Leaderboard

The reaction to this article on a fb narrowboat group was much the same as those on here....which did surprise me if I’m honest...I expected at a least a few to say they had done nothing wrong etc. Quite refreshing! People like those in the article make life so much harder for other boaters in general...both practically by hogging moorings and also by affecting public perception of boaters in general.

Let's not forget though we are reading an article written by someone who likely has no knowledge of the canals and then edited by someone else who is also likely to be unfamiliar with the issues involved. No one here knows any of the back story that's led them to this point and tbh it's not really our business. I would just be a bit cautious making a judgment based on the information in that article. Not saying I support them, just saying some caution should be taken before judgement is made

Lived on a boat " Near Bradford on Avon " for FOURTEEN years claiming to be a ccer

Mr Holder said he had travelled 17.7 miles, moving every two weeks, and had pictures to prove it. Thats under 600 yds each week on average. Commonly known as bridge hopping. Perhaps enough to get to the water point and back? But the family have been told to remove their boat by 4 September, which would make them homeless. Flouting the conditions of their licence for 14 years, that can come as no surprise! Mr Holder said a permanent mooring could cost as much as £6,000 per year, plus the cost of a permanent licence at £1,000. Mine's a 60 ft boat and costs a third of that for those items - and he has to pay the same licence whether he moves or not, so that's irrelevant. "This prices most of us out. So they go to wealthy people so they can have a holiday boat, only used for a couple of weeks a year," he said. "This is gentrifying the canal and destroying our community." What a twisted logic! Does he not understand today's canal system exists only because of leisure purposes? Same as a football pitch or golf course - perhaps he should try living on one of those! The "poor me" gypsy mentality of these people is staggering.

But but why should he pay the same as others...he’s entitled to get everything for free....he’s got the NBTA involved so fellow snowflakes & freeloaders can soothe his troubled brow.

Mr Holder said he had travelled 17.7 miles, moving every two weeks, and had pictures to prove it. Then he is an idiot. Half an hour's further cruising over the last 6 months would have let him comply with CRT's minimum acceptable range. And let him keep his family home roughly where he wanted it. 20 miles is a day's cruise for me. A short day.

A few shots of a convoy trip from Limehouse to Brentford, via the Thames Barrier. The river was very busy! https://nbsg.wordpress.com/iwa-trip-to-margaretness/

I only know this because I've worked as a volunteer helping people in these situation. There are quite a few differences in the help given because children are involved. ETA - not with CRT specifically just homelessness in general.

Here is an update on C&RTs CC Monitoring programme : (Last year) New ‘continuous cruisers’ In November, we reached the first anniversary of our programme to actively advise new licence holders of the requirements of their licence. We have now begun to send out letters to those new continuous cruisers coming to the end of the first year who have failed to meet the requirements over the past year (despite regular reminders of their obligations as boaters without a home mooring), informing them that we’ll not be renewing their licence. Since January, 792 new continuous cruisers have received welcome letters, and we have been providing them with regular feedback if we have been concerned about their movement patterns. 63 are now in the enforcement process with a further 83 contacted to say we are concerned. Of these, we’ve contacted 23 with regard to refusing to renew their licences. So it looks like a goodly percentage of new CCers are 'satisfying' C&RT and those that don't are not getting their licences renewed

I’m not sure he does find it a problem. He’s probably just angling for a response from people here who spend too much time bothering themselves about what other people are doing. At the end of the day the arrangements between MK Parks and their mooring customers aren’t our business. Nor can I get too excited about whatever arrangement exists between MK Parks and CRT. JP

Snowflakes .... break the perceived rules and suffer the consequence. Mention the children and expect everyone to give in and let them do what they want. It's about time people that take the piss are dealt with properly - speaking from my highly un polished 20 year old boat .... Am I a wealthy ruiner of the canal system ?, I must have a harsh word with my self !!

Bought ours 2nd hand 20 years ago with 'thin' plate cos we was young, carefree.... And CWDF didn't exist. The current plan is to wait another 50 years, just as its about to sink, and use it as a viking burial vessel. We will get it towed out into the North Sea and set adrift. (just hope we are both dead at the time)

For clarity, it was that 1) he is bankrupt, 2) he lost the first stage, thus the legal costs now somewhat escalate, 3) there seems to be no appetite for (for example) a boating organisation or other interested party to fundraise or provide help in the funds, renders the affordability of appealing somewhat out of reach. The point being, that the time for the finer arguments over the law have now passed. He now has to deal with the practicalities of how law works within the court system. Which tend to suck, unless you have a rock solid case (and even then, defending yourself without the legal assistance of a barrister is fraught with hazards). So while in theory he can appeal, simply from the weight of the facts surrounding this case and other aspects of Tony's case eg lack of wider support, ill health etc etc, practically the door is closing upon this. I admire your meticulous approach to waterways law, of course it will always be an uphill battle against any public body or navigation authority, and sometimes its difficult to make your point properly to a judge. But I feel Tony's approach is quite different and lacks the finesse; which doesn't go down well with judges and other officialdom - some of whom are in a strong position to determine his future.

A case of glass houses and stones I would think. Tony made himself a very public and outspoken figure on this forum, and made his battles with CRT very public. He has also made all manner of untrue accusations about various people, myself included, when they were not in a position to defend themselves. If he had won anything he would have publicised it extensively so can't expect privacy if he has lost. .............Dave

Different company I am guessing. Looking at the OPs address I think he is referring to a boat fitter in Chelmsford not a hire company in Worcester and Rugby (who are part of the ABC group anyway). JP

That's a re-assuring start...

I went to something similar to College.......Colliery.

With a gap year at the start, and a sabbatical year out every 5th year.....

I once masked up using, in error, double sided sticky tape. I would humble recommend that you should not do the same.

Most people seem to want to stay where they grew up, or where they have worked for some time. When you have kids, you don't want to shiift them about too much if you can avoid it. It's pretty normal, really. Of the people I know, there's only one other who has moved around as much as I have (9 towns so far). You can't blame people for wanting it, but it still doesn't give them the right to it.

If your worried about meeting the trip boat mid journey, wait in Trevor or Vron until it heads back and follow him, it's only a 2ish hr journey from the aquaduct

If you walk down to your local shop 1 mile away, and then walk back home, your DISTANCE is 2 miles, but your RANGE is one mile. If you do that every day for a month then your DISTANCE will be 60 miles but your RANGE will still be only 1 mile. C&RT have 'suggested' that if you have a RANGE of less than 20 miles then you are unlikely to be complying. However if you shuffle back and forward 1 mile 25 times per year you have a RANGE of1 one mile and that suggests that you are tied to that area and are just 'bridge-hopping' and definitely not complying. Here’s what we’re looking for when we’re seeing if a boat meets our expectations for bona fide navigation:  Range: We look at the furthest points a boat has visited over the year, not just the total distance. While the British Waterways Act does not stipulate a distance, boaters often ask us to give them some indication of how they need to travel. We’ve said that it is very unlikely that anyone travelling a range of less than 20 miles (32km) would be able to satisfy us that they are bona fide navigating and that normally we would expect a greater range. If you’re cruising in a smaller range than this you may run into trouble when it comes to renewing your licence.  Overstaying: We check how often boats overstay, either for longer than 14 days on regular (unsigned) stretches of the canal, or for shorter periods at places like visitor or short stay moorings, where a sign will tell you what the time limit is. Many boaters will occasionally need to stay somewhere for longer due to breakdown, illness or other emergencies, so we look at overstays in light of the overall pattern of range and movement pattern. If you let us know when there is a pressing need for you to stay somewhere for a little longer, talk to us. Every year we grant hundreds of approved overstays, but we need to hear from you to be able to do so. Movement: Continuous Cruiser Licences have always been intended for bona fide (genuine) navigation around our waterways, not for staying in a small area. They were originally added to the British Waterways Act 1995 as a group of very passionate boaters argued that, because they continuously cruised around such a large extent of our network, it wouldn’t be fair or necessary to require them to have a home mooring as a condition of their boat licence. As well as establishing an acceptable range we’re also looking for boats to be generally on the move within that overall range: for example if a boat stayed in a five mile area for most of their licence and then went on one 60-mile trip over the course of two weeks, they’d be unlikely to meet our requirements for bona fide navigation. We don’t want to set a rigid pattern and we know that sometimes boats will turn round every so often if they reach the end of a canal, revisit a favourite spot once in a while or go back to refuel etc. What happens if someone can’t meet the movement requirements and needs to stay in an area? We encourage boaters to get in touch if they’re having problems moving in line with our guidance: we can only help if we know something is wrong. We issue regular reminders if a boat is overstaying and communicate actively to guide people and, if someone’s boat has broken down or they are ill, we can arrange for a boat to stay a little longer in an area whilst this is resolved. But it would be neither fair nor feasible to apply this to everyone who wants to confine their movement to a small area indefinitely, for potentially very long term reasons like work or school. If a boater wants to stay in a particular area then they will not be continuously cruising and this type of licence is not right for them and they should consider obtaining a home mooring. What about families – isn’t it difficult for those with kids to continuously cruise? The Trust understands that boaters with children of school age may have more of a need to stay in one area close to a child’s nursery or school. In general we don’t believe that we can simply waive our licence requirements (i.e. to navigate throughout the licence period) by allowing all parents with school-aged children to remain permanently in the area of the school, given that their children may attend a particular school for many years. The choice to be on a boat without a home mooring being at the individual’s discretion.

The next will be No. 2!

Very droll.

Can anyone translate the OP into plain English please? Despite reading it several times, I have no idea what the problem is with this bloke on his widebeam having his winter mooring! Maybe its the weird text formatting but I simply can't stay with it right to the end, all in one single para. (See what I did there?)

From the link: "Mr Holder said a permanent mooring could cost as much as £6,000 per year, plus the cost of a permanent licence at £1,000" So that's £7,000 a year, much the same as everyone else with a young family pays for their accommodation. What's the problem?

Looks OK from pictures, simple boat, possibly ex hire. My concern is that it's been on sale since March and has had a survey in August.....meaning someone has just walked away from buying it. You need to find out why, and if the survey highlights why the boat was epoxied in 2016.

...but longer at the front.?

Yes but why does Para's granny know so much about skinning cats?

Muppets find it difficult to do that.

If he was failing to make an incorrect point, he must surely have been successfully making a correct point.

I hope the OP claims for the docking and repairs, in the small claims court if necessary.

Yeah, ok, ok! I don't know about you though, DC, but I quite often moor up and walk somewhere. In this particular case, I've moored up at Trevor, walked to Llangollen (having a pint in the pub halfway and stopping to laugh at the utter chaos caused by boats meeting the trip boat in the narrows) and I've caught the bus back when it rained. Worked pretty well for me, and I've no reason to suspect it wouldn't be an even more useful strategy for a nervous hirer like the OP.

The bit I'd be more inclined to avoid is the Trevor to Llangollen leg. There's often a snarl up in the narrows that seems to take an inordinate time to sort out and its actually quite a pleasant walk. There's a pub about half way and you can also enjoy a smug moment when you pass the boat traffic jam shenanigans! When it rains, which it seems it can do occasionally in Wales, there's a regular bus back to Trevor.

ling is a nice boat but it's a shame it was put back, there are not many BW boats that have got there later cabins, radiant is prob one of the few

Morag I think you may have problems with grit blasting, it is such a messy process that few dock owners will allow it, look in the classified section in Waterways World for a dry dock near you and under Surveys. There is usually a waiting list for the docks, especially at this time of year. Most will allow you to do it yourself with the hire of a high pressure steamer / blaster, save a few pounds. Don't discard your old anodes if there is more than 25% remaining, have extra ones fitted alongside the old.