Higgs
-
Posts
5,588 -
Joined
-
Days Won
20
Content Type
Profiles
Forums
Events
Gallery
Blogs
Store
Posts posted by Higgs
-
-
9 minutes ago, matty40s said:
That's not the correct bridge
But is says 17 and 15 in the link. Ok. The strike was on 16. "vehicle strike which has badly damaged Barrow Bridge 16. "
-
Past there last week. The side by the sign was in the water. But both sides have been cracked for ages.
-
4 minutes ago, Alan de Enfield said:
And they don't pay a penny to moor.
And neither did the other poster have to, who decided that he'd not do the CCing and have the same circumstances. He paid for the extra.
-
45 minutes ago, Arthur Marshall said:
And continuous cruisers don't moor?
Yep, they do. And like you, they didn't need to go for a home mooring.
-
Just now, Paul C said:
No they pay more
They pay more, because they have more., but none of that extra payment is connected to the licence.
-
Just now, Lady M said:
Most home moorers do pay more to CRT. Their mooring fees would be lower if this did not happen.
They pay for mooring. Individual choice.
-
9 minutes ago, midnight cowboy said:
I think it's the best approach.
-
7 hours ago, LadyG said:
My understanding is that if the CRT can't manage the organisation it will be replaced. What good will that do?
There is no boating community that has one goal, one strategy, one plan. Its just lots of people who have boats which happen to be on inland waters. Some dont even live in Englsnd and Wales!
What good is the petty action that CRT have taken? And when supporting boaters go on about it, they talk a lot of their grudge against CMers. It's a meagre amount of extra income that the surcharge will bring in. About as noticeable as a gnat's bite on a Rhino.
The other indefensible argument of those supporting the supplement goes along the lines of - we have Home moorings, therefore we should be treated as already contributing more than CC'ers. Rubbish. If anyone thinks that CC'ers should be charged for the use they make of the canal, I think it is reasonable to apply the same rationale to anyone that uses the canal..., obviously, include people with home moorings. They are, after all, so concerned that the canal should be maintained properly, how could they morally refuse to accept higher charges for themselves. So, why mess around, slap the costs on all 30 odd thousand. It may happen, anyway.
With the CC'ers, it just gets everyone accustomed to the idea that everything could be extra, above your initial licence purchase.
-
1 minute ago, Machpoint005 said:
There is no distinction to be made, except that one group follows the rules and the other group doesn't.
As I said, the chargers make no distinction.
-
1
-
-
4 minutes ago, MtB said:
Yes there is an exemption in (ii) for boats being "used bona fide for navigation throughout the period for which the consent is valid", but boats CMing do not pass this test.
Which made the previous part of your post irrelevant.
But the current charging system hits CCers. No distinction is made between CCers and CMers. And some home moorers are trying to claim privileges attached to the licence. I think they should check their mooring contracts.
-
10 minutes ago, IanD said:
I have loads of tolerance for people with different lifestyles to me, regardless of their appearance or wealth or canal usage or anything else, so long as they follow the rules/laws and have consideration for others -- this applies on the canals as much as anywhere else.
I don't have much tolerance for piss-takers
Well, there's no law that says anyone needs a 'formal' mooring, there's no extra added value to a mooring contract, and I know you're taking the piss. You won't be reading this post, because you are intolerant, and appear to be a bigot.
-
25 minutes ago, MtB said:
Adversely impacts the canals I'd suggest, by providing a massive financial incentive for boaters to keep their boats out on the public towpath rather than on a formal mooring.
There's no need for a 'formal' mooring.
-
One poster wrote this: "The CC surcharge on the license fee goes at least part-way to correcting this anomaly (and increases CART income), and simply means that everyone -- CCer or CMer or HMer or EOGer -- pays a similar amount to CART. Or at least CCers don't continue to pay less -- some HMers who pay CART directly or via EOG obviously pay much more. It's a bit like closing a historical tax loophole that some people have taken advantage of but now protest when this is corrected... 😉"
The only reason HMers and EoG moorers pay more than CCers is because they are paying for exclusive moorings. They pay extra for the extra they choose to have. Moorings do not come for free. That is why they pay more, they have more. And both home moorers and EoG moorers should now be liable to be included in the PAYG culture when they are not on their moorings, that a lot seem to think should apply to CCers.
I think the mentality of some home moorers is: They think CCers should be liable to pay Hmers and EoG moorers some kind of indirect subsidy.
People that moor in marinas pay 9% of their mooring fee to the marina, so that the marina can pay one of its overheads to CRT. There's absolutely no connection there between the moorer and CRT. There's no directly paying anything to CRT by those moorers.
EoG moorers have a mooring contract liability. End of.
IanD and some moorers are full of BS entitlement delusions.
-
20 minutes ago, Arthur Marshall said:
What boating community? There's no such thing. You can't suddenly decide a bunch of people with entirely different, and often opposing, ideas as to what their boats are for, are a homogeneous community.
The vast majority of boat owners sit, like you did for years, in marinas and probably don't even know CCers exist, nor care. Most know nothing about EOG moorings, or the CC surcharge.
If the survey showed anything at all, it was that there is no "community". Active boaters are about the last remnant of a bunch of anarchistic individualists still at large in this country. Gods save us from "communities" and their self appointed leaders.
And there's no such thing as an end of garden mooring that would exclude you from being obliged to pay for your use of the canal system. It doesn't exist, but the suggested £20.00 a night mooring for you - a nice £140.00 a week for a little cruise. That'd rip right into your state pension.
-
Unless the charging of a suppliment is removed from CC'ers and the whole pricing is once again spread throughout, I see the present set up as ultimately shooting the boating community in the foot.
-
1 minute ago, Paul C said:
It looks like it did extend, at the start of the month. We’re now debating the rate.
It extends to that right in some home-moorer's minds. How are you going to deal with the situation of moorers in marinas, who have no contract with CRT. Not even their licence is valid in the marina waters.
-
4 minutes ago, Paul C said:
It’s exclusive that night though…..it’s not like anyone else could moor there.
Exclusive is exclusive. A right to moor where no one else has a right to moor. It still doesn't extend contractually as a paid-for right to the 2,000 miles of the cut.
-
6 minutes ago, Arthur Marshall said:
No, it's very simple. Anyone without a home mooring obviously moors on the towpath 365 days a year, and is billed accordingly. Anyone with a home mooring pays the equivalent of the local EOG fee, which covers mooring to CRT land for the same period. Sorted.
You pay for an exclusive mooring, not a 2,000 mile mooring anywhere on the cut.
-
1 minute ago, Alan de Enfield said:
Wasn't that on a food -forum ? where you were complaining that there was no legal requirement to pay extra for a pot to hold your Yoghurt, and that potted yoghurt should be the same price as 'loose' youghurt.
Oh, yes, how silly of me. Can you put your dad on?
-
3 minutes ago, Paul C said:
I can start a new thread on topics of my choosing. Can you?
Yes, of course I can. I choose this one, for now. I've been here for 12 years, I started one thread, possibly another, and that was about a yoghurt pot.
-
Just now, Paul C said:
Are you unable to start a new thread? I have this button:
Do you?
You can. Help yourself.
-
4 minutes ago, MtB said:
As you seem to want to discuss a different subject now, start a new thread on it.
You can separate the issues, I can't. You know the saying - give unto Caesar...
-
Just now, Machpoint005 said:
It's not your words that are the problem, it is the unique meanings you ascribe to them.
I think I can easily prove how to use the word plagiarism. With an example of what I'd consider is trying to palm someone else's work off as a deception.
-
2 minutes ago, Machpoint005 said:
Glad to see yet another rejection of the Higgs Alternative Dictionary.
And all my own words, no plagiarism here.
Where are all the boaters?
in General Boating
Posted · Edited by Higgs
Any where an ordinary bike can go, an electric bike of up to 250w motors can go. EAPCs. Electrically Assisted Pedal Cycles.