Jump to content

Now is the time to refuse your consent to the proposed new CRT Boat Licence Terms and Conditions

noone

By noone
in General Boating

 Share

Featured Posts

Jon johan Contributor

Jon johan

Posted
Posted
7 minutes ago, Graham Davis said:

You really do have an attitude problem, don't you?
So if you don't want any members of this Forum to support the NBTA why have you bothered to post on here? Because at the moment all you are doing is antagonising people and not gaining any support at all.
 

Haven’t I already told you to get over yourself, if not, sorry, I’ll say it now. Get over yourself, it’s a forum, like wow, you know, people can express themselves.

The only one who seems to have attitude issues is you Mr shouty. Calm down dude.

Link to comment
Share on other sites
Jerra Veteran II

Jerra

Posted
Posted
1 hour ago, Leggers do it lying down said:

https://uk.news.yahoo.com/people-offend-abuse-another-without-130125114.html

It's legal!.

That could be an interesting discussion.   From the Govts website on racism and hate crime:

 

Crime and Disorder Act 1998 (as amended)

This Act created a number of specific offences of racially aggravated crime, based on offences of wounding, assault, damage, harassment and threatening/abusive behaviour. The Act defines "racial group" as a group of persons defined by reference to race, colour, nationality (including citizenship) or ethnic or national origins.

  • Greenie 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites
Alan de Enfield Veteran II

Alan de Enfield

Posted
Posted
1 minute ago, Jerra said:

That could be an interesting discussion.   From the Govts website on racism and hate crime:

 

Crime and Disorder Act 1998 (as amended)

This Act created a number of specific offences of racially aggravated crime, based on offences of wounding, assault, damage, harassment and threatening/abusive behaviour. The Act defines "racial group" as a group of persons defined by reference to race, colour, nationality (including citizenship) or ethnic or national origins.

 

Exactly what I posted in the CAB link.

  • Greenie 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites
Graham Davis Veteran

Graham Davis

Posted
Posted
3 minutes ago, Jon johan said:

Haven’t I already told you to get over yourself, if not, sorry, I’ll say it now. Get over yourself, it’s a forum, like wow, you know, people can express themselves.

The only one who seems to have attitude issues is you Mr shouty. Calm down dude.

Oh dear! I haven't shouted at you once and I'm perfectly calm, thank you. 
You however...............................................?
Still carry on, your doing ever more harm to the aims of the NBTA with your attitude.

  • Greenie 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites
Jon johan Contributor

Jon johan

Posted
Posted
6 minutes ago, Graham Davis said:

Oh dear! I haven't shouted at you once and I'm perfectly calm, thank you. 
You however...............................................?
Still carry on, your doing ever more harm to the aims of the NBTA with your attitude.

I perhaps should point out I am not a member of the nbta.
I have a 60x14ft wide beam I use during the winter months and is berthed within a marina. I have a Birchwood crusader 400 I use during the summer months. I doubt very much the nbta would even want me.
Be a good lad, take your pills as nurse instructs you, read the posts with care, and no doubt you won’t be so confused and fuddled. 

  • Unimpressed 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites
Ewan123 Proficient

Ewan123

Posted
Posted (edited)
31 minutes ago, Alan de Enfield said:

The only issue I can see to get 'aerated' about is the dimension changes.

 

C&RTs wording would appear that they reserve the right to amend the dimensions of the canals, which is illegal under the 1968 Act. Canals must be maintained such that they continue to be usable by boats that could have used them in 1968.

 

What C&RT need to do is restrict which canals can be accessed by 'Widebeams', this cannot be done by licencing as once licenced the bot is free to go anywhere.

 

What needs to be done is for 'narrows' (chicane) to be installed on canals that only allows boats of suitable dimensions access.

I recall someone posted a link to an ongoing FOI request relating to the first part, trying to get records of the original navigation dimensions prior to 1968 from CRT (and getting frustrated by a lack un-updated original copies).

 

I can't find the link again - anyone have it to hand?

Edited by Ewan123
Link to comment
Share on other sites
Guest

Guest

Posted
Posted
17 minutes ago, Alan de Enfield said:

 

Exactly what I posted in the CAB link.

Can you let me know your nationality in order that can call you 'typically what ever it is'.

 

You can then report me to the cops for being 'racist'.

Link to comment
Share on other sites
Alan de Enfield Veteran II

Alan de Enfield

Posted
Posted (edited)
7 minutes ago, Ewan123 said:

I recall someone posted a link to an ongoing FOI request relating to the first part, trying to get records of the original navigation dimensions prior to 1968 from CRT (and getting frustrated by a lack un-updated original copies).

 

I can't find the link again - anyone have it to hand?

I have the original documents (copies) and tables showing all the legally required dimensions for each Canal.

The 1968 Act used the dimemsions of Craft using the canals for the 9 month period prior to December 1967

 

Example :

 

 

Screenshot (108).png

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

Graham Davis

Posted
Posted
19 minutes ago, Jon johan said:

I perhaps should point out I am not a member of the nbta.
I have a 60x14ft wide beam I use during the winter months and is berthed within a marina. I have a Birchwood crusader 400 I use during the summer months. I doubt very much the nbta would even want me.
Be a good lad, take your pills as nurse instructs you, read the posts with care, and no doubt you won’t be so confused and fuddled. 

Oh dear. 
Have you considered joining Thunderboat? Your rude and infantile manner would be much more suited over there, and they would be a lot less polite to you then we are allowed.

Link to comment
Share on other sites
Ewan123 Proficient

Ewan123

Posted
Posted
32 minutes ago, Alan de Enfield said:

I have the original documents (copies) and tables showing all the legally required dimensions for each Canal.

The 1968 Act used the dimemsions of Craft using the canals for the 9 month period prior to December 1967

 

Example :

 

 

Screenshot (108).png

Interesting, I wonder why they found it so difficult to find (CRT, that is).

Link to comment
Share on other sites
Mike Adams Rising Star

Mike Adams

Posted
Posted

I responded to the consultation which concerned me regarding the changes in navigational dimensions but otherwise they seemed reasonable and were in response to changing circumstances on the canals. I believe the proposed changes have been largely proposed in response to boating activities that were never envisaged in the earlier acts. The canals were largely kept and restored as an amenity resource be it for boaters, fishermen, walkers canoeists etc. Nobody, including me, thought at the time when restoring canals that the numbers and sizes of the craft on the canals would reach the levels we have today. There were a few houseboats around the system but pleasure boats were much smaller and I remember how we looked up to a dawncraft with envy from our little 17ft plywood cruiser. We now have a situation aggravated by the media and commercial interests that suggest it is OK to go and buy the largest vessel that will fit on a navigation and live on it on the pretense that they are continuous cruisers and pushing every regulation to the limit especially the 14 day rule as a right. Houseboats are fine with a properly serviced mooring as are genuine continuous cruisers and all this stuff is just because people don't work within the spirit of the bylaws. Unfortunately this is leading to increased draconian measures around mooring sites and so on as CaRT try to try one step ahead of the problems.

Link to comment
Share on other sites
enigmatic Rising Star

enigmatic

Posted
Posted

IIRC people here also questioned the legality and drafting of the terms requiring people with a home mooring to observe cc rules when not at their home mooring

 

I won't be writing to CRT to say I reject their conditions because I quite fancy getting the gold licence (and pro rated crt licence refund) next year...

Link to comment
Share on other sites
Arthur Marshall Veteran II

Arthur Marshall

Posted
Posted

What is the problem with home moorers following CC rules when cruising? I've never managed to work out why one wouldn't, unless you've got a home mooring specifically so you can hang about somewhere else without shifting, and you can't do that legally anyway.

What surprises me is that CRT haven't yet found a way to refuse CC status to anyone not living on the boat, as the 14 (ish) day dump & move brigade seem to be proliferating like rabbits, and they are the boats that cause problems by coming adrift, sinking or just clogging up prime spots or visitor moorings. And yes I do know it's legal,  but moving maybe a dozen times in a year isn't exactly in the spirit of a continuous cruise.

  • Greenie 3
Link to comment
Share on other sites
TheBiscuits Veteran II

TheBiscuits

Posted
Posted
7 minutes ago, Jerra said:

Legal yes but "within the spirit of continuous cruising" personally I doubt.

 

What is the "spirit of continuous cruising"?

 

Genuine question, because I think it was something BW made up out of whole cloth when they didn't get their own way with the 1995 act regarding moorings.  It has no basis in law, there is no definition of it apart from the "rules" BW published and it's often used to make attacks on scruffy boaters.

 

For clarity, my boat is licenced "without a home mooring" (the legal definition) and I have less time for bridge hoppers and continuous moorers than most, if only because they make it harder work for those of us that do follow the rules. 

 

I know quite a few boaters who only move every 14 days who just bimble their way happily around the system, some liveaboards and some every-other-weekenders.  I have also noticed that most of the boats that cause the most frustration at popular spots are boats with home moorings - you can tell from the code on the licence.  BW-05-007 is a boat without a home mooring, anything else wasn't at last licence renewal.

 

 

  • 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
 Share
Go to topic listing

  • 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.