Jump to content

Red is not dead, - yet


Tracy D'arth

Featured Posts

13 minutes ago, Alan de Enfield said:

 

5.38 The government is considering introducing a new relief scheme where approved fuel suppliers would be able to deduct from the sale price the duty difference on the proportion of white diesel intended for non-propulsion use. The fuel suppliers would then reclaim this deducted duty from HMRC and reflect this in the price charged to the private pleasure craft user at the point of sale.

Lets hope the word 'considering' is eventually deleted.

It seems to me for a lot of boat owners the 60/40 split price is not something they are used to paying. 

  • Haha 2
Link to comment
Share on other sites

5 minutes ago, haggis said:

I seem to remember that red diesel sellers will have to empty and completely clean their old tanks to get rid of any trace of  red diesel if they want/need to switch to selling white and presumably they will have to do this before the cut off date. I don't see much red being available canal side and whether sellers will consider it economically viable to switch to white remains to be seen. I think we are going to lose a  lot of canal side diesel sellers. 

 

Haggis

 

See post #58

Link to comment
Share on other sites

3 hours ago, Alan de Enfield said:

5.38 The government is considering introducing a new relief scheme where approved fuel suppliers would be able to deduct from the sale price the duty difference on the proportion of white diesel intended for non-propulsion use. The fuel suppliers would then reclaim this deducted duty from HMRC and reflect this in the price charged to the private pleasure craft user at the point of sale.

 

If this is implemented then the only change will be that the duty element will be deducted from the price we pay instead of being added to it, which is what happens now.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 minute ago, BrumSaint said:

If this is implemented then the only change will be that the duty element will be deducted from the price we pay instead of being added to it, which is what happens now.

Indeed, having a nett zero effect on us.

(Except for any higher base price that the seller charges)

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I am confused about the HMRC/Government's attitude here. The EU proposed these changes many years ago and the HMRC/Government have spent countless hours and resources fighting them and delaying the changes. Whilst that was happening the Government was arguing that we should leave Europe so that we could take back control. We've now left Europe, but instead of saying we've been fighting this for years we are now in control so let's just forget it and carry on as normal. They now seem intent on pushing through something they've been fighting against for years, what was the point of 'taking back control'?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

8 minutes ago, BrumSaint said:

I am confused about the HMRC/Government's attitude here. The EU proposed these changes many years ago and the HMRC/Government have spent countless hours and resources fighting them and delaying the changes. Whilst that was happening the Government was arguing that we should leave Europe so that we could take back control. We've now left Europe, but instead of saying we've been fighting this for years we are now in control so let's just forget it and carry on as normal. They now seem intent on pushing through something they've been fighting against for years, what was the point of 'taking back control'?

 

I really don't think red diesel is the only question raised by that particular slogan, nor is it in the top hundred!

 

 

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

14 minutes ago, BrumSaint said:

I am confused about the HMRC/Government's attitude here. The EU proposed these changes many years ago and the HMRC/Government have spent countless hours and resources fighting them and delaying the changes. Whilst that was happening the Government was arguing that we should leave Europe so that we could take back control. We've now left Europe, but instead of saying we've been fighting this for years we are now in control so let's just forget it and carry on as normal. They now seem intent on pushing through something they've been fighting against for years, what was the point of 'taking back control'?

During the 'transition' we had agreed to implement all laws imposed during our membership. We had not applied this law and we were in process of being referred to the ECJ so had no option but to be seen to be complying.

 

What actually happens after 1/1/21 remains to be seen.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

2 hours ago, Chewbacka said:

It’s not easy carrying 2 x 25litre cans down a towpath.  You will need a trolley, and a trolley suitable for 3 or 4 cans is going to be a pain to store.  So I doubt many will be doing that.  To use one of my favourite expressions - unintended consequences- I do see fuel theft from boats going up......

We have done it before when we could get red for 45ppl and the price at the waterside pump was closer to 90ppl. Just need to moor the boat where you can get the car close too it. Not a problem.

38 minutes ago, Alan de Enfield said:

During the 'transition' we had agreed to implement all laws imposed during our membership. We had not applied this law and we were in process of being referred to the ECJ so had no option but to be seen to be complying.

 

What actually happens after 1/1/21 remains to be seen.

The whole thing will be dropped and seen as an expensive waste of time at a guess.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

18 hours ago, Alan de Enfield said:

By 2050  No boats will be allowed on UK waters (inland and coastal) unless they are zero emmission

I would be 96, and suspect the thoughts mostly occupying my mind would be along the lines of which is a suppository and which a throat lozenge. 

  • Haha 2
  • Horror 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 minute ago, zenataomm said:

I would be 96, and suspect the thoughts mostly occupying my mind would be along the lines of which is a suppository and which a throat lozenge. 

That's probably true of a vast majority of current formum members.

 

But, I certainly wouldn't be ordering an ICE, or even Hybrid powered new boat, or even suggesting one to a newbie -  You might not plan keeping it 20 years but the depreciation will be horrendous as 'the date' gets closer.

  • Greenie 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

4 hours ago, BrumSaint said:

I am confused about the HMRC/Government's attitude here. The EU proposed these changes many years ago and the HMRC/Government have spent countless hours and resources fighting them and delaying the changes. Whilst that was happening the Government was arguing that we should leave Europe so that we could take back control. We've now left Europe, but instead of saying we've been fighting this for years we are now in control so let's just forget it and carry on as normal. They now seem intent on pushing through something they've been fighting against for years, what was the point of 'taking back control'?

As I remember - Before this was just an annoyance for HMRC and so they didn’t want the trouble, BUT with the new Green thinking the government wishes to greatly curtail the use and therefore the availability of red diesel, and the easiest way to get rid of most of the red sellers on the waterways is to resurrect the ‘no red in boats’ approach.  Thank the green lobby for this.  Whilst I am no great fan of hmrc, they have recognised that people that live on boats would pay more for heating fuel (cost per kWh) than rich people in mansions and are looking at how to manage this.

  • Greenie 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 hour ago, Alan de Enfield said:

That's probably true of a vast majority of current formum members.

 

But, I certainly wouldn't be ordering an ICE, or even Hybrid powered new boat, or even suggesting one to a newbie -  You might not plan keeping it 20 years but the depreciation will be horrendous as 'the date' gets closer.

I was on one of Finesses electric boats today electric motor beautiful job 10 year warranty as well, thats the motor, battery pack and electronics. Finesse can monitor every electric boat it produces as well [the owner can monitor his boat by phone if he wants] I was well impressed by it. spec wise 65 foot narrowboat 1.5 kw at 3mph,  solar and onboard genny/shoreline for charging, one hour on the genny charges the batteries back up from 5 hours running less/none if its been sunny, genny heats calorifier as well via pipes and immersion heater.

  • Greenie 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

3 minutes ago, peterboat said:

I was on one of Finesses electric boats today electric motor beautiful job 10 year warranty as well, thats the motor, battery pack and electronics. Finesse can monitor every electric boat it produces as well [the owner can monitor his boat by phone if he wants] I was well impressed by it. spec wise 65 foot narrowboat 1.5 kw at 3mph,  solar and onboard genny/shoreline for charging, one hour on the genny charges the batteries back up from 5 hours running less/none if its been sunny, genny heats calorifier as well via pipes and immersion heater.

It's the future, not my future, but it is THE future !

  • Greenie 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

22 hours ago, ditchcrawler said:

But will they still have these pumps, who will their customers be, there cant be that many farmers who buy red at a garage

I bought some recently, it's called gas oil. I think that contractors buy it for machinery, I am assuming road vehicles buy white.

Edited by LadyG
Link to comment
Share on other sites

3 minutes ago, Alan de Enfield said:

Thats very naughty - you are defrauding the C&E.

You have paid 'agricultural' rate of duty and NOT the lesiure boating rate of duty.

 

Shame on you !!!

I have been buying white for heating, so we're quits, I think

  • Haha 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

It's all blurry gas oil - just that what is sold for no road use has marker substances added at the distribution point to distinguish which bears full duty and what does not.

 

It's many years since refineries churned  out two grades of 'diesel fuel'  one for vehicles and one for 'plant'.

 

Any lower grade 'residue' that in previous years might have gone into 'MGO' is now passed into whatever cooking oil they is in ships etc.

The 'real' oil industry is very complex and fascinating to a chemical engineer....

  • Greenie 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

On 10/11/2020 at 19:39, Tracy D'arth said:

Some do lose their vehicles, its not automatic. But I very much doubt that you would lose your home if its a boat.

Enforcement will be farcical.

I admire your optimism.

 

Keith 

On 10/11/2020 at 19:40, Machpoint005 said:

 

?

 

What do you suggest, that I flush out my tank with "white" diesel

No I don't suggest that and if you read what I said again perhaps you might grasp what I actually said.

 

Keith

Link to comment
Share on other sites

20 minutes ago, Steilsteven said:

I admire your optimism.

Misplaced optimism

 

Just one of dozens of examples :

 

On 14th September 2016 Canal & River Trust (CRT), together with police, bailiffs and a CRT enforcement officer, seized a boat without a home mooring that was a vulnerable woman’s home while she was asleep inside it. The woman, who suffers from epilepsy, was later rushed to hospital in an ambulance as the stress of the eviction had caused her condition to become critical.

Boat dweller Peter John Wells, who was an eyewitness, filmed the eviction. It is on YouTube here

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=RQGSVSGWOsE and

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=6TYzW97R5XY

Mr Wells said: “On the morning of September 14th Corrine Rotherham, CRT Enforcement Officer, and a team of seven private contractors set off in a vessel from Bradford on Avon on the Kennet and Avon Canal. They were on a mission to evict a lone woman living on a boat in Bath due to a licence dispute. They arrived as she was still asleep in bed, boarded the boat and proceeded to attach their boat to hers and tow it away. A number of nearby boaters were alerted to the situation and a blockade was formed preventing the removal. The boaters offered to pay any outstanding money due on the spot. This was not accepted”.

“Ms Rotherham decided her plan had gone seriously wrong and called for back-up, in this case four police officers and a police van with an unknown number of officers inside. By this time the woman, who suffers from epilepsy, was so distraught that she was reduced to tears. At one point she was surrounded by CRT, bailiffs and police officers against the railway wall. Despite support from the other boaters she felt she had to escape the situation and she agreed to leave her boat. Her boat was taken to Bradford on Avon, lifted on a lorry and driven away. Two days later she was admitted to hospital as the stress o the eviction had caused her epilepsy to become critical”.

Before being taken to hospital the woman wandered around Bath in a confused and distressed state. According to staff at a drop-in centre for homeless people, she was so ill that she was incoherent and could not explain what had happened. The following day she was found by police and an ambulance was called.

The eviction of this vulnerable boater and its drastic effect on her health raise some very serious questions about CRT’s compliance with the law regarding the safeguarding of vulnerable adults. For example, why was there no welfare officer present? Why were the police called? Why did Enforcement Officer Corrine Rotherham not want to be filmed?

 

CRT’s Relationship Manager Matthew Symonds claimed on 22nd September that the Waterways Chaplaincy had been supporting the woman, but the Chaplaincy has confirmed that they were not involved at all prior to the eviction. CRT did refer the case to their Welfare Officer Sean Williams, but unlike social housing, CRT has no measures in place to safeguard vulnerable people in cases where health issues mean that the person at risk of eviction does not engage with the authorities. We have been informed that the boater attempted to claim Housing Benefit.

According to Mr Wells, it was apparent from his conversation with them that the bailiffs, police and Ms Rotherham all wanted to avoid any responsibility for the eviction. He said that one bailiff was clearly uncomfortable and another said that it was ridiculous and tried to distance himself from his job.

CRT currently uses bailiffs from a private company called The Sheriffs Office when they believe that a boat dweller will be resident on a boat at an eviction. Kevin George Thomas of The Sheriffs Office appears to be one of the bailiffs in the first photo. The second photo shows Mr Thomas serving court papers on a boater in 2014. Kevin Thomas used to work for Sherlock, a trading division of Shergroup Limited, which also included Sherforce bailiffs that CRT used until about 2014.

We have unconfirmed reports that the woman was renting the boat but the “landlord” failed to licence it. Anyone in this situation should make sure that the boat is licensed and should also be aware that they have very few rights.

 

 

  • Greenie 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

22 hours ago, BrumSaint said:

I am confused about the HMRC/Government's attitude here. The EU proposed these changes many years ago and the HMRC/Government have spent countless hours and resources fighting them and delaying the changes. Whilst that was happening the Government was arguing that we should leave Europe so that we could take back control. We've now left Europe, but instead of saying we've been fighting this for years we are now in control so let's just forget it and carry on as normal. They now seem intent on pushing through something they've been fighting against for years, what was the point of 'taking back control'?

The change is due to attempting to cut CO2 emissions not EU membership.

 

Keith

  • Greenie 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

17 minutes ago, Alan de Enfield said:

Misplaced optimism

C&RT seem to have no problem in making people homeless.

 

Just one of dozens of examples :

 

On 14th September 2016 Canal & River Trust (CRT), together with police, bailiffs and a CRT enforcement officer, seized a boat without a home mooring that was a vulnerable woman’s home while she was asleep inside it. The woman, who suffers from epilepsy, was later rushed to hospital in an ambulance as the stress of the eviction had caused her condition to become critical.

Boat dweller Peter John Wells, who was an eyewitness, filmed the eviction. It is on YouTube here

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=RQGSVSGWOsE and

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=6TYzW97R5XY

Mr Wells said: “On the morning of September 14th Corrine Rotherham, CRT Enforcement Officer, and a team of seven private contractors set off in a vessel from Bradford on Avon on the Kennet and Avon Canal. They were on a mission to evict a lone woman living on a boat in Bath due to a licence dispute. They arrived as she was still asleep in bed, boarded the boat and proceeded to attach their boat to hers and tow it away. A number of nearby boaters were alerted to the situation and a blockade was formed preventing the removal. The boaters offered to pay any outstanding money due on the spot. This was not accepted”.

“Ms Rotherham decided her plan had gone seriously wrong and called for back-up, in this case four police officers and a police van with an unknown number of officers inside. By this time the woman, who suffers from epilepsy, was so distraught that she was reduced to tears. At one point she was surrounded by CRT, bailiffs and police officers against the railway wall. Despite support from the other boaters she felt she had to escape the situation and she agreed to leave her boat. Her boat was taken to Bradford on Avon, lifted on a lorry and driven away. Two days later she was admitted to hospital as the stress o the eviction had caused her epilepsy to become critical”.

Before being taken to hospital the woman wandered around Bath in a confused and distressed state. According to staff at a drop-in centre for homeless people, she was so ill that she was incoherent and could not explain what had happened. The following day she was found by police and an ambulance was called.

The eviction of this vulnerable boater and its drastic effect on her health raise some very serious questions about CRT’s compliance with the law regarding the safeguarding of vulnerable adults. For example, why was there no welfare officer present? Why were the police called? Why did Enforcement Officer Corrine Rotherham not want to be filmed?

 

CRT’s Relationship Manager Matthew Symonds claimed on 22nd September that the Waterways Chaplaincy had been supporting the woman, but the Chaplaincy has confirmed that they were not involved at all prior to the eviction. CRT did refer the case to their Welfare Officer Sean Williams, but unlike social housing, CRT has no measures in place to safeguard vulnerable people in cases where health issues mean that the person at risk of eviction does not engage with the authorities. We have been informed that the boater attempted to claim Housing Benefit.

According to Mr Wells, it was apparent from his conversation with them that the bailiffs, police and Ms Rotherham all wanted to avoid any responsibility for the eviction. He said that one bailiff was clearly uncomfortable and another said that it was ridiculous and tried to distance himself from his job.

CRT currently uses bailiffs from a private company called The Sheriffs Office when they believe that a boat dweller will be resident on a boat at an eviction. Kevin George Thomas of The Sheriffs Office appears to be one of the bailiffs in the first photo. The second photo shows Mr Thomas serving court papers on a boater in 2014. Kevin Thomas used to work for Sherlock, a trading division of Shergroup Limited, which also included Sherforce bailiffs that CRT used until about 2014.

We have unconfirmed reports that the woman was renting the boat but the “landlord” failed to licence it. Anyone in this situation should make sure that the boat is licensed and should also be aware that they have very few rights.

 

 

 

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.