ianc1200
Well-Known Member
When you think of all the other silly things which people sue about & win, I think Apollo has a good point. Like the photo above though, I would love to hear the robo's reaction to that lot on a Sunday morning.
Stuck@Windsor.com...
- Thread starter No Regrets
- Start date
boatone
Well-Known Member
That was taken at last years Rewind Festival at Henley. I hadn't been before and was quite taken aback when I saw all the anchored boats listening to the music without having paid to get in !
apollo
...
Brilliant, that could become very common in the windsor area if nobody gives a sh!t about our props
Chris_d
Well-Known Member
Tony, wouldn't mind a copy of those photos if poss
Find myself agreeing with Apollo on this one (yipes!!!), EA should just fess up and stop trying to wriggle out on technicalities, if they have said anything at all yet of course.
boatone
Well-Known Member
Just for the record, has anyone actually made a complaint or lodged a claim? This has happened before and will no doubt happen again. My approach would be to lodge an insurance claim and let the insurers take it up with the EA ?
boatone
Well-Known Member
To parody a famous tv sketch…..
I have shafts and a keel and take the ground without damage so I laugh at him who has legs
I have legs and prepare for such problems by lifting them up when I moor so I laugh at him who doesn't bother
I have a rowing boat …..
I have shafts and a keel and take the ground without damage so I laugh at him who has legs
I have legs and prepare for such problems by lifting them up when I moor so I laugh at him who doesn't bother
I have a rowing boat …..
Brayman
Well-Known Member
I vaguely remember that about 20 or more years ago boaters were recommended to moor on the assumption that river levels could fluctuate by 3 feet or so overnight, I don't know where this recommendation came from but certainly in the last 20 years or so we have become to expect fairly constant river levels in normal weather conditions.
My feeling is that over the last 3 or 4 years Lock keepers have not been called on to maintain levels out of hours like they used to be, and are then expected to correct things when they come on shift in the morning.
My feeling is that over the last 3 or 4 years Lock keepers have not been called on to maintain levels out of hours like they used to be, and are then expected to correct things when they come on shift in the morning.
Chris_d
Well-Known Member
Seems to happen more often than normal at Windsor though, has to be a reason and its not lack of water
apollo
...
Tony, wouldn't mind a copy of those photos if poss
Find myself agreeing with Apollo on this one (yipes!!!), EA should just fess up and stop trying to wriggle out on technicalities, if they have said anything at all yet of course.
Steady now.....
No Regrets
Well-Known Member
DogsBody
Well-Known Member
Seems I can't get away for a quiet weekend anywhere nowadays without being the talk of the town...but then again, I guess going away with No Regrets isn't a good start if you want a quiet life 
As John says, we moored with plenty of water on Saturday, Sunday my boat was so hard aground that I couldn't move it even with four of us pulling on the lines. The Port outdrive leg was obviously supporting the boat's weight (being the lowest part of the boat), as the boat would rock and the bow would turn but the boat wouldn't actually move anywhere. I could here the lift motor on the leg running but the leg would not budge (starboard one lifted ok).
When we reported the lack of depth to a lockie, he phoned the relevant keeper and reported back that he'd said the level hadn't dropped at all. Guess Fifty Shades and Unwinder took on a lot of weight somehow overnight.
I see Brayman's comment about previously being advised to allow for 3 feet of depth change when mooring, may have been the case in the past, however if using that criteria now, 90% of the moorings would be unusable, heck I'd bottom out in parts of our marina if the level dropped by 3 feet!
This is exactly what I have done. I have a screen shot from the EA web site (thanks John), showing the river dropping clearly below their "typical range" and informed my insurance company of such, which I will be sending them with the claim form. It is then up to them as to whether they wish to pursue the EA for damages, suspect they have a bit more clout than me doing so alone.
Good news is that Terry at Bray has replacement props ordered and is hopeful of having them fitted in time for me to still head off to London this weekend.
As John says, we moored with plenty of water on Saturday, Sunday my boat was so hard aground that I couldn't move it even with four of us pulling on the lines. The Port outdrive leg was obviously supporting the boat's weight (being the lowest part of the boat), as the boat would rock and the bow would turn but the boat wouldn't actually move anywhere. I could here the lift motor on the leg running but the leg would not budge (starboard one lifted ok).
When we reported the lack of depth to a lockie, he phoned the relevant keeper and reported back that he'd said the level hadn't dropped at all. Guess Fifty Shades and Unwinder took on a lot of weight somehow overnight.
I see Brayman's comment about previously being advised to allow for 3 feet of depth change when mooring, may have been the case in the past, however if using that criteria now, 90% of the moorings would be unusable, heck I'd bottom out in parts of our marina if the level dropped by 3 feet!
This is exactly what I have done. I have a screen shot from the EA web site (thanks John), showing the river dropping clearly below their "typical range" and informed my insurance company of such, which I will be sending them with the claim form. It is then up to them as to whether they wish to pursue the EA for damages, suspect they have a bit more clout than me doing so alone.
Good news is that Terry at Bray has replacement props ordered and is hopeful of having them fitted in time for me to still head off to London this weekend.
CJL
Well-Known Member
This is crazy,
Would you claim against a harbour master if they dropped the water level in harbour due to locking or leakage?
Did you check the depth before mooring overnight?
How much "factor of safety" did you allow under your keel when mooring?
Who damaged the props - you did trying to get the boat out!!!
Come on!!
Would you claim against a harbour master if they dropped the water level in harbour due to locking or leakage?
Did you check the depth before mooring overnight?
How much "factor of safety" did you allow under your keel when mooring?
Who damaged the props - you did trying to get the boat out!!!
Come on!!
Portland Billy
Well-Known Member
I've been mooring on the inside of the island for over twenty years, but found that last year there was a lot less water - especially at the downstream bit. Further along, using the 'shallow water' sign for the headline was fine (just below where the old (useful) footbridge used to be.
It's definitiely silting up at the lower end - I wonder of anyone will bother to do anything about it.
It's definitiely silting up at the lower end - I wonder of anyone will bother to do anything about it.
boatone
Well-Known Member
I used to moor in there with my Norman 32 and P32 but when I got the Pedro found that I couldn't get in. I have not tried since I got the Hardy. I must admit that I would not have thought of going in there with any of my boats in the recent conditions.
Re will "anyone" do anything about it i would suggest we need to identify "someone" who should do something about it. The EA, in my opinion, will decline any responsibility although I would be surprised if they weren't prepared to consider offering assistance with plant and logistics if the local authority were to take the lead. Lets face it, if RBWM actually bothered to collect mooring fees efficiently they would get quite a bit of income to help with the costs.
apollo
...
Tone, this is political speak - leave it to the EA to trowel it on. (Deep down you agree - i can feel it!!)
We know the old story of no money yada yada, but the flippin river has to be fit for purpose.
boatone
Well-Known Member
Just telling it like it is I'm afraid but no amount of complaining on this forum is going to solve the problem. As far as the EA is concerned it is fit for purpose and I don't hear or see other bigger, (self professed more constitutional and claiming more clout than the TMBA) boaters representatives doing much about it either ! As you belong to an ATYC member club why not harass them instead of me?
Dave_Seager
Well-Known Member
In "A User's Guide to the River Thames", available from the Environment Agency web site, it says "When stopping overnight or leaving your boat for any considerable time, do not moor in shallow water or with a tight rope or chain as water levels may fluctuate by as much as 1 metre in a few hours. If the level drops and your boat is beached or moored in shallow water, it may be damaged. If the level rises, and mooring ropes or chains are tight, your boat may take on water, be pulled under or break free."
You have been warned.
You have been warned.
TrueBlue
Well-Known Member
In a recent publication on the web of an ATYC meeting minutes it was claimed that ATYC represented all boaters on the River. It's a pity, therefore, that it doesn't make itself known more generally on this forum - on a regular basis rather than leave regular matters to concerned members on this forum.
534l4rk
Well-Known Member
The ATYC communicate with the clubs via ‘Notice Board’ information sent out by e-mail to club representatives. This is for downloading and exhibiting in members’ clubhouses. All ATYC business including ‘Notice Board’ information and minutes of meetings is available on their website and can be viewed by club and non club boaters. A new website is currently under development which has already been identified on this Forum.
I understand that there are other ATYC representatives who follow this Forum but it is not seen generally as the medium for ATYC communication. This is possibly due past comment made about the Officers and the organisation. I have taken stick on several occasions irrespective of stating that I am not on the ATYC Committee and that anything I post is my personal opinion which is not endorsed by the ATYC.
On this posting in my opinion CJL and Dave Seager postings are relevant altho’ I do sympathise with people having damage to their vessels in the cited cases.
I expressed concern in my posting on ‘Control of Weirs etc.’ related to effects of possible further reduction of Lock Keepers . This did not get much comment. Unless substantial funding for a fully automated Thames weir control system were to be provided I would think that incidents like the one at Windsor will be more likely in the future plus the potential for frequent flooding.
Finally, would RUG 7 not be the route to go altho’ I see no problem with clubs in the stretch enlisting comment from the ATYC ?
boatone
Well-Known Member
I do wish people would stop keep trying to play the "risks of flooding" card in relation to the reduction in lock keeping services. The fact is that once river levels rise to the point where all weirs are fully drawn there is nothing anyone can do to to control the situation until the level starts to drop back to more normal levels and weirs can start being closed in again. Even a resident lock keeper can do nothing once the weirs are full drawn except, perhaps, provide assistance in the event of people getting into difficulty.
Face up to it people. Rowers do not need locks, swimmers and fishermen do not need locks, kayakers do not need locks. The only substantial body of river users that need locks are motor boaters and most of the other user groups I have mentioned would positively welcome our absence. There are some businesses, particularly the marinas, that would fare badly if power boat numbers decrease but most local authorities do not have the budget to maintain and repair mooring areas and mooring charges alone will be nowhere near enough to match required expenditure to provide the facilities we would like. Wake up and get real - there is not enough money !
As for suggesting the RUGs are the right place to tackle these issues, in the words of John McEnroe - you cannot be serious!
