Jump to content

Long term hire wanted


Ricoblue

Featured Posts

Hi,

 

I Live in the West Country and work in Milton Keynes during the week. I am looking to hire a canal boat for a six month period with possibly an option to renew after that. Ideally in the Milton Keynes area.

So if anyone knows  of anything that would suit a single mature male with occasional visits from family please could you let me know?

 

Many thanks

 

Richard

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Welcome to the forum.

In a word: don't. Such hire is fraught with legal and insurance problems, and there are people hiring such boats out who have no right to do so - so if there a fire/theft/collision, you're not covered.

 

HOWEVER: buying an cheap second (third?) hand boat, staying on it during the week for those six months, and then selling it again could be a cheap and convenient option. I do not know the MK area but I think there's a marina or two where you could keep the boat.

 

That's my view anyway. I am sorry if I seem discouraging.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Hi Athy and thanks for your reply. I hadn't realised there would be insurance issues. There are indeed several marinas in the area so perhaps I need to consider that option. I had supposed that if I purchased one it would be difficult to get out of if my plans changed in the future, hence the idea of renting.

It seems I have a lot to learn!

Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 minute ago, Ricoblue said:

Hi Athy and thanks for your reply. I hadn't realised there would be insurance issues. There are indeed several marinas in the area so perhaps I need to consider that option. I had supposed that if I purchased one it would be difficult to get out of if my plans changed in the future, hence the idea of renting.

It seems I have a lot to learn!

There are pukka long term hire boats out there properly insured etc. Narrowboats however always sell more or less immediately if priced correctly so you will be able to sell it on and save six months rental, assuming of course you have the spare cash in the first place.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

There was a question a little like this the other day and two hire companies came forward and posted that they would be willing to do longer term hires. 

 

Rose Narrowboats - https://rose-narrowboats.co.uk

 

Floating Holidays - https://www.floating-holidays.co.uk

 

This is a link to they thread the commented on. Just click the grey arrow in the top right hand corner of the box below. 

 

 

Edited by Tumshie
spelling
Link to comment
Share on other sites

A company called "Escape the rat race" do fully legal long term (minimum 3 months)boat hire.

 

Prices start at £1000 per month.

 

The £6000 you'll spend (and then probably extend another to another £6000 ?) + marina fees would allow you buy a boat and even 'give it away at the end' and still save money over the hire costs.

 

Buy don't hire.

 

 

https://www.etrr.co.uk/

Edited by Alan de Enfield
  • Greenie 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

@Ricoblue if you scroll to the top of the page you'll find the forum search function on the top right hand side, it's worth putting "hire" in to there and giving it a whirl, you'll find loads of discussions on the long term hiring of boats. The need for cheap accommodation is causing rather a surge of people living on boats on boats, and for some it's not because they have a love of boats; there have been many pit falls in this scenario, boats have been stolen and never recovered and people have fond themselves living in atrociously dangerous conditions, which is why long term hiring is met rather tentatively here, but as the need for this kind of hiring rises I can see more and more legitimate companies doing this. 

 

 

  • Greenie 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

There is actually a fully legal creative way of effectively "hiring" a boat for an extended period. French car companies have been doing it for years for new cars to non EU residents, although in their case the motivation is dodging VAT.  The mechanism used, is a sell and guaranteed buy back offering. Instead of hiring the boat out they sell the boat, and finance the sale,  by a loan, secured by the boat, and even some additional security. The purchaser is required to comprehensively insure the boat, I think in the name of the seller. At the end of the agreed period the owner buys the boat back at the pre agreed reduced price subject to any damage being rectified. 

I would advise, that such an arrangement not be attempted by either party without competent legal safeguards. It is not probably not worth the legal expense for a one off but for somebody with a spare boat or two, intending to do it more then once, the legal cost of draughting the agreement would be spread.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

2 hours ago, DandV said:

The purchaser is required to comprehensively insure the boat, I think in the name of the seller.

I was always under the impression that to be able to insure something you MUST have an insurable interest in it (ie own it)

To insure something you don't have an insurable interest in is classed as fraud.

 

A google would seem to agree :

 

One case many years ago was a young lady attending medical school and could no longer afford her car payment and sold the vehicle to her mother. The mother essentially took over payments but the vehicle was now in the mothers name (legally titled to the mother only). The daughter bought insurance as if she was still the owner and several months later she was in a minor 2 mph bumper accident. The person she tapped claimed vehicle damage and neck pain and the other parties carriers was looking for re-imbursement for medical and property damage. When the claims adjuster, through the company she purchased insurance, asked for a proof of insurance, i.e. a copy of the title, her name was absent and no coverage was provided. She paid for an insurance policy should could not collect on because she had no vested interest and the law states you cannot insure property you do not own.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

46 minutes ago, Alan de Enfield said:

I was always under the impression that to be able to insure something you MUST have an insurable interest in it (ie own it)

To insure something you don't have an insurable interest in is classed as fraud.

 

law states you cannot insure property you do not own.

Surely the point is they do own the boat as the suggestion is the owner has sold it but agreed to buy it back at a reduced price.

 

EDIT to add how do companies which offer insurance by the day for cars you borrow etc cope if you must own the vehicle to insure it?

Edited by Jerra
Link to comment
Share on other sites

3 minutes ago, Jerra said:

Surely the point is they do own the boat as the suggestion is the owner has sold it but agreed to buy it back at a reduced price.

 

But if you have sold something you do not own it (until you buy it back).

 

With leasing, HP etc the owner is the finance company, with a 'sale' the ownership passes to the person paying for it.

 

As I understand it, the 'way around it' is for the 'owner' to sell just (say) 75% they both become joint owners and either of them can insure it (in joint names)

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Hire purchase may  be the valid legal structure for such an arrangement I don't know.

My experience with the buy and buy back arrangement  is only with Renault Eurodrive on four occasions.  "Reggie Renault" , " Mo the Modus" " Maggie the Megane" and ""Dodgy the Dacia"  They arranged the insurance, an absolutely  no excess policy in  every country in Europe except Russia and Albania. could have been Macedonia and at that stage most of North Africa. Even Iceland was covered on the first two "hires"

Minimum period was about 20 days, but deals could add another 7 free days to this amount. The minimum charge was only a slight discount to a rental car. Additional days paid for prior to pick up were however only about £15 a day up to 3 months. The money for them, is that a sale to a non EU resident  is VAT exempt. In three plus weeks they got their car back to on sell VAT free. Le scam francais. Hence  the top shelf insurance, the customer paid for this, if the car came back missing some corners, well the insurance company paid. No hassles. Unless you extended the period the amount you paid up front for the period was the net amount, nothing was returned to you upon return. If you see red French number plates these are the cars.

I know of one narrowboat that was sold and bought back on a pre arranged basis but I am not privy to the details.

Edited by DandV
Link to comment
Share on other sites

2 hours ago, Jerra said:

Hence the fact DanV said the purchaser is required to insure it comprehensively.

 

Ooops - You missed out the important bit :

 

 

7 hours ago, DandV said:

The purchaser is required to comprehensively insure the boat, I think in the name of the seller

The devil is in the detail.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Just now, Alan de Enfield said:

 

Ooops - You missed out the important bit :

 

 

The devil is in the detail.

Sorry skim reading missed that.

 

Nobody has yet explained how short term by the day/hour insurance can be offered on vehicles you don't own if you can't insure something you don't own.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

8 minutes ago, Jerra said:

Sorry skim reading missed that.

 

Nobody has yet explained how short term by the day/hour insurance can be offered on vehicles you don't own if you can't insure something you don't own.

That I don't know.

 

When I lend a vehicle to someone I normally add them onto 'my' insurance for the period.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I have arranged a two week insurance on a car I did not own without any problem.

 

We had a silly insurance problem when my wife tried to insure her deceased father's car which had passed to her mother ( if that's too convoluted to follow, sorry but its relevant )

 

Mother in law has never held a driving licence.  My wife could insure the car no problem even though she did not own it but the owner, mother, had to be present in the car whenever it was used.

This meant that mother could never be taken anywhere to be collected later. Nor could my wife be left in charge of the car if mother went into a shop etc.

Clearly a stupid arrangement so the car was re-registered in my wife's name, problem solved.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

9 hours ago, Alan de Enfield said:

 

Ooops - You missed out the important bit :

 

 

The devil is in the detail.

The real detail may in fact be the words "I think" so the requirement may only be a comprehensive policy arranged by, or approaved by the vendor.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

3 minutes ago, DandV said:

The real detail may in fact be the words "I think" so the requirement may only be a comprehensive policy arranged by, or approaved by the vendor.

But you 'think' it is correct, otherwise why mention it ?

I was simply pointing out that your thinking was in fact (probably) incorrect.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

2 minutes ago, Alan de Enfield said:

But you 'think' it is correct, otherwise why mention it ?

I was simply pointing out that your thinking was in fact (probably) incorrect.

No problem. To pass exams I aimed at 50% plus a margin. Usually I succeeded, but sometimes not. 100% right always eluded me.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

On 11/07/2019 at 07:12, Alan de Enfield said:

To insure something you don't have an insurable interest in is classed as fraud.

 

But in the case of the French method, the seller DOES have an insurable interest. It is a loan secured on the boat.

 

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

3 minutes ago, Mike the Boilerman said:

 

But in the case of the French method, the seller DOES have an insurable interest. It is a loan secured on the boat.

 

 

Exactly as I stated in post #13

 

On ‎11‎/‎07‎/‎2019 at 08:02, Alan de Enfield said:

With leasing, HP etc the owner is the finance company, with a 'sale' the ownership passes to the person paying for it.

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

10 minutes ago, Alan de Enfield said:

Exactly as I stated in post #13

 

 

 

Hire purchase is different. Here, we are discussing title passing to the buyer at the start, not to a finance company, and the loan secured with a charge on the boat. 

 

People seem to struggle grasping the difference between a bank owning the asset and the bank having a charge over the asset. E.G. people often say the mortgage company owns their house when in actual fact, they don't. 

 

 

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.