Constant cruising

[IanD]

Please correct me if I'm wrong, but my understanding is as follows...

 

In the "good old days" there was no "continuous cruising" option, if you wanted to live on a boat on the canals you had to find and pay for a home mooring -- even if you never used it and spent all your time travelling around the country staying on visitors moorings.

 

People who genuinely did this objected (because they didn't see why they had to find and pay for something they never used) so CART allowed an exception (with a lower license fee) for those who neither needed or wanted a home mooring because they were always on the move -- so the genuine CCers were then happy.

 

The rules do clearly say that this "CC" exception is not available to people who just move around in a small area because of things like jobs or schools, in this case you need a home mooring. Because it's difficult to give any hard and fast limit as to what constitutes "CCing" -- and because if they did so people would probably do just that plus one yard -- CART left the distances as suggestions, with the final criterion as "satisfying the board".

 

Now more people are looking to live on the canals as a cheap housing option they want to stay in one area but also only pay for a cheaper CC license instead of having to find and pay for a more expensive (and difficult to find in the areas they want) home mooring. So they move as little as possible and object if/when CART spots what they're doing and threatens to withdraw their CC license or start legal proceedings -- and often plead poverty/hardship on social media or to the press about how hard it is on themselves/their children to be threatened with moving/eviction or whatever.

 

Almost all the questions about "just how far do I have to move?" come from people who are basically trying it on -- if they were being honest they'd admit that they're not really CCers but can't (or don't want to) find and pay for a home mooring. I do have sympathy for people who are poor and see living on the canals as a cheap option, but in this case they're wanting to have their cake and eat it -- or at least, eat it without paying for it -- and this is just as unacceptable as any other poverty-related fraud. It might not be their fault that they can't find a place to live on land that they can afford, but the lack of affordable housing doesn't mean they can break the rules about paying for living on the canals.

 

The problem is that if this "pushing the CC boundaries" continues the obvious course for CART to take is to withdraw the cheaper CC license and go back to the "good old days" position, then there can't be any argument about whether a boat is CCing or not -- you want to be on the canal, get a licensed home mooring and pay for it, or get taken to court. Just like driving a car on the road, there's one price for "road tax" (yes, I know...) regardless of whether you drive 100 miles a year or 100,000.

Edited February 28, 2019 by IanD

[doratheexplorer]

26 minutes ago, CompairHolman said:

The minimum requirements of the licence are still the licence, and the owner is fully entitled legally and morally to do that. 

 

The " spirit of the licence " is just someone's arbitrary opinion of what someone else should be doing. The people who have these opinions complain about others but don't even know the circumstances, a boat in my area has only moved a few miles in the last year, the owner has terminal cancer, so before you complain about others find out the circumstances or just mind your own business.

Hear Hear!!

[IanD]

29 minutes ago, CompairHolman said:

The minimum requirements of the licence are still the licence, and the owner is fully entitled legally and morally to do that. 

 

The " spirit of the licence " is just someone's arbitrary opinion of what someone else should be doing. The people who have these opinions complain about others but don't even know the circumstances, a boat in my area has only moved a few miles in the last year, the owner has terminal cancer, so before you complain about others find out the circumstances or just mind your own business.

AFAIK CART are perfectly willing to grant exceptions in cases of genuine medical need. This isn't the problem, the problem is people bending the rules in the full knowledge that they don't really meet the CC requirements, and that this either leads to terrible congestion in some areas or could lead to CART withdrawing the CC option altogether -- to the detriment of genuine CCers.

[ditchcrawler]

31 minutes ago, CompairHolman said:

 , a boat in my area has only moved a few miles in the last year, the owner has terminal cancer, so before you complain about others find out the circumstances or just mind your own business.

And I am sure they are doing it with CRTs blessing. 

[doratheexplorer]

Just now, IanD said:

Please correct me if I'm wrong, but my understanding is as follows...

 

In the "good old days" there was no "continuous cruising" option, if you wanted to live on a boat on the canals you had to find and pay for a home mooring -- even if you never used it and spent all your time travelling around the country staying on visitors moorings.

 

People who genuinely did this objected (because they didn't see why they had to find and pay for something they never used) so CART allowed an exception (with a lower license fee) for those who neither needed or wanted a home mooring because they were always on the move -- so the genuine CCers were then happy.

 

The rules do clearly say that this "CC" exception is not available to people who just move around in a small area because of things like jobs or schools, in this case you need a home mooring. No, the rules don't say that.  Because it's difficult to give any hard and fast limit as to what constitutes "CCing" -- and because if they did so people would probably do just that plus one yard -- CART left the distances as suggestions, with the final criterion as "satisfying the board".  There are no suggested distances.

 

Now more people are looking to live on the canals as a cheap housing option they want to stay in one area but also only pay for a cheaper CC license instead of having to find and pay for a more expensive (and difficult to find in the areas they want) home mooring. So they move as little as possible and object if/when CART spots what they're doing and threatens to withdraw their CC license or start legal proceedings -- and often plead poverty/hardship on social media or to the press about how hard it is on themselves/their children to be threatened with moving/eviction or whatever. How little or much they move is irrelevant.  The only relevant thing is whether CRT are happy.

 

All the questions about "just how far do I have to move?" come from people who are basically trying it on -- if they were being honest they'd admit that they're not really CCers but can't (or don't want to) find and pay for a home mooring. I do have sympathy for people who are poor and see living on the canals as a cheap option, but in this case they're wanting to have their cake and eat it -- or at least, eat it without paying for it -- and this is just as unacceptable as any other poverty-related fraud. It might not be their fault that they can't find a place to live on land that they can afford, but the lack of affordable housing doesn't mean they can break the rules about paying for living on the canals. Rules breakers are one thing.  The problem is with boaters who still point their fingers at people who aren't breaking any rules.

 

The problem is that if this "pushing the CC boundaries" continues the obvious course for CART to take is to withdraw the cheaper CC license and go back to the "good old days" position, CRT have no legal authority to do this, so fear not! then there can't be any argument about whether a boat is CCing or not -- you want to be on the canal, get a licensed home mooring and pay for it, or get taken to court. Just like driving a car on the road, there's one price for "road tax" (yes, I know...) regardless of whether you drive 100 miles a year or 100,000.

There you go, I've corrected you where you were wrong.

 

Fact is, there's a problem in London with boat numbers.  Responsibility for this should be laid right at the door of our current and previous governments since the 1980s who have utterly failed to get a grip of a broken housing market.  This will only get worse unless something very drastic is done now.

1 minute ago, IanD said:

AFAIK CART are perfectly willing to grant exceptions in cases of genuine medical need. This isn't the problem, the problem is people bending the rules in the full knowledge that they don't really meet the CC requirements, and that this either leads to terrible congestion in some areas or could lead to CART withdrawing the CC option altogether -- to the detriment of genuine CCers.

There's no such thing as 'bending the rules'.  People are either following the rules or they aren't.

[Paul C]

2 hours ago, doratheexplorer said:

 

 If a boater is clearly failing to meet the requirements, then fair enough, have a go at them;

 

The law is vague - deliberately so - and one of the phrases used in the wording is "the board is satisfied". Another is "bona fide for navigation".

 

If CRT aren't satisfied, are YOU satisfied that this is the scenario you've touched upon in the quote, ie its fair enough to have a go at them? 

[doratheexplorer]

2 hours ago, doratheexplorer said:

 

 

8 minutes ago, Paul C said:

 

The law is vague - deliberately so - and one of the phrases used in the wording is "the board is satisfied". Another is "bona fide for navigation".

 

If CRT aren't satisfied, are YOU satisfied that this is the scenario you've touched upon in the quote, ie its fair enough to have a go at them? 

If CRT aren't satisfied then they'll take action, following warnings.  In that situation my sympathy is much reduced.  As I keep saying, my beef is when CRT ARE satisfied, but other boaters aren't.  Using meaningless phrases like 'bending the rules'.  As I said before, this plays directly into CRT's hands - keep boaters squabbling amongst themselves and they'll never get anywhere, since they'll have no unified voice.

Edited February 28, 2019 by doratheexplorer

[Chris Williams]

1 hour ago, doratheexplorer said:

keep boaters squabbling amongst themselves and they'll never get anywhere, since they'll have no unified voice.

That is what the IWA was set up for, but within months they were arguing amongst themselves - Rolt v Aickman.

[beerbeerbeerbeerbeer]

Constant Squabblers. 

 

[cuthound]

On 27/02/2019 at 01:18, blackrose said:

Continuous cruising; constant cruising, consistent cruising... Any other variations? How about controversial cruising?

 

Counterfeit Cruising? ?

[Alan de Enfield]

6 minutes ago, cuthound said:

 

Counterfeit Cruising? ?

Hows about

 

Courteous cruising ?

[Murflynn]

casual cluttering

[Arthur Marshall]

Actually, in the goood old days when I started boating, the rules were the same but there weren't enough of us to cause problems, so BW never bothered much. Several of my friends lived within a few miles of Chester and never moved much - the assumption then was as long as they crossed a parish boundary they were ok. Those of us who preferred a permanent place and somewhere to park the car lived on leisure moorings. 

Then came the housing market disaster and a lot more people on boats , big cuts to the budgets, a couple of tv series about the joys of waterways, new big expensive boats in big expensive marinas that grumbled about moorings being cloogged up by scruffy buggers like me (legally, I stress), more cuts, more boats... CRT with highly paid board members who care more about their bonuses than lock gates,and who know about enforcing rules and adding up numbers. 

 

At this point I realise I've lost track of my argument... 

[RLWP]

1 minute ago, Arthur Marshall said:

At this point I realise I've lost track of my argument... 

 

You were settling in for a good rant. Take a deep breath and off you go

[Tom Morgan]

6 hours ago, IanD said:

Now more people are looking to live on the canals as a cheap housing option they want to stay in one area but also only pay for a cheaper CC license...…………………..

 

The problem is that if this "pushing the CC boundaries" continues the obvious course for CART to take is to withdraw the cheaper CC license...………………….

I didn't think there was an actual CC licence which is cheaper than everyone else's.  I thought we all pay the same (dependent upon boat length) and I thought that CC-ers were just excused the requirement to have a home mooring as a licencing condition.  

[Alan de Enfield]

18 minutes ago, Tom Morgan said:

I didn't think there was an actual CC licence which is cheaper than everyone else's.  I thought we all pay the same (dependent upon boat length) and I thought that CC-ers were just excused the requirement to have a home mooring as a licencing condition.  

Correct - but in exchange they have commitments that they must agree to, which boats with a Home Mooring do not have to agree to.

[beerbeerbeerbeerbeer]

Constant Chunnering

[LadyG]

When shove comes to push, navigation is travelling from one place to another using navigational aids. I don't really think those people in London who swop moorings on a Saturday can be described as "Navigating the Thames".

[ditchcrawler]

12 minutes ago, LadyG said:

When shove comes to push, navigation is travelling from one place to another using navigational aids. I don't really think those people in London who swop moorings on a Saturday can be described as "Navigating the Thames".

No far from it, more like the Paddington Arm of the Grand Union or the River Lee and maybe the Old Ford

[Captain Pegg]

15 minutes ago, LadyG said:

When shove comes to push, navigation is travelling from one place to another using navigational aids. I don't really think those people in London who swop moorings on a Saturday can be described as "Navigating the Thames".

Navigational aids!

 

Locate the banks, aim between them.

 

Or maybe you mean a Nicholson guide to tell you where the next water tap is.

[Chris Williams]

Do my specs count as 'Navigational Aids' ?

[howardang]

1 hour ago, LadyG said:

When shove comes to push, navigation is travelling from one place to another using navigational aids. I don't really think those people in London who swop moorings on a Saturday can be described as "Navigating the Thames".

Navigation is frequently defined as both an art and a science. It is knowing where you are, and how to go to where you want to go safely and efficiently. Swopping moorings or crossing oceans it all comes under the definition of Navigation. 

 

Howard

[RLWP]

8 hours ago, Chris Williams said:

Do my specs count as 'Navigational Aids' ?

Definitely! Don't go boating without them

 

Please...

 

Richard

 

[Paul C]

21 hours ago, doratheexplorer said:

 

If CRT aren't satisfied then they'll take action, following warnings.  In that situation my sympathy is much reduced.  As I keep saying, my beef is when CRT ARE satisfied, but other boaters aren't.  Using meaningless phrases like 'bending the rules'.  As I said before, this plays directly into CRT's hands - keep boaters squabbling amongst themselves and they'll never get anywhere, since they'll have no unified voice.

Apologies for the delay in the reply. I basically agree with you - the 'line to cross' or the 'standards' should be uniform, those imposed by the legislation; and that whilst its not black and white in the same sense that a speeding conviction is possible at 30.00001mph and not 29.99999mph, its actually not rocket science to interpret. And that some people seem to enjoy imposing their own moral standpoint on a topic which they may be intimately involved in, but are probably only distantly related to, and unaffected by. But then that's what forums do/are - a bunch of opinions which differ. I have disagreed, I'm sure, in the past, but I have always shown respect for the other party. It seems its become a trend the past few years (particularly on this forum, but there are others, it is not unique to here), that behaving online with a little bit of decency or respect is unfashionable.

[Tom Morgan]

17 hours ago, Alan de Enfield said:

Correct - but in exchange they have commitments that they must agree to, which boats with a Home Mooring do not have to agree to.

Absolutely.