Jump to content

Reduction in River licence


christophert
 Share

Featured Posts

2 minutes ago, christophert said:

Putting camels to one side, I forgot to mention I moor on a marina, so currently, like many others, do not use any facilities outside of this.

 

You may find that once you are out & about that the shoreline / battery charger has masked the degradation of the batteries and that you will continue to have problems. 

You may be able to 'bring back a bit of life' into the batteries if you can conduct an equalisation charge at low current (say 2 amps) and high voltage (say 15-15.5v) for a couple of hours.

Hopefully you do not have sealed batteries as you will probably need to top up the batteries as a result of making them fizz.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

7 minutes ago, Alan de Enfield said:

You may find that once you are out & about that the shoreline / battery charger has masked the degradation of the batteries and that you will continue to have problems. 

You may be able to 'bring back a bit of life' into the batteries if you can conduct an equalisation charge at low current (say 2 amps) and high voltage (say 15-15.5v) for a couple of hours.

Hopefully you do not have sealed batteries as you will probably need to top up the batteries as a result of making them fizz.

Wrong thread, possibly?

  • Happy 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

10 hours ago, christophert said:

Due to the current epedemic, Corona Virus, we all have been informed not to move, travel, in our Narrowboats. This is understandable as we all need to work together to stop the spread of this worrying disease.

Car insurance companies are now offering discounts to motorists during these unsettling times.  So should CRT be doing the same?  I believe so. If none of us can use the camels, then I feel we should all be offered a reduction. Since owning my boat, my licence has risen tenfold over the past decade. It is supposed to be a charity, so maybe it's a good time to be charitable.

I suspect the car insurance companies are giving discounts due to the reduced risk as a result of people using their cars less. You could ask your boat insurance company if they would give you a discount for the same reason.

The DVLA are not giving discounts on vehicle exise duty in a similar way to the CRT not giving discounts on boat licences.

 

Edited by Alway Swilby
Link to comment
Share on other sites

8 minutes ago, Alway Swilby said:

I suspect the car insurance companies are giving discounts due to the reduced risk as a result of people using their cars less. You could ask your boat insurance company if they would give you a discount for the same reason.

 

Some really bad things happen to boats when they are not in use

 

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 hour ago, christophert said:

Putting camels to one side, I forgot to mention I moor on a marina, so currently, like many others, do not use any facilities outside of this.

 

Tough!
Get over it and pay what you signed up for.

 

And not all car insurance companies have been offering money back.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Personally I am torn on this.

 

We use the boat something like ten weekends and a full week, 20-30 days a year, during about 5 months continuously cruising the system, with the remaining 7 months Oct-Easter spent in a marina. So at best our boat usage is running about 1% and the rest of the time we are (happily) paying to keep it unused on the canal network.

 

However if we actually don't go anywhere, while the gross percentage change is only about 1% the net change is 100% and we now have a 20 month unused stint, which if nothing else would go a long way to justify the cost of crane it onto the hard! And it is a reasonable amount of money to be spending! Certainly for anyone suddenly unemployed or even just facing a 20% cut on furlough. 

 

That said, CRT while not solely a charity maintains a lot of the overheads of maintaining the network remain, I am still get full pay for working at home, and we have continued paying our self-employed dog walker even though she is currently not able to walk or dog. She doesn't get any government support, because while we have used her for nearly 2 years she went from working for a local 3-person dog walking co-op to a sole trader about 5months ago.

 

 

Daniel 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

3 hours ago, Alway Swilby said:

I suspect the car insurance companies are giving discounts due to the reduced risk as a result of people using their cars less. You could ask your boat insurance company if they would give you a discount for the same reason.

The DVLA are not giving discounts on vehicle exise duty in a similar way to the CRT not giving discounts on boat licences.

 

Mentioning the DVLA some people forget it easy to SORN a vehicle if its not parked on a road. Because of this event we have SORNed 2 of our 3 vehicles as we are only using one for the odd shopping trip.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

4 hours ago, christophert said:

I forgot to mention I moor on a marina, so currently, like many others, do not use any facilities outside of this.

Ah I guess this does make your situation different to someone with an online mooring or without a home mooring, since you aren't able to actually leave and enjoy the waterways that you are paying for, whereas I have to cruise (as limited as possible, of course) in order to access facilities. I don't have a home mooring, which is probably why the license fee does seem so cheap to me. I agree with @Alan de Enfield that it would probably be fair for boaters without a home mooring to pay more for their license than those with a home mooring. As long as this amount is less than renting a "dummy mooring" somewhere cheap that you never actually visit, I'd be willing to pay more.

 

Has the license fee really gone up tenfold in the time you've owned your boat? And Alan, am I understanding right that they gradually but significantly increased the cost of licensing a widebeam as compared to a narrowboat?

 

I think I understand more the motivation for wanting a rebate. Really what I was getting at is that I'd like to see CaRT do more maintenance and restoration, not less. If that takes more money then I feel like it would make sense to raise it from the boating community who are the primary benefactors. Any suggestion of rebates means less money for upkeep, and I'm generally against that.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

10 minutes ago, ivan&alice said:

Alan, am I understanding right that they gradually but significantly increased the cost of licensing a widebeam as compared to a narrowboat?

Yes. It is just now being introduced following a customer survey and proposals.

 

Spread over 3 years. Take the 'base rate' of what an equivalent length NB would be charged and add the 'widebeam premium'

After introduction :

1st year +5% 'premium'

2nd year +10% 'premium'

3rd year +20% 'premium'

 

Many marinas charge a surcharge for 'fat-boats', our last marina was a 30% surcharge.

 

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

3 hours ago, MartynG said:

Some really bad things happen to boats when they are not in use

Yeah, quite something that wasnt it!

52 minutes ago, mrsmelly said:

Mentioning the DVLA some people forget it easy to SORN a vehicle if its not parked on a road. 

I've come quite close myself, Partner still does a day or two work in the office, plus home visits, and her car is better for the dog. Mine hasnt moved much for some time and when I came to use it yesterday to pick up a takeaway, the first time I have been out the house other than on foot for weeks, it woudnt start! 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

15 minutes ago, Alan de Enfield said:

Spread over 3 years. Take the 'base rate' of what an equivalent length NB would be charged and add the 'widebeam premium'

After introduction :

1st year +5% 'premium'

2nd year +10% 'premium'

3rd year +20% 'premium'

 

Many marinas charge a surcharge for 'fat-boats', our last marina was a 30% surcharge.

Ah, so prior to this boats were charged only on length? It seems very fair to me that widebeams pay more, and 20-30% more seems very reasonable (almost unfair?) considering it's up to 100% more boat!

  • Greenie 2
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Just now, ivan&alice said:

Ah, so prior to this boats were charged only on length? It seems very fair to me that widebeams pay more, and 20-30% more seems very reasonable (almost unfair?) considering it's up to 100% more boat!

Agreed, it means you can actually get much more square-footage with a short fat-boat, than a long 'thin-boat' at a lower price than the long-thin boat.

 

It hits hard those those following the trend of long (60+ feet) widebeams (12+ feet).

 

The EA actually work on an area basis (length x beam) which works well for skip-shaped boats, but for 'proper boats' which taper at the bow and stern they are paying for 'area' they don't have (beam is taken at the single widest point)

Link to comment
Share on other sites

4 minutes ago, ivan&alice said:

Ah, so prior to this boats were charged only on length? It seems very fair to me that widebeams pay more, and 20-30% more seems very reasonable (almost unfair?) considering it's up to 100% more boat!

There are sides to both story, including the fact that much of the network is not accessible to wider boats.

 

 

Same applies to an extend to boats over about 58-62ft as well obviously. 

 

 

Daniel

Link to comment
Share on other sites

4 minutes ago, DHutch said:

There are sides to both story, including the fact that much of the network is not accessible to wider boats.

 

 

Same applies to an extend to boats over about 58-62ft as well obviously. 

 

 

Daniel

 

Good point - at 14 foot beam I can only access a small percentage of the canal network, but pay 130% of the licence fee that a NB pays and they can access 100% of the network.

 

I still think a 'pay-by use' based on a tracker is the fairest way to charge.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

10 minutes ago, Alan de Enfield said:

Agreed, it means you can actually get much more square-footage with a short fat-boat, than a long 'thin-boat' at a lower price than the long-thin boat.

 

It hits hard those those following the trend of long (60+ feet) widebeams (12+ feet).

 

The EA actually work on an area basis (length x beam) which works well for skip-shaped boats, but for 'proper boats' which taper at the bow and stern they are paying for 'area' they don't have (beam is taken at the single widest point)

 

8 minutes ago, DHutch said:

There are sides to both story, including the fact that much of the network is not accessible to wider boats.

 

Same applies to an extend to boats over about 58-62ft as well obviously.

Hmm, but in a marina or at a visitors mooring the boats are still taking up that space, regardless of whether the shape of the boat is "usable" by the boater (that seems a bit illogical though since that space is used - to make the boat perform better!

 

Narrowbeams can also breast up when mooring in popular areas so one widebeam in that case uses the space that two narrowbeams can use, yet is only paying 65% of what the two narrowboats pay.

 

Boating is slow so I'd say the vast majority of boaters don't visit all of the network they can access, so all of us are paying for facilities that we don't actually use regardless of length - so I'm not sure that this should really be a criterion. Though I suppose you're right that widebeams shouldn't be paying for the upkeep of narrow locks that they could never actually use. So perhaps 20% more is reasonable? Personally - as the owner of a 65' boat - I'm very happy to pay towards the upkeep of the Leeds and Liverpool even though I can't use it - for me it would be a great tragedy if we were to lose any more of our canals due to disuse. Not being able to access some of the network was a sacrifice we consciously decided to make when we bought our boat.

 

10 minutes ago, Alan de Enfield said:

I still think a 'pay-by use' based on a tracker is the fairest way to charge.

Fairest maybe but it would strongly discourage boating. I like "all you can eat" payment models which encourage boaters to actually go out and boat!

 

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
 Share

  • 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.