well said .we can do without his likes on the canals .tell that to your editor.
--- In [email protected], "Bob Wood" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > > On 11/03/2008, Adrian Stott <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > > simon hall <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> > > wrote: > > > >1. I am NOT a residential boater ! > > >2. BW Have NEVER offered me suitable alternative moorings ! > > >3. Where is my apology ? > > > In Waterways World, 2007 July, page 51 there is a report on BW's > > initiative to reduce the number of towpath moorings. BW is quoted as > > saying that for every ten new offline moorings created, ten towpath > > moorings will be closed. > > > > In the Sawley area, 280 new moorings were created at Pillings Lock on > > the Soar. > > > > BW has told me that it informed all those on the towpath moorings it > > would not be renewing (I believe all those moorings were on one- year > > terms, and that BW had the right not to renew them) at Sawley and > > Beeston that moorings would be available at Pillings. > > > > In Towpath Talk of 2007 July 12, page 2, BW is reported to be > > attempting to persuade those using towpath moorings not to be renewed > > to move to Pillings.. > > > > Operators of some off-line moorings are unwilling to accept boats used > > residentially. However, there is no such problem with non- residential > > boats (unless of course they have some other significant flaw, such as > > lack of a licence or BSS, or offensive scruffiness). > > > > As a result, I stand by my statement. > > > > So my answer to the question in 3. above is "Where's mine?" > > > Adrian > > Is it any wonder that people think of you as a boor. You have written > absolutely nothing to refute either of simon's assertions that he is > not a residential boater and that he has never received an offer of > suitable alternative moorings. Quoting woolly passages from Waterways > World and Towpath Talk do nothing to prove that what simon says is not > absolutely true. > > I do wonder why you consider that you are due an apology in view of > your offensiveness and deceptive statements in relation to simon's > individual case. >
