BW slammed over 'precedent' statement - Remedy

Remedy

It is suggested that the remedy to the complaint would be for British Waterways to issue the following apology to all of the press contacts that the press release was sent to, and publish it on the British Waterways and Waterscape web sites: 'BW apologises for misleading the press, the public and its boating customers about the significance of the judgement in British Waterways v Paul Davies. The judgement will not be binding on any courts because a County Court judgement does not create a legal precedent of any kind. The judgement will therefore only apply to British Waterways' relationship with Mr Davies and will not be applicable to any other boating customer'.

Misleading?

Obviously, it is up to the waterways ombudsman to decide if she will investigate the complaint and to rule on it. However, at face value it seems that British Waterways have deliberately set out to mislead in an attempt to mitigate the massive costs involved in bring further defended court actions.

It also appears that British Waterways has attempted to mislead by omission. The British Waterways press release states quite categorically that Davies will have to remove his boat from British Waterways waters within three months saying 'The Judge's decision is that Mr Davies now has three months (30th June 2011) to remove his boat from British Waterways' canals and rivers'. However, the judgement dated 13th April makes it quite clear that Davies does not have to remove his boat if he complies with British Waterways' licensing requirements. Indeed, it documents an attempt by Davies to obtain a home mooring which would enable him to stay!

Openness and accountability

British Waterways were asked a month ago, under the Freedom of Information act to provide a copy of the court's judgement to back up the claims made in its statement. It has also been asked to provide a copy of changes to be made to guidance as a result of that judgement. Neither has been produced.

British Waterways also stated that the judgement will be made available on its website. Again this has not been done.

Perhaps it is trying to put as much distance as possible between a misleading press statement and the judgement (provided to narrowboatworld, and reproduced) on which it was based.

Whilst many boaters welcome a firm line being taken with continuous moorers (i.e. those not complying with the law) it is completely wrong for British Waterways to mislead in this manner in an attempt to mislead boaters into not defending court action.