MtB Posted October 31, 2017 Report Share Posted October 31, 2017 On 31/10/2017 at 20:49, rasputin said: Bottom Flash, what is the problem with calling it it's correct name? Well for a start it sounds terribly rude, don'tcher think? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
NigelMoore Posted October 31, 2017 Report Share Posted October 31, 2017 Sound point. In Leigh's legal pleadings I am going to refer to "the moonings" from now on. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
dmr Posted October 31, 2017 Report Share Posted October 31, 2017 17 minutes ago, Mike the Boilerman said: Well for a start it sounds terribly rude, don'tcher think? I have noticed that a car or two often spends a bit of time in the far corner of the "marina" car park late in the evening so you might be right about rude bottom flashing. ..............Dave Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
MtB Posted November 1, 2017 Report Share Posted November 1, 2017 On 31/10/2017 at 23:50, dmr said: I have noticed that a car or two often spends a bit of time in the far corner of the "marina" car park late in the evening so you might be right about rude bottom flashing. ..............Dave I notice this happens quite a lot in canalside car parks. The most blatant I've seen so far being at Brinklow, Cathiron lane IIRC. A secluded car park with space for a dozen cars right next to the waterside. I moored there once and the level of traffic in and out of the car park and torches waving about in the dark all through the night right took me aback! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
rasputin Posted November 1, 2017 Report Share Posted November 1, 2017 52 minutes ago, Mike the Boilerman said: Well for a start it sounds terribly rude, don'tcher think? I'll line them up for you... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Bewildered Posted November 1, 2017 Report Share Posted November 1, 2017 On 26 October 2017 at 20:32, mrsmelly said: Jeeeeesus. I didn't know he worked for CRT, but I supposed if you are applying for a job as a licence checker the ability to walk on water is a huge advantage for checking the boats moored on the offside. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
NigelMoore Posted November 4, 2017 Report Share Posted November 4, 2017 On 29/10/2017 at 22:22, NigelMoore said: In fact, any pleasure boat using the GUC [that part at least, that constituted the original Grand Junction Canal] is moored to the towpath unlawfully, hence subject to s.8! Section 10 of the 1801 Grand Junction Canal Act – “And it is hereby further enacted, that from and after the passing of this Act, no Person or Persons whomsoever shall use any Pleasure Boat or Boats upon the said Canal or Collateral Cuts, or any of them, or any Part or Parts thereof, by towing the same with any Man or Horse, Men or Horses, or by any other Means, nor shall use any sails with any such Pleasure Boat or Boats, without the Consent in Writing from Time to Time of the said Company of Proprietors or their General Committee, or some Clerk or Agent of the said Company duly authorized for that purpose . . . and every Person or Persons using any such Pleasure Boat or Boats contrary to the Regulations and Provisions by this Act enacted, shall for every Offence forfeit and pay to the said Company of Proprietors any Sum not exceeding the Sum of Ten Pounds . . .” That was a pretty hefty fine back in the 18thC; rather more, proportionately, than the usual £25, or even the £150 ‘charge’ on recent signs. One penny then was worth about £1 today, so the equivalent fine in today’s money would amount to a maximum imposable of approximately £1,000, if my poor maths work out aright! Even a tenner for every time you connected with the towpath would get uncomfortable for some of us. Curiously, if you stay 15 days on a 14 day signposted mooring today, you get stung for £150, but would have had to pay exactly that if you stayed 15 days on the towpath back in the 1800’s [counting every day as a separate offence]. Not that you would have been allowed to of course, the commercial boats would have made sure of that, even if the GJCC had taken a back seat over it. In fact the GJCC took very active steps to maintain a clear passage along the canal; the most notorious case being the eventual imprisonment of the Lord of the Manor of Rickmansworth, who slung a chain across the canal where it passed through and over his land, when the offer of payment for that land was insufficient for him. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Featured Posts
Create an account or sign in to comment
You need to be a member in order to leave a comment
Create an account
Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!
Register a new accountSign in
Already have an account? Sign in here.
Sign In Now