MLC sets the matter straight

THERE has been a great deal of comment by various people regarding the boat belonging to Peter Demkiw that was burnt-out and the Middle Level Commissioners (MLC) part in this, and the Commissioners have responded, as Kelvin Alexander-Duggan writes:

Mr Smith, Chief Executive of The Middle Level Commissioners, who though on holiday, has taking the time to respond quickly to Dave Watson's wild claims concerning the boat, and has sent me copies of the emails involved.

All of which paints a different story from that given by Dave Watson. I can confirm that it was the police that informed the MLC that the boat may be derelict and abandoned.

Mr Smith's Statement

I am not in the office this week but can respond as follows, so that your readers may be aware of the Commissioners' role. I attach a copy of an email received last week from Mr Demkiw's representative, together with my reply. The vessel was moved as a sunken boat and, in fact, it was the police who advised the Commissioners that it might be abandoned.

Mr Demkiw was given the opportunity to make the removal arrangements claimed. His response was that he was in Yorkshire, had no money and could not do so. At no time were we advised that any arrangements had been made. Indeed, had he done so, with a reasonable time frame, he would have been allowed to proceed. The vessel was removed because it significantly blocked the navigation and I suspect that the majority of your readers would have been concerned if we had not acted.

I am however unaware of a previous notice served on this vessel and, at the time of the fire, I am not aware that any action was proposed against the boater. We did not classify the boat as derelict or abandoned as, as I have mentioned, it was removed under the powers relating to sunken boats, not those abandoned.

As regards costs, the bye law authorises us to recover costs and sell the vessel to recover them if need be. At present the boat is in our depot, awaiting any proposals from Mr Demkiw to recover it.

The time-line

30th July

4.00am. Fire service called by a trucker sleeping in his cab in the King's Dyke lay-by on the A605 advising that a boat was on fire.
4.15am. First engines arrive and proceed to put out the fire.
5.00 am. Fire out, crews return to base.

9.00am. Police arrive and are informed by locals that the boat was possibly derelict and abandoned. (In view of the outside state, not unsurprising.)

9.50am. Mr Fenn was advised by the Cambridgeshire Police that a boat which may be abandoned was on fire on Kings Dyke. Mr Fenn confirmed that the Commissioners would look into the matter. An employee was sent to the site to advise him of what was there and Mr Fenn was subsequently advised of the circumstances.

11.10am. Peter Demkiw [the owner] contacted Mr Fenn who made it quite clear to Peter Demkiw that the vessel was sunk and a serious obstruction to navigation and that Peter Demkiw had immediately to remove it from the watercourse, failing which the Commissioners would exercise their statutory powers to do so.

Peter Demkiw's only response was to indicate that he was in Yorkshire, had not insured the boat and had no money and therefore could not deal with the matter. He did not at any time advise Mr Fenn that he lived on the vessel. In view of the fact that Peter Demkiw was unable/unwilling to remove the vessel, Mr Fenn then instructed Radcliffe's to raise and remove the boat.

3.00pm. Mr Fenn spoke to Peter Demkiw to advised him of what was occurring. Peter Demkiw's response was to the effect that the Commissioners had to do what was necessary. At no point did Peter Demkiw refer to anyone with whom he had made arrangements to remove the vessel and nor did he at any time mention permission being required to enter MLC land.

Following morning

On the following morning, 31st July, Peter Demkiw spoke to Mr Lakey. Peter Demkiw then indicated that he might possibly be able to make unspecified arrangements at some unspecified time to recover the vessel.

Mr Fenn advised Peter Demkiw that therefore the vessel would be removed and taken to the MLC depot, where it presently is, since at no time during this operation did Peter Demkiw or anyone else on his behalf mention having made arrangements to recover the vessel.

Had Peter Demkiw in fact made the arrangements—that Dave Watson and Chris Maidment claim— and been able to give the Commissioners a proper time-window in which the vessel could have been recovered, bearing in mind the needs of other users of the waterway, he would have been allowed to do so.

To sum up

Whether or not the vessel was abandoned is of course irrelevant, since it was removed as a sunken vessel, which it clearly was, using powers contained in the Middle Level Act 1874 and the Middle Level Navigation Byelaws. Byelaw 17 of the Navigation Byelaws requires the owner of a sunken vessel to remove it 'forthwith' and does not provide that the Commissioners need to give any prescribed notice. This matter of course in any event required immediate action to be taken, as Peter Demkiw's vessel was substantially impeding the navigation.

Both Dave Watson and Chris Maidment have been spreading misinformation to the Press to stir up hate against the Middle Level Commissioners, in a plan to paint the MLC as villains of the worst kind, therefore misleading a large number of people that the Commissioners made Peter Demkiw homeless. Mr Smith or any of his staff did not set fire to Peter Demkiw's boat thereby making him homeless. He would hardly be living aboard it now, even had the Commissioners not intervened.

A farce

Again, claims that the Commissioners delayed a police investigation for arson and theft is a farce. The crime scene had already been released by the police. Any forensic evidence would have been destroyed by the fire and the later sinking of the boat.

As to Commissioners demanding an extortionate amount of money for salvage costs. £5,800 is not extortionate for a salvage job of this type.

The boat was illegally moored along-side the Kings Dyke lay-by on the A605 at Kings Delph (Peter Demkiw, had, by his own admission to the MLC, made no attempt to enquire as to whether mooring on Kings Dyke was permitted). This lay-by is a popular overnight stop for truckers, there is also a trucker's café on the site as well.

The engine removal

It is claimed that the engine had been removed by the thieves before the fire. Even a modern light-weight engine like a Beta 43 weighs 243kg/535lbs, The sightly smaller Beta 38 still weighs 170kg/375 lbs, this is without the gearbox. You would need an overhead hoist or crane to remove the engine. Someone would notice. You could not man-handle the engine out of the boat and up the bank without making a fair amount of noise at night without waking one of the truckers up.

In what few cases there are, the boat has always been moved some (miles) distance away and then abandoned after stripping the boat. Apart from one case in 1984 at Sutton Stop during the 1984 Inland Waterways Association Rally (Thanks to Zenataomm of the Canalworld Forums for this information) where a converted Coburn & Cowpar motor had it's engine removed. The owners weren't on board, they'd left it moored on the outside of another boat with the intention of moving it the following weekend. Damage on the offside gunwhale indicated it went out through engine side hatch and the same way through a side hatch onto another boat.

Very rare

On the whole, inboard engine theft is very rare; on the inland waterways less than a dozen cases a year. Had the boat been insured, the claims inspector would notice this and treat the insurance claim as suspect, as in some cases the engine and other bits had been in fact removed by the owner and the boat then burnt (as the hull may have needed heavy repairs before the fire) as part of a insurance scam.

For quite sometime Peter Demkiw has had a total disregard for the the rules and by-laws of the Middle Levels. He has by his own admission, made no attempt to enquire as to whether mooring on Kings Dyke was permitted or as to the rules relating to the Middle Level navigations. As to his two friends Watson and Maidment, why did they not help him before the fire to find a legal mooring and help him, as it is claimed that he was sick, to claim the benefits to which a sick person is entitled?

Fenland Hall do pay mooring fees and March does have a very good Citizens Advice Bureau. There is also a PDSA clinic in Peterborough, therefore removing a need to cart a poor sick dog to Yorkshire.