Jump to content

Continuous Cruising In London With Full Time Job. Can it be done?


Featured Posts

8 hours ago, Señor Chris said:

Which doesn't justify CRT flipping the law around with their interpretation.

 

 

The law does not define bona fine navigation within the act, so somebody has to give an interpretation otherwise nobody knows what is expected.  In this case the body responsible for enforcement (CRT) have given their interpretation, if somebody with enough money wishes to go for a judicial review and challenge it, they can.  Good luck to whoever tries to build a fighting fund.......

 

I personally would not contribute to that fund as I would be amazed if any court felt that only moving every two weeks for a total range of about 25 miles per year was unreasonably excessive for bona fide navigation.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

11 hours ago, Mike the Boilerman said:

 

The law IIRC allows for breaks in a cruise of up to 14 days.

 

A number of boaters have flipped this around and interpret this as meaning they can remain stationary provided they have one hour cruises, once every 14 days.

 

Complies with the letter of the law but not the intention behind it, which is why some peeps have a problem with that and call them CMers. 

 

 

It doesnt need to be an hour, 1Km is all thats required to move from one place to another.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

4 hours ago, Chewbacka said:

I would be amazed if any court felt that only moving every two weeks for a total range of about 25 miles per year was unreasonably excessive for bona fide navigation.

So why do CRT falsely imply that it needs to be continuous?

 

1 hour ago, Murflynn said:

If you need clarification then you are not a BONA FIDE navigator. 

Nonsense - that's like saying that if you need to seek tax advice then you are a tax dodger. Clarification IS needed precisely because CRT have adopted such misleading terminology.

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

8 minutes ago, Señor Chris said:

So why do CRT falsely imply that it needs to be continuous?

 

Nonsense - that's like saying that if you need to seek tax advice then you are a tax dodger. Clarification IS needed precisely because CRT have adopted such misleading terminology.

 

The Act is ambiguous, and so like all is open to interpretation. "Continuous cruising" is an attempt to clarify "bona fide navigation". Whether it succeeds or not is moot and in the end is playtime for lawyers, which is why they are rich, we aren't, and CRT loses a lot of money because of those who want to bend the system to suit themselves, rather than the general user. 

PS anyone who seeks tax advice when they don't want to reduce their tax bill is not only weird, but probably unique. Everybody dodges tax when they can, and so they should... 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

24 minutes ago, Señor Chris said:

 

 

Nonsense - that's like saying that if you need to seek tax advice then you are a tax dodger. Clarification IS needed precisely because CRT have adopted such misleading terminology.

 

you have demonstrated my point perfectly, thank you. 

 

clearly you don't believe that the canals are intended to allow you to move around the system in a reasonably progressive manner;  if you do so, the terminology used by CRT is irrelevant, however if you insist on pushing the margins, then you are not a bona fide navigator.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 hour ago, Señor Chris said:

So why do CRT falsely imply that it needs to be continuous?

 

Nonsense - that's like saying that if you need to seek tax advice then you are a tax dodger. Clarification IS needed precisely because CRT have adopted such misleading terminology.

 

Continuous does not mean 24hr per day for 365 of the year, that would be impossible especially for a single handed boater.

So one either cruises from time to time such that the stop periods require a mooring, or one moves often enough to not need a mooring, so one is continually moving from place to place.  Continually moving from place to place does not preclude short stops in each place.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

4 minutes ago, Chewbacka said:

Continuous does not mean 24hr per day for 365 of the year, that would be impossible especially for a single handed boater.

So one either cruises from time to time such that the stop periods require a mooring, or one moves often enough to not need a mooring, so one is continually moving from place to place.  Continually moving from place to place does not preclude short stops in each place.

I take continuous to mean progressive.

 

For example if I drive down the M6 from J44 to J20 stopping for a break at services this is a progressive journey or to use another word a a continuous journey.

 

If I drive from J44 to J36 and turn round and drive back to J41 turn round and go to J 39 etc this isn't IMO a progressive journey and so not continuous.

 

Just my opinion other opinions are available.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

10 minutes ago, Chewbacka said:

Continuous does not mean 24hr per day for 365 of the year, that would be impossible especially for a single handed boater

Damn.  All that practising pissing over the side whilst steering has been wasted?

  • Greenie 1
  • Haha 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

fact is that if I want to move around a small part of the system, moving the minimum amount necessary to satisfy what I perceive to be CRT's requirements, or what I perceive to be enough to satisfy a judge and jury, in order to be able to remain close to my job, then I should GET A MOORING.

 

trying to equate that to continuous cruising is just nonsense.

  • Greenie 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

33 minutes ago, Jerra said:

 

 

If I drive from J44 to J36 and turn round and drive back to J41 turn round and go to J 39 etc this isn't IMO a progressive journey and so not continuous.

 

Just my opinion other opinions are available.

You need a new satnav

Link to comment
Share on other sites

30 minutes ago, Murflynn said:

fact is that if I want to move around a small part of the system, moving the minimum amount necessary to satisfy what I perceive to be CRT's requirements, or what I perceive to be enough to satisfy a judge and jury, in order to be able to remain close to my job, then I should GET A MOORING.

 

trying to equate that to continuous cruising is just nonsense.

But who defines what is a small part of the system? Back to the topic...there are many parts of the country with an awful lot of waterway within commuting distance. 

  • Greenie 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 hour ago, Dave123 said:

But who defines what is a small part of the system? Back to the topic...there are many parts of the country with an awful lot of waterway within commuting distance. 

Whoever runs it makes the rules. Someone has to. Users can challenge if they wish. The winner is usually the one with most money. 

Keep a low profile, don't push your luck and generally you can get away with murder. Behave like a pillock, shout loudly about being unfairly treated and you're in trouble. 

  • Greenie 3
Link to comment
Share on other sites

It always comes back down to the same arguments by CCers (or CMers) about how many narrowboats can dance on a short stretch of canal...

 

The intention behind a "CC" licence ("without a home mooring") is simple, and has been stated by CART many times. If you want to live on a canal boat in one small area to be near to jobs or school or whatever similar reason, your primary use of the canals is for living on in one place and you need (and should find and pay for) a home mooring.

 

For people who roam around the system instead of staying in one small area as above, there is an exception -- the "CC" license -- which says you don't need a home mooring, because it's unfair to make people find and pay for something they never use, and because they're not wedded to one small area or place or whatever you want to call it, they're "cruising".

 

As far as I can see, all the people arguing about *exactly" what the CC rules are (like on the K&A and in London) know full well that they *ought* to have a home mooring because they really want to stay in one place, but either can't find (because they don't exist or are all full) or don't want to pay for a home mooring. They know they're bending the rules, CART know they're bending the rules, most people on this forum know they're bending the rules, but they often get away with it because of lack of enforcement -- and when enforcement happens they scream blue murder to the press and TV about how unfair it is, how is little Johnny supposed to go to the local school if we have to keep moving? (in spite of the fact that CART clearly say this is one reason that you *do* need a home mooring)

 

Arguing endlessly about the precise "rules" is basically to try and hide the fact that they want to take advantage of a CC license/exemption while not being the kind of boater it was created for.

 

If they carry on like this there's only one obvious way out; since there's no way CART can enforce any rule which is being so widely flouted, they'll just remove the "CC" exemption and say that everyone who owns a boat and a license must have a home mooring -- just like the old days before the exemption was introduced. Then it'll be like MOTs and insurance for cars -- you either follow the law and have both, or break the law and have neither -- which is far easier for CART to check, you have to provide proof of a home mooring to get a boat license, any boat without this is liable to be removed.

 

The upshot is that the bogus CCers and CMers will have bugger*d it up for all the people who do cruise round the system and don't try and bend the rules... ?

  • Greenie 4
Link to comment
Share on other sites

16 minutes ago, IanD said:

since there's no way CART can enforce any rule which is being so widely flouted, they'll just remove the "CC" exemption and say that everyone who owns a boat and a license must have a home mooring -- just like the old days before the exemption was introduced

That would require new waterways legislation.  CRT can not just ignore the 1995 Act, much as they might like to.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

2 minutes ago, TheBiscuits said:

That would require new waterways legislation.  CRT can not just ignore the 1995 Act, much as they might like to.

 

They don't have to ignore the Act. They can just declare 'the board' is 'not satisfied', refuse a license, and wait for the piss-taker to start judicial review proceedings to force them to issue a license. That would draw a line in the sand.  

 

In fact I really don't know why they haven't done this already. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

So you don't apply for a licence, have no name or number on your boat, and tell anyone who asks for i d to shove off. 

I suspect what will happen is CRT will turn long stretches of towpath into long term moorings - it's another income stream and nonmoving boats put little wear and tear on the infrastructure. Whether we like it or not, people have to live somewhere, and when houses are unaffordable to buy or rent, you either need a housing price crash, something else cheap, or employers paying sensible wages. The last won't happen, the first might but is unlikely, which leaves... 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

5 minutes ago, Arthur Marshall said:

So you don't apply for a licence, have no name or number on your boat, and tell anyone who asks for i d to shove off. 

I suspect what will happen is CRT will turn long stretches of towpath into long term moorings - it's another income stream and nonmoving boats put little wear and tear on the infrastructure. Whether we like it or not, people have to live somewhere, and when houses are unaffordable to buy or rent, you either need a housing price crash, something else cheap, or employers paying sensible wages. The last won't happen, the first might but is unlikely, which leaves... 

What you need is a government, and local councils, willing to build housing for rent. It can actually be built very cheaply, and rented very cheaply but, on the whole, they wont do it.

 

Government says it is building thousands of houses each year, but what is actually happening is that new builders are building the houses, and they are definitely not affordable.

 

I heard recently that Liverpool have created some new council housing where houses are available for about £350 per month. I cant remember where I heard it, not sure if the rent figure is precise,nor how big the houses are........ assuming it's true, and reasonably accurate, it shows what can be done..... if there is the will.

 

I dont think there is the will :( 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

4 hours ago, Dave123 said:

But who defines what is a small part of the system? Back to the topic...there are many parts of the country with an awful lot of waterway within commuting distance. 

if you feel the need to debate the definition of 'a small part of the system' then you are not a bona fide navigator. .......  hung by your own petard.

 

you can also debate what is commuting distance - I used to meet folk commuting from Swansea to London.    .... but it is irrelevant;  I said 'close to my job'.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

2 hours ago, Richard10002 said:

but what is actually happening is that new builders are building the houses, and they are definitely not affordable.

So who's buying them? here in West Wales there are hundreds of executive homes going up and selling. Where are all the 'executives' coming from , most people struggle on minimum wage

Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 hour ago, Murflynn said:

if you feel the need to debate the definition of 'a small part of the system' then you are not a bona fide navigator. .......  hung by your own petard.

 

you can also debate what is commuting distance - I used to meet folk commuting from Swansea to London.    .... but it is irrelevant;  I said 'close to my job'.

Current Jobseekers guidelines state they have to be able to travel to 1 and a half hours to an interview or they will get sanctioned(ie - lose all benefits). How are they supposed to feed a family on minimum wages in a job 100 miles away? They won't, but Jobseekers say they have to.

 

I regularly commuted up to 2 hours from boat to positions, depending on where I was moored.  I was in an Operations level management position in London, I could not have afforded, nor wanted a 1 bedroom flat or bedsit in a crap area of London to invite my daughter to at weekends, so I  CC-d the boat as I love the boat and waterways.

You have a personal bugbear that is stopping you seeing that many boaters have been observing the guidelines and doing lots of movement, there is probably less than 5% in certain locations, and much less across the rest of the network who do not satisfy the BOARD.

 

  • Greenie 2
Link to comment
Share on other sites

3 hours ago, Arthur Marshall said:

So you don't apply for a licence, have no name or number on your boat, and tell anyone who asks for i d to shove off. 

I suspect what will happen is CRT will turn long stretches of towpath into long term moorings - it's another income stream and nonmoving boats put little wear and tear on the infrastructure. Whether we like it or not, people have to live somewhere, and when houses are unaffordable to buy or rent, you either need a housing price crash, something else cheap, or employers paying sensible wages. The last won't happen, the first might but is unlikely, which leaves... 

The problem is that even if all the canals where people might want to moor were filled with end-to-end boats, it would meet maybe 1% of the low-cost housing need in the UK while wrecking the canals for navigation -- and it's a one-off sticking plaster, once they're full you can't find more spaces every year to meet the need.

 

Yes the UK has a problem with housing in general and low-cost housing in particular, but filling up the canals with boats isn't even a partial solution, there just aren't enough of them to make any significant difference...

  • Greenie 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!

Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.

Sign In Now
  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    • No registered users viewing this page.
×
×
  • 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.