The caring face of CaRT

I WOULD like to correct the account given by Simon Greer of the reason for seizure of my boat, writes Geoff Mayers.

The Judgment stated that the 'relief they sought' could not be executed if I agreed to take up a 'mooring'; they wanted to take my boat and make me homeless. After every trick in the book amounting to abuse of process, perverting the course of justice, perjury and contempt of court, they 'seized' my boat when I had, actually, arranged a mooring.

Seeking a plausible reason

CaRT expected me to take a 'mooring' (unlawful, no planning permission etc.) and pay a licence and never leave the mooring. i.e. pay a mooring fee plus a licence fee to live in a marina and not venture onto 'their' water. (You will recall them discussing, recently, the rules relating to people with moorings who are not on their mooring. This was when they were seeking a plausible reason, for the court, to seize my boat).

The Judge stated that they cannot seize my boat as I don't owe them any money. They ignored this.

He stated that I could stay on my boat while they 'removed ' it from 'their' water, all they were allowed to do, and they had no right to 'remove' me from the boat. I was threatened with violence if I did not leave my boat. (Incidentally, the two police officers present thought it was all highly amusing as did the CaRT staff—Steve Holder, Paul Griffin, Jill Overum and Helen Waterman).

Left on the towpath

Presumably, based on their interpretation of 'their water' I could have just gone into the marina. They wouldn't listen. They were intent on craning out my boat, a 72ft wooden boat (Pearl, a Thomas Clayton boat). I was left on the towpath with a few possessions and a distressed cat. I couldn't risk any confrontation as I was, as I had informed them in relation to my arranging a mooring , looking after my mother, 91, who was in hospital and had come out to a care home the day before. I had to carry on helping her as if nothing had happened, as I am now.

I went to the boatyard where they were craning it out and asked Steve Holder, CaRT legal person, how I would get my boat back as I didn't owe them any money and had fulfilled the requirement of the Court (not actually written on the Court Order but in the Judgment) that I obtain a mooring.

He said there were the costs of them removing my boat which was on 'their water'. I said that, in that case, I could, presumably, pay them now, before they craned it out and damaged it, and return it to the arranged mooring. He said there were also court costs. I said that the Judge had stated there was no order for costs. He said they would return to the court to ask for costs. I said surely you should have got that order before you seized my boat. He said he wasn't prepared to discuss it.

Stole my boat

They 'stole' my boat and won't tell me where it is and now won't respond to my requests to deliver the rest of my possessions. I have had some of them delivered in a small van. Note that these same people seized "Maggie's'' boat and she has heard nothing from them and not had her property back.

The Judge has washed his hands of the matter, I have written to him several times. As I have no legal representation at present advantage was taken of the fact I am a 'litigant in person'.

All of this is because I challenged them, since 2007, about their policy of systematised abuse of vulnerable people, elderly and/or with health problems. This based, particularly, on evidence from the Cheshire area and Northwich office of British Waterways and, currently, the Wigan office.

Deliberate and systematised abuse

My intention in challenging them was to expose their deliberate and systematised unlawful abuse of people living on boats. I have ample evidence of this which I have presented to all relevant parties and now have evidence of the response of all those parties and the systemic inadequacy of the legal process and the routine corruption of that process and the unlawful and criminal behaviour of the 'Charity' and 'Public Body', i.e funded by charitable donations from the 'public' and from the 'public purse', the Canal & River Trust.