BWML Marinas - 'Unlawfully Living Aboard'

[junior]

Hi Keith

 

I believe that Grade 1 Mooring is liveaboard (fully residential) - and will normally include a premium (as an element of the local Council Tax)

A Grade two may have exactly gthe same facilities, but be a leisure mooring (i.e. not residential), and therefore work out cheaper - (though, of course, one shouldn't live there all the time )

 

I could be wrong but in BWML terms I believe that to be wrong. As I understand it they offer 3 types ofmooring. 'Residential' is exactly what it says on the tin and doesn't seem to be available at all of it's marinas. 'Grade 1' is extended or high usage, I.e. somebody who wants to spend say 3 or 4 nights a week on their boat but has an address elsewhere. 'Grade 2' is for the equivalent of a CRT leisure mooring.

 

I can see how it is difficult for the Grade 1 occupation to be enforced and I would imaging that people are taking up grade 1 and grade 2 moorings and in fact being unofficially fully residential on them. I would imagine they have decided to try and cra k down on this and are using the planing permission situation as their reason. It's more likely to be because they have realised people are getting away with paying less than they should be and want the extra money.

 

I recently went to a BWML marina to ask about a mooring vacancy. I plan to be 'living' on my boat week on week off and on the weeks I am not on the boat I will be at work out of the country. For the time I am in the UK the boat will in fact be where I 'live' but will use my parents address for post and official purposes. BWML told me I would be fine with a grade 1 mooring but not a grade 2 as it would be outside the terms of use.

 

I also rang my local CRT mooring manager who also told me with myplanned usage for the boat, I could 'live' on a CRT leisure mooring week on week off.

[MtB]

Hi Keith

 

I believe that Grade 1 Mooring is liveaboard (fully residential) - and will normally include a premium (as an element of the local Council Tax)

A Grade two may have exactly gthe same facilities, but be a leisure mooring (i.e. not residential), and therefore work out cheaper - (though, of course, one shouldn't live there all the time )

 

I think the point is, without resi PP, one shouldn't live there ANY of the time.

 

The problem lies in enforcement. The powers that be find it difficult to differentiate between a long holiday and actually living there. In addition, enforcement generally leads to an increase in homeless people the council are obliged to accommodate, so one dept at the council leans on the other NOT to enforce.

 

MtB

[jelunga]

Hi Keith

 

I believe that Grade 1 Mooring is liveaboard (fully residential) - and will normally include a premium (as an element of the local Council Tax)

A Grade two may have exactly gthe same facilities, but be a leisure mooring (i.e. not residential), and therefore work out cheaper - (though, of course, one shouldn't live there all the time )

BWML have 5 mooring grades.

Platinum at Sawley gives you 365 days use, a free engine service p. a. Rcr membership and free electricity up to a certain value.

Grade one gives 365 days pa use, water, electric chargeable, storage box and post handling.

Grade 2 gives no storage or mail facility.and water point during March to Nov

Grade 3 gives less.

Their Residential rate gives everything that Grade 1 does plus the ability to register as elector.

Grade 3

[MtB]

BWML have 5 mooring grades.

Platinum at Sawley gives you 365 days use, a free engine service p. a. Rcr membership and free electricity up to a certain value.

Grade one gives 365 days pa use, water, electric chargeable, storage box and post handling.

Grade 2 gives no storage or mail facility.and water point during March to Nov

Grade 3 gives less.

Their Residential rate gives everything that Grade 1 does plus the ability to register as elector.

Grade 3

 

The trouble is, I'd rather live in a house than on Sawley. I've only been there once but 'ghetto' was the feeling I picked up from the place.

 

It was godawful, I hated it. I cannot imagine anything less like the bohemian/boatman lifestyle the general public imagines 'living on the canals of England' is like.

 

Sorry to be dragging off topic

 

MtB

[jelunga]

The trouble is, I'd rather live in a house than on Sawley. I've only been there once but 'ghetto' was the feeling I picked up from the place.

 

It was godawful, I hated it. I cannot imagine anything less like the bohemian/boatman lifestyle the general public imagines 'living on the canals of England' is like.

 

Sorry to be dragging off topic

 

MtB

Each to their own. There are many disadvantages to Sawley. Dog poo being the biggest.

There are advantages. Low electric price and 5 pubs in 5 minutes walk for example

Edited February 7, 2013 by jelunga

[matty40s]

There are advantages. Low electric price and 5 pubs in 5 minutes walk for example

I prefer to take my time over a pint....

[brian1042]

BWML T&C:

30. Occupation of Vessels

30.1. The Owner shall not live permanently on board the Vessel nor shall they encourage or permit anyone else to do so, without the prior written permission of BWML. The exception being where a Residential mooring has been purchased from BWML on sites that have full planning approval granted.

 

This link has all the information on what and is not provided for various mooring grades:

http://www.bwml.co.uk/uploads/pdf-docs/2012_BWML_Mooring_Types_Summary_Document.pdf

[Alan de Enfield]

From the BWML Mooring Terms / definitions

 

There does appear to be very little difference between residential and Grade 1

The obvious differences are :

Grade 1 - water not guaranteed in winter

Grade 1 - Post handling(not a post box)

Residential is 'Local Authority' 'approved' and BWML pay Council Tax. I asked at Kings re the council tax and was told it was included in the mooring charge and that BWML then repay the Council.

 

A grade 1 mooring is charged at £167/mt so a 20 mt n/b would be £3340 per annum

The residential mooring is charged at £3512 per annum irrespective of length.

If we assume that a mooring is 'Band A' at £90/month then the council tax would be £1000 per annum -so-certainly for a longer boat, and the residential security it offers, a residential mooring would look to be good value.

 

Full Residential Berth

A planning approved berth offering 12 months or longer live aboard

status 365 days per annum.

• Minimum 16 amp electrical supply at berth - chargeable

• Free winterised water supply at berth

• Free parking subject to availability*

• Free storage box - subject to land take and availability

• Post box

• 10% discount from BWML Chandleries

• 6 weeks free hard standing for maintenance subject to

marina facilities

 

 

Grade One

Non residential leisure mooring allowing unlimited use.

• Minimum 16 amp electrical supply at berth - chargeable

• Free water at mooring subject to weather conditions

• Free parking subject to availability*

• Free storage box - subject to land take and availability

• Free post handling

• 10% discount from BWML Chandleries

• 6 weeks free hardstanding for maintenance subject to

marina facilities

 

Grade Two

Non residential leisure mooring with occasional long holiday stays.

• Minimum 8 amp electrical supply at berth - chargeable

• Free water at mooring

• Free parking subject to availability*

• 10% discount from BWML Chandleries

• 4 weeks free hard standing for maintenance subject to

marina facilities

• Overnight stays are not permitted between

1st November - 31st March (local variations may apply)

[MtB]

It will be interesting to see if this extends to CRT LTM's too.

 

It looks like it might be about to. CRT long term mooring auction listings now seem to have the following paragraph in the notes:

 

• A residential mooring is one which has planning consent from the local planning authority for use as a primary residence and is authorised for such use by BW. A leisure mooring is not to be used by people intending to use their boat as their main residence.

This may have always been there but I don't remember noticing it until now. Example here

 

MtB

 

Edited to add: This of course has the potential to blow up into an issue WAY bigger than CCing vs CMing, and at the same time further exacerbating the CC/CM issue. If CRT start terminating leisure moorings agreements due to peeps living aboard, then the natural reaction is for those peeps will be to cast off and CC or CM, thus saving the cost of renting the mooring. This will further deplete CRT's revenue stream, so I can imagine them only doing this if forced to by some other agency, eg the local authority.

 

But let's not forget that anyone choosing to CM still needs Planning Permission, obviously...

Edited February 7, 2013 by Mike the Boilerman

[David Schweizer]

As has already been indicated, Planning Consent for Residential moorings either in a Marina or on line, are within the gift of the Planning Authority. There are some rules in relation to areas resticted by special status, but unless things have changed recently there are just Planning guidelines. What that means is that the Planning Authority can impose such conditions on the consent as they think are appropriate to the location.

 

I have seen Planning Consent for residential use limited not only by the number of weeks in the year it can be used residentially, but also how many continuous weeks any one tenant can occupy the premises. Admittedly these have usually been in the green belt and on premises which are designed to be holiday lets, but the Planning Authority has chosen to imopose conditions which prevent permanent residence, for which planning consent would not be granted.

 

There is also the issue of Council Tax. Although there have been well publicised cases to the contrary, it is normal for Recreational Moorings to not attract Council Tax however, wheras Residential moorings automaticly attract Council tax (assuming Planning Consent has been granted). The Local Council has a legal duty to evict people living in premises for which residentilal status has not beenn granted, or require them to apply retrospectively for residential status, if the location suggests it would be granted.

 

When I was Clerk to the Local Council, threatened eviction occured several times in our Parish, where people had converted the inside of farm buildings and then rented them out as living accomodation. As far as the recent incidents are concerned, this wouod suggest that boat dwellers are not being victimized, even if that is what it feels like.

Edited February 7, 2013 by David Schweizer

[David Mack]

The Local Council has a legal duty to evict people living in premises for which residentilal status has not beenn granted, or require them to apply retrospectively for residential status, if the location suggests it would be granted.

 

When I was Clerk to the Local Council, threatened eviction occured several times in our Parish, where people had converted the inside of farm buildings and then rented them out as living accomodation. As far as the recent incidents are concerned, this wouod suggest that boat dwellers are not being victimized, even if that is what it feels like.

 

But whereas evicting occupiers from unauthorised barn conversions may solve that particular problem from the local authority's point of view, how would they cope if a residential boater occupying a mooring without residential staus, simply upped sticks occasionally and CC'd/CM'd for a few weeks (while continuing to pay for the mooring)? Wouldn't the absence end any period of deemed residential use, and restart the clock on returning?

[MoominPapa]

One criteria used is paying council tax elsewhere. When the council took a serious interest in marinas local to me, moorers who were on the council tax register for other addresses in the county were not approached, but any not already paying the council were asked for details of where else in the country they paid CT.

 

MP.

[David Schweizer]

But whereas evicting occupiers from unauthorised barn conversions may solve that particular problem from the local authority's point of view, how would they cope if a residential boater occupying a mooring without residential staus, simply upped sticks occasionally and CC'd/CM'd for a few weeks (while continuing to pay for the mooring)? Wouldn't the absence end any period of deemed residential use, and restart the clock on returning?

The simple answer is probably not, it is most unlikely that the limited occupancy Planning conditions which apply to most caravan parks, would have been incorporated into the Planning Consent for recreational moorings. People often spend quite long periods away from their house, but it does not make them non-residential, or excempt from Council Tax.

[MtB]

One criteria used is paying council tax elsewhere. When the council took a serious interest in marinas local to me, moorers who were on the council tax register for other addresses in the county were not approached, but any not already paying the council were asked for details of where else in the country they paid CT.

 

MP.

 

That seems a very good criterion to me, but for one (admittedly small) class of boater. How the council would use it to differentiate between people who have a leisure home mooring and CC regularly, and those who stay permanently in the marina living there full time?

 

The former would be caught by their net, and presumably enforcement commenced. Tricky, because when the boater is out CCing, the enforcement officers will struggle to serve notices on a boat that isn't there.

 

MtB

[David Schweizer]

That seems a very good criterion to me, but for one (admittedly small) class of boater. How the council would use it to differentiate between people who have a leisure home mooring and CC regularly, and those who stay permanently in the marina living there full time?

 

The former would be caught by their net, and presumably enforcement commenced. Tricky, because when the boater is out CCing, the enforcement officers will struggle to serve notices on a boat that isn't there.

 

MtB

If the boat is out Continuously Cruising and does so all year, there is no need for enforcement.

[MtB]

If the boat is out Continuously Cruising and does so all year, there is no need for enforcement.

 

Sorry, by 'regularly', I should have put 'intermittently'. No need for a home mooring if permanently CCing

 

MtB

[Paul C]

Its not continuous cruising then, its intermittent cruising. I imagine there's lots of issues in serving notices in circumstances like these, but won't stop them trying, probably quite persistently.

[MtB]

Its not continuous cruising then, its intermittent cruising. I imagine there's lots of issues in serving notices in circumstances like these, but won't stop them trying, probably quite persistently.

 

Good point. Semantics R us eh?!

 

It's easier to define what I meant actually by using the term 'bridge hopping'. The liveaboard bridge hopper, who bridge-hops totally legitimately because they pay for a home mooring even if they hardly use it, would fall foul of LA enforcement based on whether they pay council tax on a land address anywhere.

 

The enforcement officers would be pushing an open door, trying to stop someone using a leisure mooring as resi, who isnt!

 

Or maybe they are?

 

MtB

[Steilsteven]

Good point. Semantics R us eh?!

 

It's easier to define what I meant actually by using the term 'bridge hopping'. The liveaboard bridge hopper, who bridge-hops totally legitimately because they pay for a home mooring even if they hardly use it, would fall foul of LA enforcement based on whether they pay council tax on a land address anywhere.

 

The enforcement officers would be pushing an open door, trying to stop someone using a leisure mooring as resi, who isnt!

 

Or maybe they are?

 

MtB

 

 

According to the AINA advisory document regarding residential use of waterways, the law is that you can only stay over at your mooring for up to 28 days per year without planning approval. Therefore, to my mind, anyone charging extra for high usage ( or whatever they choose to call it) is doing so illegally because they are, in fact,officially allowing residential use where it's not permitted.

 

Keith

[carlt]

According to the AINA advisory document regarding residential use of waterways, the law is that you can only stay over at your mooring for up to 28 days per year without planning approval. Therefore, to my mind, anyone charging extra for high usage ( or whatever they choose to call it) is doing so illegally because they are, in fact,officially allowing residential use where it's not permitted.

 

Keith

Sorry but if you mean this paragraph:

 

 More difficult may be the situation where a vessel is used for residential purposes, as

a person’s sole or main residence, but does cruise regularly between stays

amounting to more than 28 days at its mooring base. Whether there has been a

material change of use in the location of the mooring will be a matter of fact and

degree having regard to the planning unit and the nature or character of the previous

and existing use.

 

or this...

 

Planning permission may be required for any

stay at a mooring longer than 28 days in any

calendar year.

 

I don't see how you can extrapolate these paragraphs into a "law". They appear to be written by somebody who is making an uninformed guess at how a planning authority may act.

[Steilsteven]

Sorry but if you mean this paragraph:

 

 

 

or this...

 

 

 

I don't see how you can extrapolate these paragraphs into a "law". They appear to be written by somebody who is making an uninformed guess at how a planning authority may act.

 

Because those guesses are based on planning law, as mentioned elsewhere in the document, regarding use of land.

 

Keith

[carlt]

Because those guesses are based on planning law, as mentioned elsewhere in the document, regarding use of land.

 

Keith

 

You appear to have more faith in them than they do...

 

Disclaimer

The content of this document is only intended to provide a general summary of the issues commonly

encountered with respect to residential mooring, in the context of relevant current law and policy. It should not be

relied upon by individual boaters, moorings operators, navigation authorities or other third parties as definitive

legal or other advice.

[Steilsteven]

You appear to have more faith in them than they do...

 

Well, us poor old Joe Public (unless we are prepared to take an expensive route) can only go by the information available to us.

 

 

Keith

[FidoDido]

Interesting corollary to this, the planning permission for the changes to the marina have a condition that no-one will be allowed to live there from now on. The awkward (for the marina owners) conditions recommended by the planning officer were not included.

Are they not required to accept all reccomedations? Surely cant pick just the ones that suit them?

 

I see you are now at Brandon Creek... watch out for the Ghost of Johnnie O'Hara! (a long story I'll tell you sometime over a pint!).. You there permanently, or still waiting for Denver/Salters?

[Paul C]

Good point. Semantics R us eh?!

 

It's easier to define what I meant actually by using the term 'bridge hopping'. The liveaboard bridge hopper, who bridge-hops totally legitimately because they pay for a home mooring even if they hardly use it, would fall foul of LA enforcement based on whether they pay council tax on a land address anywhere.

 

The enforcement officers would be pushing an open door, trying to stop someone using a leisure mooring as resi, who isnt!

 

Or maybe they are?

 

MtB

 

Agree, bridge hopping is a better term. I know you kinda mean 'continuous cruising' but that term - even though its not officially defined or used as such - is probably best reserved to instances where we're talking about a boat without a home mooring, which complies with (whatever the number of the subsection) of the 1995 Act is.

 

I've met our local enforcement officer and she explained that if someone took a mooring but didn't use it, and spent extended periods of time moored up canalside, then they'd simply interpret the law as if they didn't have a home mooring (ie they had to obey the slightly stricter requirements of not staying in one place for more than 14 days). Whether there is a legal basis for doing so, I don't know (I doubt though). And what the time you're 'allowed' away from your home mooring is, before they interpret you as not having one, is not known (at least by me).