Jump to content

Paul C

Member
  • Posts

    11,821
  • Joined

  • Last visited

  • Days Won

    2

Everything posted by Paul C

  1. Its not ringfenced but it doesn't really matter, we can all see that its an indirect charge that moorers pay, and we all (because of the multiple threads on the topic) know the detail of the NAA.
  2. I don't think you do understand the term. And you telling me it is, doesn't mean it is. It just means you perceive it as such.
  3. But its not ringfenced. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ringfencing
  4. I don't think the money is ringfenced - in other words, while moorers are charged more, so are other marina users - the café customers, people who stop for diesel/pump out, workshop, etc etc. Its a business cost that the marina knows it needs to pay, so they ensure their income covers it so they can stay in business. Its also because there is a big hole in the banking in between the marina and the canal, that boats can freely (excuse the pun) pass through. If CRT relied upon honesty of boaters who only occasionally nipped out to use the canal to have a licence, while those who never did, didn't need one, CRTs income would be less - partly because of dishonesty (it would be world's easiest licence evasion, if cruising was limited), and partly because the vast majority would go for 6 month or 3 month licences to only cover their 'season'. Its an agreement you don't need to be involved in because the NAA is between the marina operator and CRT.
  5. They already are - CRT have decided to very broadly classify it into two bands of "use" - which coincides with CCer or home mooring status. CCers use CRT facilities, be that elsan/rubbish disposal much more often as a downstream consequence of living aboard (or spending much more time on the boat, due to the requirements placed on them by having a CC licence) or simply the facility of mooring on the towpath 365 nights of the year. I am sure some home moorers use the facilities more than others, and some of your exceptional friends, not at all. But for now we have the 2 bands.
  6. I would say getting off is a good approach, so long as you can get off the boat (ie with a ladder). Obviously you'd need to get tight on the side. The alternate is to put the centre line around a bollard and get it back to the stern so you can hold it, but this relies on there being a suitable bollard and your centre line being long enough to reach. Also on most (NOT ALL) locks, opening the paddle the opposite side to the boat will "pin" it to the wall, which helps.
  7. CRT should be consistent in their enforcement, and it would also be a good disincentive that they're SEEN to enforce too. While the 1995 legislation itself is okay, there's peripheral areas of law (such as, a higher penalty for the non-display of boat name/index/licence, for example) which would help them greatly. At the moment its cat and mouse with a very sophisticated mouse population vs an underfunded, lackadaisical cat.
  8. In any cutting with non-vertical trees, the ground is clearly slipping/rotating at a faster rate than the tree is able to grow, so its unstable.
  9. What kind of charging system were you expecting to find (apart from the alternator)? And also, if you've yet to find any fuses, it doesn't mean it doesn't have fuses, just that you've not found any yet. Worth being 100% sure of that before you go altering anything. After all, they are a BSS requirement and if its been active 1979-2019 it must have had one at some stage. And isolators, etc.
  10. You're right - its a perception thing - which has been made worse, I fear, not better by the publicity NBTA brings. Remember when they sought clarification on whether CCers could claim the extra one-off energy payments?
  11. Does it matter? The principle is, boats don't appreciate in value in the same way that land does.
  12. I'm not comparing CCers with criminals though. I'm comparing law-breakers with law-breakers. Also let's put it in perspective - "breaking" the CCing rules is a low level offence, similar to speeding. I see MANY, MANY speeders on the roads as I travel around the country. I don't hold a strong opinion on it, unless it directly affects me (at least once a week on the roads, someone will try to kill me - inadvertently). But myself, I don't speed, because I choose that choice.
  13. Its a red herring because its not about "alternative lifestyle" etc, its about whether CCers comply with the law or not. (And by that I mean, actions which are clearly against the spirit of the law and might lead to enforcement eg staying in one place for months, not the technicality of "I'm not a criminal yet because I've not gone to court and been convicted"). A corollary might be that instead of going out to work and earning £12/hour in a boring job, someone chooses an "alternate" income which involves stealing cars and selling them. One is within the law, one is not. There's plenty of CCers who DO comply with the law and plenty who, quite clearly, don't.
  14. Don't remember it but is that where the number of strands; and the size of each strand, is specified? So you could identify different (for example) 4mm2 cables, one with many fine strands which will be very flexible; and one with fewer thicker strands, not quite so flexible but probably cheaper.
  15. The "opting out" element is a red herring. Its just a philosophy towards borrowing money vs saving up first then buying/owning something. People get a mortgage on a house simply because they don't have savings or the ability to save in the timeframe they'd need it. So, they enter into a mortgage agreement. (Of course, its also worth considering this is secured lending rather than unsecured lending).
  16. Do you mean a mortgage? Of course, a mortgage eventually gets paid and then you own a property (probably including land) - an appreciating asset. A boat doesn't really appreciate.....of course, its like comparing chalk and cheese but its not as simple as "boating is cheaper"
  17. For the sake of clarity: either— (i)the Board are satisfied that a mooring or other place where the vessel can reasonably be kept and may lawfully be left will be available for the vessel, whether on an inland waterway or elsewhere; or (ii)the applicant for the relevant consent satisfies the Board that the vessel to which the application relates will be used bona fide for navigation throughout the period for which the consent is valid without remaining continuously in any one place for more than 14 days or such longer period as is reasonable in the circumstances.
  18. I think you are, AND a home moorer. An analogy might be if one parks their car in a public street, then gets into a truck. You are still a "car owner" because you were the last one to have driven your car, so any penalties relating to excess parking, obstruction, no insurance or road tax etc will still apply. At the same time, you're also a truck driver because you are now in a truck, driving it. CCer is a fairly neutral, commonplace term for "a boat(er) without a home mooring or other place..........blahblahblah" and is much easier to use in conversation. I don't think anything more than the distinction of the (no) home mooring arrangement, is applied by using the term.
  19. I believe what LadyG is referring to, is that some vendors won't allow a 100% domestic declaration if you're clearly a CCer (how they'd know, unless you told them, I don't know.....or maybe they guessed from the stuff on the roof). Or if you are clearly travelling in the boat, ie you stop at a marina but its not your mooring. Of course, the way the rules are structured is that its the responsibility of the boater to correctly declare the split, and its nothing to do with the vendor. Neither can/should they restrict the availability of splits. Their only legal obligation is to record the boat number and some other personal details as required by legislation on red diesel sales to boats.
×
×
  • Create New...

Important Information

We have placed cookies on your device to help make this website better. You can adjust your cookie settings, otherwise we'll assume you're okay to continue.