Leaderboard

Or better still any place where the public are present, so there is no wriggle room. Hopefully it is the first step to getting compulsory registation and insurance for cyclists, to bring them into line with other road users.

Mouths of babes? What patronising twaddle. I am 51 years old and went to a traditional Grammar school which was staffed mainly with sadistic old gits and a few younger teachers who didn't believe in corporal punishment. Guess who got the most respect from the pupils (a clue...It was the ones who treated kids as human beings to educate, not animals to train). The pleasure of winding up a nasty aggressive dinosaur who ruled by fear was worth the pain of getting caught so their classes tended to be utter chaos as they ran around the classroom screaming and waving their weapon of choice around. It was no deterrent at all and, having brought a son up through a modern school whose staff are not allowed to assault the children anymore I am in an excellent position to compare the two systems and the new one wins hands down...Trust me...Babe or not. Brutalising children is a big deal because it appears to have bred a generation that seem to want to perpetuate the assaults. Fortunately there is a "younger" generation that followed yours that, with a little luck, will mean the aggressive attitudes will die out along with the dinosaurs that approve of them.

Reported this morning on the BBC. In the wake of recent fatal accidents, the government are to look at reviewing dangerous cycling laws. I hope the scope extends to cycling on towpaths and to those who encourage cycling in areas where cycling is incompatible with pedestrians. "Announcing the move, the government said there had been a "series of high-profile incidents" involving cyclists and that in 2015, two pedestrians had been killed and 96 seriously injured after being hit by a bicycle." Mr Parry should be nervous!

Do you have to drain the engine and coolers? Well no it is your choice not too but it will be expensive to replace them if the frost gets at them. And trust me it can do. A friend of ours had a very lucky escape and only had to replace the exhaust manifolds on his petrol V6 when the cold got to them and this was with engine bay heaters installed and working! I would give up on the idea of a heater from your batteries as all this will do is flatten your batteries. You will get bugger all from your solar panels in winter and certainly not enough to keep up with a heater. With no power source you really need to drain everything down properly. Throw some old duvets and blankets over the engine and coolers as well to help to keep them a tad warmer. It may seem like a faff now but it will be better then some expensive repairs next spring. The last couple of winters have been very mild and you may have gotten away with not draining down, however there is no guarantee that this winter will be mild and it only takes one cold night to cause the damage. Also make sure you keep the boat well ventilated if you want to keep the condensation, mould and mildew at bay.

With a boathook?

I think we should try to lobby the enquiry to request that towpaths are included in any new laws. ...............Dave

Whenever I hear people extol the virtues of beating children into submission (as some of my older relatives do) I suggest they try swapping the word 'women' for 'child'. Is it acceptable to beat a woman into submission? No, people get sent to prison for that, so on what planet is it OK to beat a small helpless person? I also find it ironic that many of the people who seem keenest on beating children and executing some criminals are also those who are most opposed to Sharia law...

I can't explain your assertion because I don't think it is true. When they used to publicly hang people for pickpocketting it would normally draw quite a crowd, and in amongst those crowds pickpockets would still be operating, not really much of a deterrent there. Since children have always misbehaved I can't really comment on whether they behaved worse today or when caning was in force. In my own school one of my classmates was caned for throwing a dart into the back of a teacher standing at the blackboard, sounds like pretty bad behaviour to me even when caning was an option (wounding I believe). The greatest deterrent to poor behaviour is the certainty of being detected, the likelihood is high in small villages where everyone knows everything about each other and minimal in large cities where you may not even know who your neighbour is. The yobs in the OP were city kids.

...therefore no real deterrent. If physically assaulting a child was such an effective deterrent why did it not die out as kids became so well disciplined that it was no longer necessary? It only disappeared because it was finally accepted that assaulting children was no more acceptable than assaulting adults.

It was disdain for cowards who thought it okay to assault people half their size that fed my rebellious streak. My head could have caned me until my fingers fell off and I would have still been staring into his eyes with contempt at his pathetic, sadistic weakness. Contempt for authority is fed by authority's contempt for those it has a responsibility for. Discipline at my son's school is ten times better than at my school because the teachers treat the students with respect, not contempt.

To throw in my 4 penn'orth as one who has also worked in the Criminal Justice arena for over 30 years, all this talk of punitive treatment, caning,national service, etc.etc totally ignores one vital point in the criminal mind; when they commit the act they have no intention of being caught so whatever punishment that you wish to throw at them is largely irrelevant. I have known of very few criminals who weigh up the pros and cons of what will happen to them if they are caught, since that is not their intention. The only obvious exception to this are the hard core drug addicts who know what the consequences are likely to be and really don't care one way or the other (that is the effect of addiction), they know they will be periodically arrested and locked up and honestly don't care. Retributive punishment has nothing to do with 'tough love' or any other catchphrases, it is all to do with making the rest of us feel better about punishment inflicted upon others. One other poster has already highlighted the weakness of the case with his comment "..... Caning worked................ We also got bashed with a pump across the backside, no big deal......", I was also caned at school, my only real thought at the time was that I felt a bit sorry for the Deputy Headmaster who had to inflict it (I actually quite liked him as a teacher), I can't say I had any deeper revelation from the experience. When you look at other retributive punishments around the world, Singapore executes drug dealers, and regularly execute several each year, if it was such a deterrent why would they be doing that? Surely everyone would avoid dealing in drugs altogether and they wouldn't need to execute anyone. Capital Punishment is another non-deterrent to potential murderers, again because it is not their intention to get caught so why would they bother about what the penalty is? The only people who are deterred by punitive punishments are those who probably would not be committing crime anyway (you and I) as we look at is and say "Oh, I wouldn't want that happening to me". Looking back at the OP the thing that most of these little yobs were more aware of than anything else was the unlikelihood of actually being caught for anything, that drives criminality more than anything else. Looking at our own minor criminality, are you more likely to drive at excessive speed in your car on an open section of motorway without any speed cameras? or on a section fitted with a whole series of average speed cameras? The penalty is the same for both but I bet that more will do it on the open motorway because the chance of getting caught is minimal.

Chubby, thank you so much for your post. I was starting to get disheartened (but not deterred!) and your post really perked me and my girlfriend up. I think as you pointed out, most people seem to have missed the point that I don't own a house or have a mortgage. You're bang on the money, I'm young and I'm already fed up of not being able to afford to live the way society is going and i'm looking for alternatives. I'd rather live on a boat, have more money and more time to do what I want to do and love rather than working constantly to end up in a coffin having got nowhere in life. I'm almost sure that having time to do what I want and love will in turn make me love the boat life. Of course, people are still shouting "but you must want to live on a boat, not because it's cheaper" well the truth is as i said before it's been playing on my mind for the last 6 to 8 months so it's not a fleeting thought. We went to see our friends who have lived on a 30ft cruiser stern for the last two years and they couldn't be happier. (Just like to point out theirs is a springer and only cost £15k but it's bloody amazing and just passed it's hull survey). So yes, I do want to live on a boat and not just because it's cheaper. Maybe we won't like it, but as Chubby said, we won't know for sure until we try. We're actually looking forward to downsizing and simplifying our lives. Yes it's one thing to go away in a campervan for two weeks compared to living on a boat but the truth is, when we go away in our van, we have showers, in winter, outside in the freezing cold with boiled water from a pan fed through a solar shower. So yeah, we're used to difficult, I wonder how many people who live on a boat have done this? In terms of costs, trust me it still works out cheaper even when moored compared to the costs of renting here with bills. I fully understand if you own a house it costs more because you are paying for mooring fees where you don't pay them fees in a house, but a loan for a boat plus mooring fees still comes in less than my rent a month. Unfortunately as well, our budget will not allow us to get a massive boat that's nice and new because I'm simply not well off and let's be honest, if I had the money you'd still be telling me no in case I didn't like it. That's the whole idea, we get something a little cheaper that we won't lose much money on hopefully and we can test the water, excuse the pun. We have received some fantastic advice on the thread as well, so thanks for everyone who has contributed and I know some will have genuine concern and don't want to see us regret the choice. At the end of the day, that was what the original post was about, asking for help so we didn't make a mistake.

Yesterday we left Manchester Piccadilly Basin and headed for The Rose Of Lancaster, several times on the way I had to get down the weed hatch to remove plastic bags and various items of clothing. Then I got to lock 66, which I think was the lock where a boat had some problems with youths a week or so ago, and my engine stopped instantly. I went down the hatch again only to find a blue nylon rope and some kind of material had completely wrapped itself around the prop . After about half an hour of trying to get this stuff off, a young guy on a bike approached me with a junior hacksaw and asked if it would be useful, I thanked him and said I'd give it a try. He then took off saying he hoped it would help and to hang onto it. I gave it a try but I was really struggling to get anywhere. I decided to ring Canal and River Rescue and put the kettle on. After a while I rang them back and the engineer was still on another job and they couldn't say how long he would be. It was decided to pull the boat into the next lock and tie up to the boat we were travelling with. On pulling the boat, I became grounded and couldn't move, we didn't want to risk the other boat getting grounded by backing out of the lock and at this point three young lads who were fishing saw me struggling with the rope and asked if they could help. They grabbed the front rope and back ropes with me on the centre rope and between us we managed to get the boat free and into the lock. I would like to say to anyone who is contemplating this journey, the amount of rubbish in the canal from Manchester to The Rose of Lancaster is ridiculous however the locals were very friendly and very helpful.

The theory of your idea may sound good but the practice is where it falls down. Yes, take an unruly (gobby) child into another environment and teaching them discipline and the error of their ways is all very good..........and then what? When they come from an environment in which father gets drunk and beats their mother, most of the people that they associate with deal/take drugs and carry knives, how long is your good work going to last when you return them to that environment? This is where the penal policy repeatedly fails, they lock someone up, supposedly educate them with some life skills (now increasingly rare in prison since they no longer have the manpower to do so) and then return them to the environment where they learned their anti-social skills in the first place, and we are supposed to be surprised that the the re-offending stats are so high. Although I was initially sceptical of the idea when it was first brought in, the Restorative Justice model does actually work (for certain crimes), sadly it is seen by some as an airy-fairy, leftie liberal idea. What it actually does however is to take away the anonymity of crime and lets both the victim and the offender realise that real people are involved. Rather than having some image of who the guy who broke into your house was, you get to meet him (obviously in a controlled environment) and rather then being the demon that you imagined, you find out that he is actually rather a pathetic individual. Since he broke into your house you aren't going to feel sorry for him, but you realise that he isn't someone to be particularly scared of. The offender, whose view is that since insurers will pay to replace what he steals, he doesn't think about the individual whose house he is violating. When he has to meet the victim face to face, rather than in the adversarial context of Court, it becomes very uncomfortable for him realising that the effect of his actions are not simply covered by insurance. The re-offending rate for those subjected to Restorative Justice is far lower than most other means of disposal. The question we need to answer is what we trying to achieve? If we want to feel good about the punishments inflicted on others (Canings, long prison sentences etc.etc.) then we keep on 'upping the ante' and lock more people up, execute a few and give the rest a good thrashing. If we are trying to stop the behaviour in the first place we need to look at other options. Just from a personal perspective, the caning I received at school achieved nothing constructive; I did not give any consideration to the likelihood of being caned prior to committing the action that resulted in the caning (stupid rather than malicious act) and, if any thoughts came to mind afterwards it was more along the lines of,"If I do something like that again I'll make sure I don't get caught". This is also how many criminals think regarding punitive punishments.

Can I ask about your experience of discipline in schools then and now? I don't recognise the situation from my own 40 years experience. There was indiscipline in schools while caning was permitted true but it wasn't to the level or severity of current times. Again just my own personal experience.

Should be a limit of 5mph when passing pedestrians, and near walking pace where the path is narrow. That way, if you hit a pedestrian while on a bike, it's your fault! I always slow to jogging pace when passing pedestrians, and say 'excuse me' politely when necessary, never been a problem...

I think sense comes into insurance. There is no compulsory dog insurance but for a very few quid a year mine is insured so if for instance it bites someone they have a point of claim and if it runs into the road and is the cause of an accident then again insurance is in place. Why on Earth should other vehicle users have insurance when a cycle which is classifies as a vehicle doesn't have it? I reckon without googling cycle insurance will be peanuts? Joggers are just people and insuring people would be stupid but insuring a steel vehicle capable of 30 plus mph is surely just common sense though I know that common sense aint very common.

Nah, they can prove who is driving from the swear words accompanying each near miss or incident

So, why are you having a boat built ? Why no just build / buy a House Boat (no engine, different rules and requirements), its much simpler - there again, even simpler, buy a house !

No. If a pedestrian steps into the road without looking, not on a crossing, and is in collision with a cyclist, the pedestrian is at fault UNLESS the cyclist had time to react. Similarly, if a cyclist pulls out of a side road, at the last moment, in front of a car being driven responsibly, where the driver cannot possibly avoid a collision, then the cyclist is at fault. Even more so if the collision happens at night and the cyclist has no lights. All road users must accept some responsibility for their own safety and must look out for others too.

The laws already exist, and have been used this year to prosecute a cyclist - but there has to be the 'will' to use it. THE case where a cyclist has been found guilty of causing bodily harm by 'wanton or furious driving' yesterday, has raised further questions about pedestrian safety and the responsibility of cyclists in public places, writes Keith Gudgin. Mrs Briggs' family said they plan to campaign for tougher cycling laws to protect pedestrians. He said: "Out of this senseless carnage, I shall try to bring change to the law and change to attitudes. Perhaps in this way I can honour my wife." Cycling furiously along the towpath Cyclists need to remember this law whilst they are cycling furiously along the towpath. If they injure a pedestrian by 'wanton or furious driving or racing, or other wilful misconduct' with the result of causing 'any bodily harm to any person whatsoever' could mean they end up in prison for up to two years or having to fork out a hefty fine or both. As can be seen, they would not need to kill anyone to be prosecuted, any bodily harm to any person whatsoever is sufficient for a prosecution and the law does not state that they have to be on a public road or footpath either so towpaths and private property are also covered. Provide evidence We boaters, as towpath users, need to be aware of this law and take measures to provide the police and other authorities with the evidence of cyclists who persist in riding in a wanton or furious manner or racing along the towpaths in order to get them stopped and/or prosecuted. Remember, speed trials are a form of racing and therefore fall within the remit of this law. Also, I feel CaRT and local councils need to become aware that they could also, by not attempting to prevent furious riding or racing in any form by cyclists, become liable for a failure in their duty of care responsibilities. CaRT could end up with a fine If CaRT and local councils continue to upgrade all the towpaths to knowingly allow cyclists to race or ride furiously without including any other restrictions, i.e. speed humps, gates or even just a blanket speed limit to restrict cyclists then I feel that before long they could end up with a very hefty fine and a court order to implement measures of prevention. Remember, aiding and abetting an offence is treated by the courts in just the same manner as actually committing the offence under British law. Cyclists only one user of the towpaths We pedestrians have the law on our side, we must put a stop to irresponsible and ignorant cyclists who insist that they have the right of way over everybody and anybody on any road, path, track or byway. Cyclists need to be made aware that they are only one user of the byways and that they are required to give way to others. On towpaths, the rules actually state that cyclists should give way to pedestrians. Why do cyclists assume that all pedestrians are going to jump out of their way. Why should pedestrians have to step off the path into the mud and puddles just to let a speeding cyclist go past without even slowing down. What happens if the pedestrian is deaf and cannot hear the cyclist approaching from behind? Not even need come in contact This law, as it is, does not even need the cyclist to come in contact with the pedestrian for an offence to be committed as it states '...do or cause to be done any bodily harm...'. It appears from this that a cyclist could be liable if, by their action, they just make a pedestrian fall over and injure themselves. Therefore any action by a cyclist that causes bodily harm in any way could constitute an offence under this law. Not above the law Cyclist need to be shown that they are not above the law and that other people, other byway users, also have rights and even have a right of way over cyclists in many cases. One thing that needs urgent attention is the identification of cyclists to prevent them from just getting up and riding off after an accident without leaving any trace of who they are. Registration of all adult cyclists and a registration plate fixed to their bike is an urgent and long overdue legal need. The law under which the cyclist was charged... 'Offences Against the Person Act 1861'. This law is the closest to dangerous driving a cyclist can be charged with and states 35} Drivers of carriages injuring persons by furious driving. Whosoever, having the charge of any carriage or vehicle, shall by wanton or furious driving or racing, or other wilful misconduct, or by wilful neglect, do or cause to be done any bodily harm to any person whatsoever, shall be guilty of a misdemeanor, and being convicted thereof shall be liable, at the discretion of the court, to be imprisoned for any term not exceeding two years.

If somebody used a weapon to punish you then you were beaten whether you believe it or not and, because it may have scared you into submission, you believe it worked. I have never laid a hand on my sons, never mind used a weapon on them, and they are both top of their class, well behaved and respect their teachers, classmates and parents. My eldest may well have been beaten into submission, if he had been assaulted by adults, but my youngest would have, like me, riled against it and despised the sadists who think causing pain and fear is the same thing as commanding respect.

I just wonder what a vegetative state we will be in, in another generation. How is it that we cannot take responsibility for own lives, why must we rely on others to remind us to do things ? Never heard of a diary, or even a reminder / alarm on your PC / phone ? Surely every day you are on the boat you pass by the licence 'disc'. Unbelievable !

Provided you measure a steel boat with a steel tape measure, surely the measured length is unaffected by the ambient temperature?

Thank you all! So I found a way to get a hand till Great Haywood, from there I should be able to lift her and get down again at Watford Junction. If not I'll cut her into pieces and ship her by Royal Mail!

Two site members who often help owners move boats for little or no payment except for expenses, food and drink are The Boater and Peter X. Others that do it professionally and thus charge are Matty40's and Nigel Carton. May be worth PMing them?

It would seem that Ed Grundy would be out there, but would probably be lost to the signal/noise ratio.

So how do you explain the fact that when they hung people for stealing a loaf of bread theft was almost unknown and when caning was allowed children behaved better than they do today? I taught through the change from caning to no caning (which if I remember correctly was more than 30 years ago) and there was a definite difference in behaviour .. I am not saying you are wrong I am just interested in how, you with the years of experience can explain things.

Stop whinging and just get on with boating

I have used Villager Puffin stoves on 4 different boats and all of them have had an adjustable grille to regulate air flow. They didn't look like the one you show. This is like ours:- Howard

I have managed to enter the planning portal and posted the below letter of objection, This site has an amenity block, much used by boaters such as me, which includes a toilet, facilities to dispose of sewage, fresh water standpipe and skips for refuse. CRT have made very little mention of this and appear to be trying to gloss over its existence. They are proposing to install new facilities but the location of these leaves much to be desired. The facilities share the same waterside mooring as the relocated NEW HORIZONS(NH) trip boat. Any boater wishing to use the new facilities will have to tie outside the NM, then CLIMB OVER the NM to the bank, carrying bags of refuse, a hosepipe for water, a toilet cassette or even a pumpout hose for bulk sewage removal. To compound matters, the location of this facility is immediately next to the luxury development of the old warehouse. What the new residents of this luxury house will make of sewage hoses and skips of rubbish beneath their windows beggars belief. Having obtained planning permission, CRT have a track record of quietly removing boaters facilities from the scheme leaving boaters with nowhere to dispose of rubbish and sewage. The potential for fly tipping and illegal sewage dumping is obviously increased. I object to this proposal unless a firm condition that the facilities for boaters MUST be built and kept in use. The potential effect on the value of their "luxury house" is a matter for CRT to consider. George

And i in turn agree with pretty much all you say . Ive lived aboard for only a fraction of the time you have and i daresay you have seen folk come & go from the boating scene . Im not saying for one moment that its cheap . But that it is cheaper. Having said that if one is hit with big bills for boat repairs early on during boat ownership then it may well appear otherwise . If you own a home outright ( mortgage paid ) & a boat outright then it may well be the case that the boat works out more costly than the property . But then again youve had the opportunity to purchase the property in first place & those costs are behind you . As i mentioned previously im not suggesting that paying for the property was an easy ride over 25 years . But the opportunity was present & many quite rightly took the opportunity. Thing is - thats not how it is anymore . I fear that many folk are simply looking at thier inability to acquire a mortgage & asking themselves " what is the point of working my socks off to pay some poxy landlords investments off because this situation isn t about to get better . Politicians aren t going to sort it out , & society mostly doesn t care because theyre just interested in themselves being alright " - at which point they begin to look at alternative ways of living . " The NIMBYism of " boats cost more than renting " is dreadful. I read it as " these canals are my playground - dont come living on them cos u can't afford it " . Disgraceful mentality . Mr Smelly - you ve seen folk come & go during your long years onboard . Some folk don t last . Some folk do . How can one really know unless they give it a shot ? IMO the best thing the OP can do is save as hard as they can to gather a greater budget together as thier current one is at a level where theyre on risky ground and will be looking at boats firmly in the bottom of the market . Better to wait , research , ask questions and if prepared to pursue boat ownership then do so with a higher budget which is of course still no guarantee of a decent boat . I thought the OP sounded level headed and realistic & deserved good info . This he got - and its right to advise novices of the pitfalls possible and its right to suggest one can only really liveabord long term if they love it - but how can a novice no without taking tje plunge ultimately , but i was mightily annoyed by some of the comments about home ownership costing more than boat ownership . In years to come many will not know what home ownership feels like or they ll have to commit to a life of paying off student debt & home ownership debt and probably for thier entire working lifetime for reasons beyond thier control. Or live a different way maybe . Those who are fortunate to have thier homes , thier security etc should IMO count thier blessings because many of thier childrens generation are unlikely to do so . cheers

I was once a young man with an old boat now I'm an old man with an old boat the gap in age between us doesn't change. What does change is how we are percieved. When I was young the perception was we were poor because we lived on an old workboat, now it is we are snobs and above others because we have an old workboat. Can I respectfully make the observation that we are the ones who haven't changed. We haven't bought in joined an elite or a cult, we are simply doing what we have always done...

I don't understand why there is so much emotion over the shape of a boat or who it was manufactured by. My boat is a one off and I don't care if anybody likes it or not. Why do people find themselves slagging off other peoples possessions. Who really cares if an individual does not like something either because it has too many, not enough rivets, the wrong shaped bow etc. If we all liked the same things then life would be very boring. If you don't particularly like something then don't buy it but please don't keep telling us all that you don't like it because that is also very boring!!

Size 4 no problem, have you any flat feet, fallen arches, in growing toe nails, or any other foot deformities?, if so a special order will have to be made. Order from... ''Suckers for suckers unlimited'' 1007 Heel crescent, off Boot st, Tonguestead near Leatherhead. WARNING! But whatever you do don't order any on easy terms from a catalogue, my dad did and he ended up with a club foot.

I live on my narrowboat . There was of course a sizeable payment when i bought it . In 4.5 years ive owned it - my first boat ive also spent a fair amount in improvements , servicing , maintenence etc . I have a mooring , i have insurance , i have RCR cover , i have a license . It is CONSIDERABLY cheaper than renting a flat . If i CC'd it would be cheaper still . I dont live on my boat cos its cheaper . I live on my boat cos its BETTER .... by a country mile . All this negativity about overheads , and how theyre greater than my home etc is wearyingly boring ..... . Well done to those who " played the property game " and won . " Weve a got a big house , didn t we do well , weve got boat aswell , aren t we marvellous " . " Our boat coats more than our house - so dont even think about buying a boat as its an expensive thing to own " It all reminds me of the Harry Enfield character who always comments " Excuse me Sonny , but me and the wife couldn t help but notice that we are considerably richer than yow " in a brum accent . Of course your house was cheaper . You probably bought it in the 60s 70s 80s 90s & have seen big increases in its value . Im not suggesting you ve had it easy but i am suggesting that things are more difficult in recent times . Folk - hard working , honest folk just like yourselves cannot get the homes they want the buy because they cannot keep up with the insane prices of home buying . If one is stuck in a cycle of renting in order to fund someone elses lifestyle is not likely that one will look to altetnatives ? In times past one bought a home to live in , raise a family etc . Property nowadays is bought up by investors aswell thus removing the opportunity to those whod like to buy . So some folk - usually old , retired types or close to it did well . Good for them . But all this " dont buy a boat unless you love it etc " is bollocks . Is it so far beyond imagination that someone can buy a boat for one reason ( finances ) and stay on it for other reasons ( cos they then fell in love with it ) ? I expect there are several members of this forum who would fit my question above . But i doubt many would question thier motives The OP sounds to me like theyve got thier head screwed on . Asking the right questions. Theyve spent time in campervans - so what they haven t lived in it . The OP doesn t sound like he wants a lavish lifestyle and would infact actively embrace the simplicity of boat living . It sounds actually as if the only thing missing is a larger budget . People are slowly waking up to the idea that working your knackers off all your life to pay a mortgage isn t the be all and end all of the three score years and ten that good fortune has blessed us with by being born in the first place . Why spend that lifetime working working working if its just to pay rent because the country they live in is such a f*** up that it cannot house its own population . So all this " it aint cheaper " is tosh - because it is cheaper by a long way , & its better by long way than renting a crappy house to pay a landlords investment off Yes - there will expenses & some of them may well end up very costly. Buying a boat , especially the first is frought with insecurity , anxiety & worry because the initial cost of buying involves a sizeable chunk of money . Concern is only natural . If one buys a boat its warts n all and if a buyer is unlucky or not diligent enough the costs can be eye watering . These things the OP should be made aware of - quite rightly . But i personally find all this " don t do it unless u wanna do it " boring , negative and if really honest a bit snobbish ..... Thats all folks cheers

You really dont get it do you? Trevor Maggs is not operating an ex-working boat, there is no ex about it. He as been running Corona as a full operational working boat, as Alan suggests, since the 1960's and is an very experienced and well respected boatman. I have known him for most of that time, and he is one of the most competent, courteous and considerate boatmen I know. The fact that you appear to know nothing of him, merely demonstartes how little you really know about the canals, and those who work on it. Unfortuantely this lack of knowledge does not appear to act as any sort of impediment to you making uninformed observations.

The Sad Passing of Common Sense Today we mourn the passing of a beloved old friend, Common Sense, who has been with us for many years. No one knows for sure how old he was since his birth records were long ago lost in bureaucratic red tape. He will be remembered as having cultivated such valuable lessons as knowing when to come in out of the rain, why the early bird gets the worm, life isn't always fair, and maybe it was my fault. Common Sense lived by simple, sound financial policies (don't spend more than you earn) and reliable parenting strategies (adults, not children, are in charge). His health began to deteriorate rapidly when well intentioned but overbearing regulations were set in place. Reports of a six-year-old boy charged with sexual harassment for kissing a classmate; teens suspended from school for using mouthwash after lunch; and a teacher fired for reprimanding an unruly student, only worsened his condition. Common Sense lost ground when parents attacked teachers for doing the job they had failed to do in disciplining their unruly children He declined even further when schools were required to get parental consent to administer Panadol, sun lotion or a sticky plaster to a student; but, could not inform the parents when a student became pregnant and wanted to have an abortion. Common Sense lost the will to live as the Ten Commandments became contraband; churches became businesses; and criminals received better treatment than their victims. Common Sense took a beating when you couldn't defend yourself from a burglar in your own home and the burglar can sue you for assault. Common Sense finally gave up the will to live, after a woman failed to realise that a steaming cup of coffee was hot. She spilled a little in her lap, and was promptly awarded a huge settlement. Common Sense was preceded in death by his parents, Truth and Trust; his wife, Discretion; his daughter, Responsibility; and his son, Reason. He is survived by three stepbrothers; I Know My Rights, Someone Else is to Blame, and I'm A Victim. Not many attended his funeral because so few realised he was gone. If you still remember him, pass this on. If not, join the majority and do nothing.

...it's even more weird when you are trying to make it sink. Have a watch of this video of Brinklow Boat Services floating dry dock flooding: Cheers, Mike