Paul C Posted September 19, 2019 Report Share Posted September 19, 2019 2 minutes ago, nbfiresprite said: As to what is a Continuous cruiser licence? We should ask the hypothetical ordinary and reasonable person on the Clapham omnibus, what Continuous cruiser licence means to them. If you read the legislation, its when you obtain a boat licence and declare section ii) rather than section i) - there's 2 choices and you need to declare one or the other. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
stegra Posted September 19, 2019 Report Share Posted September 19, 2019 (edited) £1690 per year for a year on the floating harbour? That's bonkers. Can that really be right? I know people paying three times that for a farmer's field mooring in the middle of nowhere, halfway between Bristol and Bath next to a tatty industrial estate. Edited September 19, 2019 by stegra Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
nbfiresprite Posted September 19, 2019 Report Share Posted September 19, 2019 4 minutes ago, Paul C said: If you read the legislation, its when you obtain a boat licence and declare section ii) rather than section i) - there's 2 choices and you need to declare one or the other. I'm talking about non-boat owners. The view of hypothetical ordinary and reasonable person used in court cases. I have asked around my own office this question? What does Continuous cruiser means to them, The answers have all been on the line of always on the move around the system. These are non boaters. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Alan de Enfield Posted September 19, 2019 Author Report Share Posted September 19, 2019 8 minutes ago, Paul C said: …….. there's 2 choices and you need to declare one or the other. That is only 1 choice (2 options) 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Paul C Posted September 19, 2019 Report Share Posted September 19, 2019 3 minutes ago, nbfiresprite said: I'm talking about non-boat owners. The view of hypothetical ordinary and reasonable person used in court cases. I have asked around my own office this question? What does Continuous cruiser means to them, The answers have all been on the line of always on the move around the system. These are non boaters. The hypothetical ordinary person isn't involved in County Court cases - they don't have a jury. If a jury are involved in a later stage, they normally have the law explained to them in some amount of detail, so they can decide. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Cheese Posted September 19, 2019 Report Share Posted September 19, 2019 5 minutes ago, stegra said: £1690 per year for a year on the floating harbour? That's bonkers. Can that really be right? I know people paying three times that for a farmer's field mooring in the middle of nowhere, halfway between Bristol and Bath next to a tatty industrial estate. Well it's £1960 - but I take your point. They apparently only moved there on 2 September. Given the closed / long waiting lists for residential / annual licences in Bristol, they might even be on a short term visitor mooring so have to move again soon ... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
nbfiresprite Posted September 19, 2019 Report Share Posted September 19, 2019 Just now, Paul C said: The hypothetical ordinary person isn't involved in County Court cases - they don't have a jury. If a jury are involved in a later stage, they normally have the law explained to them in some amount of detail, so they can decide. Who is the man on the Clapham Omnibus? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Chewbacka Posted September 19, 2019 Report Share Posted September 19, 2019 1 minute ago, Cheese said: Well it's £1960 - but I take your point. They apparently only moved there on 2 September. Given the closed / long waiting lists for residential / annual licences in Bristol, they might even be on a short term visitor mooring so have to move again soon ... But where will they move to? West takes them out to the Severn estuary and east is back on to CRT waters. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Paul C Posted September 19, 2019 Report Share Posted September 19, 2019 11 minutes ago, nbfiresprite said: I'm talking about non-boat owners. The view of hypothetical ordinary and reasonable person used in court cases. I have asked around my own office this question? What does Continuous cruiser means to them, The answers have all been on the line of always on the move around the system. These are non boaters. 4 minutes ago, nbfiresprite said: Who is the man on the Clapham Omnibus? But you've asked the wrong question, nowhere in the legislation does it refer to "continuous cruiser" - its an approximate abbreviation, which in certain cases isn't particularly helpful because it projects a false expectation. You've applied the principle incorrectly, they are not asked how they would react to emotive terms, the test is what they would consider a reasonable interpretation of the legislation as written. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
stegra Posted September 19, 2019 Report Share Posted September 19, 2019 (edited) 12 minutes ago, Cheese said: Well it's £1960 - but I take your point. They apparently only moved there on 2 September. Given the closed / long waiting lists for residential / annual licences in Bristol, they might even be on a short term visitor mooring so have to move again soon ... Sorry, typo. I know people paying over £6k per year. Possibly a winter mooring then. I remember a few folk getting them a couple of years ago because they were a lot cheaper than the marinas at Keynsham and Saltford, apparently. Edited September 19, 2019 by stegra To add most of it. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Mike Todd Posted September 19, 2019 Report Share Posted September 19, 2019 43 minutes ago, sirweste said: Seems that way doesn't it. Until someone else is brave enough to challenge it in court. I would have thought this bloke stood a good chance in court. Assuming he's had at least the same movement pattern in the last 14 years (which was perfectly acceptable apparently) and given that he was close to the arbitrary 20 miles. I think we have been over this before: he only did 17+ miles in a year, moving every two weeks, which indicates a range of around 0.65 mile, well short of the 20 mile range below which CaRT say they will definitely not per persuaded that the boater is engaged in bona fide navigation - and this boater kindly offered the evidence to support the CaRT case! Far from uniformly 'going after' every 'local' boater that does not go very far, it is clear that CaRT have picked their fights with care, much to do with pour encourager les autres. In other words, the local paper has given them considerable free advertising space to warn all the other boaters about what will happen to others who push the boundaries into non existence. Let alone the towpath telegraph. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Señor Chris Posted September 19, 2019 Report Share Posted September 19, 2019 1 hour ago, nbfiresprite said: . I have asked around my own office this question? What does Continuous cruiser means to them, The answers have all been on the line of always on the move around the system. These are non boaters Which just goes to show the extent to which CRT have mislead the public. As a recipient of public funds, CRT really shouldn't be allowed to get away with deception on this scale. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Murflynn Posted September 19, 2019 Report Share Posted September 19, 2019 if the photos are taken at their mooring, then I believe they are private, the property of Pooles Wharf housing complex, normally allocated only to residents AFAIK. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Paul C Posted September 19, 2019 Report Share Posted September 19, 2019 19 minutes ago, Señor Chris said: Which just goes to show the extent to which CRT have mislead the public. As a recipient of public funds, CRT really shouldn't be allowed to get away with deception on this scale. Does it? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Murflynn Posted September 19, 2019 Report Share Posted September 19, 2019 Poor Steve can't afford £4,400 p.a. rent for a mooring, apparently only rich people can afford that. Perhaps he should investigate how much the average family pays for rent of a small house in Bristol or in Bath. 'Rich' presumably means thrifty and allocating available funds for essentials like rent, but it seems he lives in a parallel universe. I pity his kids, 'cos they will grow up with a totally skewed sense of values. 3 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Chewbacka Posted September 19, 2019 Report Share Posted September 19, 2019 5 minutes ago, Murflynn said: Poor Steve can't afford £4,400 p.a. rent for a mooring, apparently only rich people can afford that. Perhaps he should investigate how much the average family pays for rent of a small house in Bristol or in Bath. 'Rich' presumably means thrifty and allocating available funds for essentials like rent, but it seems he lives in a parallel universe. I pity his kids, 'cos they will grow up with a totally skewed sense of values. And don’t forget the house renters also pay council tax which as a cc he doesn’t. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
matty40s Posted September 19, 2019 Report Share Posted September 19, 2019 (edited) 42 minutes ago, Murflynn said: if the photos are taken at their mooring, then I believe they are private, the property of Pooles Wharf housing complex, normally allocated only to residents AFAIK. Well the daft jerk isnt exactly going to engage his engine for propulsion purposes just for publicity shots is he given his track record for moving his boat.....? Edited September 19, 2019 by matty40s Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Flyboy Posted September 19, 2019 Report Share Posted September 19, 2019 (edited) Bristol Docks mooring fees. https://www.bristol.gov.uk/documents/20182/34144/Navigation+and+berthing+charges https://www.bristolmarina.co.uk/index.php?option=com_content&view=article&id=21&Itemid=19 Edited September 19, 2019 by Flyboy Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Graham Davis Posted September 19, 2019 Report Share Posted September 19, 2019 1 hour ago, Murflynn said: if the photos are taken at their mooring, then I believe they are private, the property of Pooles Wharf housing complex, normally allocated only to residents AFAIK. If that is the case, and they don't have permission to moor there, I can see them having another battle soon. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Murflynn Posted September 20, 2019 Report Share Posted September 20, 2019 10 hours ago, Graham Davis said: If that is the case, and they don't have permission to moor there, I can see them having another battle soon. I expect they've done a deal by sub-letting from a resident who has mooring rights. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Alan de Enfield Posted September 20, 2019 Author Report Share Posted September 20, 2019 37 minutes ago, Murflynn said: I expect they've done a deal by sub-letting from a resident who has mooring rights. In which case - I wonder why they have declared "A boat with no home mooring" option when they licenced it. If they do have a mooring - why not just tick the box on the licence application that says "home mooring" and give details - all of the problems would never have happened. I'd suggest that they are just tied up there 'free-loading' for as long as they can get away with it. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
MtB Posted September 20, 2019 Report Share Posted September 20, 2019 I suspect these people still think like ordinary non-boating 'civilians'. They see the canals as like rivers, a naturally occurring feature of the landscape that happens to be just 'there' and we must all therefore have a god given right to put boats in it. So they did. Now all the regulation bearing down on them has come as a complete surprise and feels all wrong, hence their denial of any need to comply with what they see as the pettyfogging nagging from CRT about keeping moving, and their hope that if they ignore it long enough, it will "all blow over". 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
noddyboater Posted September 20, 2019 Report Share Posted September 20, 2019 8 minutes ago, Mike the Boilerman said: I suspect these people still think like ordinary non-boating 'civilians'. They see the canals as like rivers, a naturally occurring feature of the landscape that happens to be just 'there' and we must all therefore have a god given right to put boats in it. So they did. A chap local to me has just started doing cruisers up on a farm and flogging them on. Around 2 months ago he appeared with his latest project on a trailer in the pub car park, where his mate lifted it off into the canal with a hiab. There it’s been since, on a 48hr visitor mooring, no name, number or licence. Ok he’s not living on it, but if everyone who bought a cheap boat did that.. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
DaveP Posted September 20, 2019 Report Share Posted September 20, 2019 (edited) 15 hours ago, Chewbacka said: My understanding is that CRT always go to court to have a liveaboard boat removed. CRT will only have movement records from just a few years ago (when they started tightening up) and no doubt have been in communication with the boater for 2 or 3 years about his lack of bona fide navigation, so I would not rate his chances of winning as highly as you do. I suspect its more than a few years. I asked for my sighting data last year - got it back to 2008, when I first licensed the boat. The first couple of years are sparse, but from 2010 there's good (ie every month at least) data... 15 hours ago, Chewbacka said: My understanding is that CRT always go to court to have a liveaboard boat removed. CRT will only have movement records from just a few years ago (when they started tightening up) and no doubt have been in communication with the boater for 2 or 3 years about his lack of bona fide navigation, so I would not rate his chances of winning as highly as you do. Edited September 20, 2019 by DaveP Doubled up Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
blackrose Posted September 20, 2019 Report Share Posted September 20, 2019 (edited) 15 hours ago, nbfiresprite said: I'm talking about non-boat owners. The view of hypothetical ordinary and reasonable person used in court cases. I have asked around my own office this question? What does Continuous cruiser means to them, The answers have all been on the line of always on the move around the system. These are non boaters. Non boaters? So by that rationale anyone who has a mooring and doesn't move around the system is a non boater? There are lots of different types of boaters, some live aboard, some don't; some have moorings others don't, and some move more than others. Surely you meant they are not continuous cruisers? I think we can all agree with that. Edited September 20, 2019 by blackrose Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Featured Posts
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 accountSign in
Already have an account? Sign in here.
Sign In Now