Canal World

Register now to gain access to all of our features. Once registered and logged in, you will be able to contribute to this site by submitting your own content or replying to existing content. You'll be able to customize your profile, receive reputation points as a reward for submitting content, while also communicating with other members via your own private inbox, plus much more!

This message will be removed once you have signed in.

Eugene Baston

Members
  • Content count

    105
  • Joined

  • Last visited

Community Reputation

0 Neutral

3 Followers

About Eugene Baston

Profile Information

  • Interests
    Waterways (surprisingly!), MG's & travelling.

Previous Fields

  • Occupation
    Communications consultant
  • Boat Location
    Usually as a stow away, so anywhere...

Contact Methods

  • ICQ
    0
  • Website URL
    http://
  1. I think it's simply BW (eventually) getting its act together regarding the informal employment of MW's that's gone on for years. The IR doesn't like public bodies giving 'stuff' away. Been on the cards for years: not pleased it's actually being implemented but not surprised either, the pressure must have got too much Happy boating all.
  2. Paul, you're comparing apples with pears there, two entirely different companies. Suggest you acknowledge that in your post above just to be on the safe side. It was Spring Residential that purchased the site and Castlemore is/was a part of that company. But they're nothing to do with the marinas you mention. Another interesting twist to a story that goes on and on. The comment about seeking the cheapest price in fire sale of the company's assets appears pretty accurate to me. Best wishes to all, Eugene
  3. Ha...who says?! It was only a suggestion after all, and I'm sure there are numerous others who could contribute annonymously....even if you always thought it was me! Eugene
  4. How about 'Towpath Telegraph'? Fairly popular term already that helps give the site the boost for readership. I'm looking forward to seeing it come online and reading the contributions. If there was room for an annonymous contributor column......... All the best, Eugene
  5. Evening all I'd say that's just below Lapworth on the Stratford. That's what I thought when I saw it anyway. Hope everyone's well! Eugene .....or somewhere down the Claydon flight on the Oxford......in Spring 1988 (ish).
  6. Hi Go to http://www.britishwaterways.co.uk/accounta...on_reports.html and scroll down to 2005. There's three reports there. Right, back to lurking, Eugene.
  7. When did THAT happen???! I'm shocked, I thought I'd gone to a reputable party, and then this appears. No wonder Bones is AWOL at present!
  8. Hey Moley, happy birthday for today and thank you for such a great evening on Saturday. I felt very honoured to have been asked to come along, as you know, and the company, food and entertainment (both official and that which was unofficial! were superb. I hope those beers that I brought along are going down well, or did go down well, depending on how you felt the morning after the night before of course! Thank you again, and thanks to everyone else there for being such a delightful bunch of folk!! Best ones, Eugene
  9. I'm getting my coat and puting my auto reply 'out of office' on......... ....Christmas shopping even appears appealing now! Merry Chrsitams everyone Eugene
  10. Not that reliable Julian. The ceiling isn't 7.5%. The average increase for BW directly managed moorings is 7.4%. Averages can mask some figures way removed from what initially sounds like a reasonable figure! Merry Xmas
  11. There are lots and it's hard to choose. Marple is a good one both up and down (in one afternoon!), but Moggyjo beat me to that example. For me then it has to be the Wolverhampton 21 going down. From the noise and bustle of the inner ring road, albiet besides a quaint lock cottage and some well tended private moorings, this flight drifts delightfully down to the serenity of the countryside below. One thing though! Don't hang around what I've nick named Incinerator Lock if you've got a weak stomach. The stench will provide the fish with plenty of food if the wind's blowing in the wrong direction! Eugene
  12. He still does read what appears here! Honest!! Eugene
  13. A couple of points after reading this thread. Someone mentioned that you were moored on "BW's water", and someone else said "but I already pay a licence to be on the water". You are actually moored over BW's land, ie the bed of the canal. That's what the charge is for. BW charge the boat owner 50% of the nearest towpath side mooring when it comes to end of garden moorings. Why 50%? Because in using a mooring there are two benefits - foot access to said mooring and benefit of mooring over said piece of canal bed. An EoG mooring does not have access over BW's land - therefore BW charges only 50%, i.e. for the part of the benefit which relates to the mooring being over BW's land. It expects the owner of the EoG to charge the remainder to the boat owner, unless, of course, it's a mate or relative or indeed you own the piece of garden to which the boat is tied to. BW may bill the garden owner for the 50% and the owner will then bill the moorer for that amount plus whatever they think having access across their land to the mooring is worth. The court case was in 1992 and on the Lancaster canal. A subsequent one around the turn of the century also proved that BW had a right to charge for mooring over its property. Occasionally, ancient wharf rights exist which permit 'the laying up of vessels', and because of this historical right it can be argued that BW cannot charge for a mooring at these locations. But they are few and far between! As for witholding a cruising licence because on non payment of fees - I wouldn't count that BW wouldn't do this, regardless of David's views on unfair contracts etc. Even if they didn't, the outcome would be as follows. You apply for a licence, and because you're unable to declare your mooring location, you state you a CC'er. But you don't move like a CC'er, and so when it comes to licence renewal it is refused. See the test case on the G&S being covered in most of the waterway titles right now. HTH, Eugene
  14. From an existing moorer's point of view: Annual increases are implemented from April each year, and are usually arrived at through BW's assessment of local market conditions,i.e. what others are charging for online moorings, plus an adjustment for the site's waiting list popularity. With adjacent mooring fees being established through the tendering trial for the next 12 months, data from those adjacent moorings that are tendered will be used to inform BW's future price setting of those moorings that have not been subjected to the tender process. I haven't seen anything that suggests where the threshold will be set whereby, on the results of the tendering process, adjacent mooring fees are set to rise above a certain percentage. Perhaps phazed increases over more than one year will kick in if price reises for adjacent moorings are above 15%. perhaps the threshold will be more. BW has said that it will publish all data received as a part of a tender for one mooring, giving adjacnet moorers at least access to information upon which future prices will be set. HTH, Eugene
  15. Winter moorings were never intended to be a part of the trial, simply because they are, by their nature, a temporary mooring for the winter. The trial is concerned with BW's 12-month towpath moorings. It would be a very long winter if the temporary moorings were included, since each contract awarded to the winning bidder is for a three year period. You should check (firmly) that this is the case. That's my advice. HTH, Eugene