife in the drawer is he?
|
|
|
Post by JohnV on Nov 18, 2021 12:04:29 GMT
I think one of the troubles is that he expects "anti" replies all the time so he is already at half cock ready to fire
|
|
|
Post by tonyb on Nov 18, 2021 12:23:33 GMT
If the stock has snapped as stated then Tony D is right that it should be perfectly possible to lift the whole upper assembly out of the boat once the upper bearing has been freed. Either from the stock or from the hull. It should also be possible to lift the blade and bottom part of the stock out of the skeg and get it ashore. Once ashore and at suitable premises the rams head can be freed from the stock and a repair of the stock effected but now I do see a problem. If the boat is afloat you need a sufficient depth of water to allow the stock to pass under the uxter plate so it can be pushed up. I know on the hire cruisers this was often wetsuit or drysuit time because the boat had to be pushed out into deeper water. maybe f yo are strong enough you could do it by laying on a floating pontoon or a jetty/bank that is sufficiently low to the water but I come back to will there be sufficient depth. We certainly did such jobs on the hire fleet in the way Tony suggests if the boat was upriver and not near a slipway but often we just slipped the stern as long as the trolley gave us the needed clearance to get the stock under the hull. I asked earlier if Tony Dunkley would be willing to go and attempt the actions he suggests, but I realised it would be very unlikely that socks would want TD anywhere near her boat, so I deleted the question. She has decided to go the insurance route and the £400 excess which will be a reasonable cost if all works out even, certainly the two Waynes at Lower Park will do their best to help. However, it will mean that very long worriesome wait to crane the boat out because I imagine the insurance will need a full assessment report of the damage before they can even consider her claim. At the moment she might be persuaded by you that the above plan could be feasible and at least worth an investigation? She has deleted her account here but I think may still be reading. Feasible yes, but not sure how practical on the canals of today. Its the depth of water and the need to get in that concerns me. I am certainly not trying to suggest that it would be sensible to consider it. I was just trying to say that what TD said was far from outlandish and in the right circumstances may be feasible. Each day that goes by now the colder the canal will become so the shorter time you can stay in it even if there is the depth needed.
|
|