New T&C's - merged thread

[ditchcrawler]

13 minutes ago, haggis said:

No, I haven't noticed any . Must look more closely. I wondered if such companies were used in view of what  Matty and Alan said

 

Haggis

 

[Alan de Enfield]

7 minutes ago, ditchcrawler said:

 

 

 

It makes interesting reading going thru it all again.

 

It was 2017 when I still had several more years to go on the canals, and it looks as if my posts were pretty much identical to those of the last few days.

[haggis]

38 minutes ago, ditchcrawler said:

 

Thank you, Brian.  So they have been in use on the canals for about 4 years . I wonder if anyone has fallen foul and had to pay the fine. 

That's my job for our next trip - read the mooring signs ? 

 

haggis

[ditchcrawler]

8 minutes ago, haggis said:

Thank you, Brian.  So they have been in use on the canals for about 4 years . I wonder if anyone has fallen foul and had to pay the fine. 

That's my job for our next trip - read the mooring signs ? 

 

haggis

I think there was a problem on the K&A with people just pitching up on long term moorings.

[Mike Todd]

On 28/05/2021 at 18:55, Arthur Marshall said:

I absolutely agree. The interests of minorities shouldn't be trampled on. But I'm waiting to be told what these interests are, and the nature of the minorities.  If it's just people who live on boats who basically want to be moored in one place without the expense of renting a mooring, then I'm not sure the whinging is justified. That's like folk in houses refusing to pay council tax because they don't like the council's politics.

There is a strong argument for opening up cheap moorings for residential boats in town and cities, but this isn't what is being discussed. The new t&cs don't seem to have disadvantaged anyone on here yet.

The problem I suspect us that you are asking people who read what us on the face if the document. The kind of conflict that can arise is when someone finds a way if using/abusing what was innocuous at first sight. The more complex a legal document the more likely it is that there will be unintended consequences or, if you are a conspiracy thrust, latent intended ones. I am quite sure that you know that it is a tad more complex than you pretend it is!

[PeterF]

9 minutes ago, Mike Todd said:

The problem I suspect us that you are asking people who read what us on the face if the document. The kind of conflict that can arise is when someone finds a way if using/abusing what was innocuous at first sight. The more complex a legal document the more likely it is that there will be unintended consequences or, if you are a conspiracy thrust, latent intended ones. I am quite sure that you know that it is a tad more complex than you pretend it is!

You mean like councils using the RIPA legislation for covert surveillance of terrorists to spy on the parents of school children 10 years or so ago.

[Arthur Marshall]

27 minutes ago, Mike Todd said:

The problem I suspect us that you are asking people who read what us on the face if the document. The kind of conflict that can arise is when someone finds a way if using/abusing what was innocuous at first sight. The more complex a legal document the more likely it is that there will be unintended consequences or, if you are a conspiracy thrust, latent intended ones. I am quite sure that you know that it is a tad more complex than you pretend it is!

Very true. It's a valid general rule never to trust anyone with any authority over you. But I still can't see any great problems arising from the t&cs - but then I can't see a great problem in a few people living on boats where they shouldn't rather than being homeless.

CRT would say that isn't their problem, but it has to be somebody's, sooner or later.

[CompairHolman]

We are all operating under a pleasure boat licence that is claimed to be both statutory and a civil contract at the same time, why bother discussing it anymore until this question is answered?

 

It's like discussing the decorating before the foundations have been finished.

 

 

[Arthur Marshall]

1 hour ago, CompairHolman said:

We are all operating under a pleasure boat licence that is claimed to be both statutory and a civil contract at the same time, why bother discussing it anymore until this question is answered?

 

It's like discussing the decorating before the foundations have been finished.

 

 

Because to most of us it's irrelevant?

[Allan(nb Albert)]

A bit of ignorance being displayed about data protection in the T's & C's, I think.

 

Under the British Waterways Act 1971, CRT has a statutory duty to keep a register of craft available for public inspection. Seems to me that the T's & C's attempt to alter the law  by allowing CRT to decide who can obtain this information.

 

 

 

[matty40s]

13 hours ago, CompairHolman said:

 

 

It's like discussing the decorating before the foundations have been finished.

 

 

..or who is paying for it....

[Iain_S]

19 hours ago, ditchcrawler said:

I think there was a problem on the K&A with people just pitching up on long term moorings.

It's quite a few years since we were on the K&A, but my memory was that there were miles of empty long term moorings east of Bath, with no spaces where a visiting boat could stop without being in violation of the signage.

[ditchcrawler]

3 hours ago, Allan(nb Albert) said:

A bit of ignorance being displayed about data protection in the T's & C's, I think.

 

Under the British Waterways Act 1971, CRT has a statutory duty to keep a register of craft available for public inspection. Seems to me that the T's & C's attempt to alter the law  by allowing CRT to decide who can obtain this information.

 

 

 

Is a register of craft the same as name and addresses of private owners. Surly it was this register that Jim Shead put on his web site and is now what is on CanalplanAC but nolonger up to date. Maybe C&RT are failing in their duty to publish that?

 

[Alan de Enfield]

6 minutes ago, ditchcrawler said:

Is a register of craft the same as name and addresses of private owners. Surly it was this register that Jim Shead put on his web site and is now what is on CanalplanAC but nolonger up to date. Maybe C&RT are failing in their duty to publish that?

 

 

It would appear so.

 

The register must be availbale to be viewed on payment of 10p (see section 18) and the details that must be displayed are shown in Schedule 2

 

 

 

[Arthur Marshall]

6 minutes ago, ditchcrawler said:

Is a register of craft the same as name and addresses of private owners. Surly it was this register that Jim Shead put on his web site and is now what is on CanalplanAC but nolonger up to date. Maybe C&RT are failing in their duty to publish that?

 

It doesn't say that the register should be published, just available for inspection.

[ditchcrawler]

1 hour ago, Alan de Enfield said:

 

It would appear so.

 

The register must be availbale to be viewed on payment of 10p (see section 18) and the details that must be displayed are shown in Schedule 2

 

 

 

But very few Narrowboats are House Boats, don't they have a specific definition and a house boat licence or permit

[Allan(nb Albert)]

2 hours ago, ditchcrawler said:

Is a register of craft the same as name and addresses of private owners. Surly it was this register that Jim Shead put on his web site and is now what is on CanalplanAC but nolonger up to date. Maybe C&RT are failing in their duty to publish that?

 

No Brian, the boat index on Jim Shead's site does not contain the name and address of the owner. The register that, by law, CRT must keep and make available for inspection will contain the name and address of the owner (private or otherwise) and licence applicant.
 

 

24 minutes ago, ditchcrawler said:

But very few Narrowboats are House Boats, don't they have a specific definition and a house boat licence or permit

Houseboat certificates were introduced by this act so are included. As I recall, CRT are specifically empowered to set Terms and Conditions for House Boat Certificates.

 

Edited May 30, 2021 by Allan(nb Albert)

[Alan de Enfield]

37 minutes ago, ditchcrawler said:

But very few Narrowboats are House Boats, don't they have a specific definition and a house boat licence or permit

 

Yes , but the Act covers ALL pleasure boats  AND house boats, be they anorexic. obese, mobile or static

[Tim Lewis]

2 hours ago, Alan de Enfield said:

 

It would appear so.

 

The register must be availbale to be viewed on payment of 10p (see section 18) and the details that must be displayed are shown in Schedule 2

 

 

 

 

Surely any such requirements will have been superseded by the GDPR regulations?

 

[Alan de Enfield]

1 minute ago, Tim Lewis said:

 

Surely any such requirements will have been superseded by the GDPR regulations?

 

 

 

Does new legislation automatically repeal / overide all relevant parts of any previous legislation ?

[ditchcrawler]

2 hours ago, Tim Lewis said:

 

Surely any such requirements will have been superseded by the GDPR regulations?

 

I would have thought so

[Allan(nb Albert)]

4 hours ago, Alan de Enfield said:

 

 

Does new legislation automatically repeal / overide all relevant parts of any previous legislation ?

GDPR is about how the holder of information (in this case CRT) uses it. In GDPR speak "using" is called "processing").

GDPR Article 6(1)(c) provides a lawful basis for processing where "processing is necessary for compliance with a legal obligation to which the controller is subject.”

 

[Alan de Enfield]

1 minute ago, Allan(nb Albert) said:

GDPR is about how the holder of information (in this case CRT) uses it. In GDPR speak "using" is called "processing").

GDPR Article 6(1)(c) provides a lawful basis for processing where "processing is necessary for compliance with a legal obligation to which the controller is subject.”

 

 

 

That suggests that C&RT must still comply withh the 1971 Act and the GDPR legislations allows them to comply with the law.

[Allan(nb Albert)]

21 minutes ago, Alan de Enfield said:

 

 

That suggests that C&RT must still comply withh the 1971 Act and the GDPR legislations allows them to comply with the law.

The British Waterways Board (Transfer of Functions) Order 2012, transferred BW's functions of harbour authority, navigation authority and statutory undertaker to CRT. This included duties under British Waterways Acts from 1963 to 1995 inclusive.

GDPR operates on seven key principles, the first of which deals with lawfulness. Quite simply if the law requires that you provide information then you do not contravene GDPR regulations by providing it. 

Edited May 30, 2021 by Allan(nb Albert)

[Mike Todd]

8 hours ago, Allan(nb Albert) said:

No Brian, the boat index on Jim Shead's site does not contain the name and address of the owner. The register that, by law, CRT must keep and make available for inspection will contain the name and address of the owner (private or otherwise) and licence applicant.
 

 

Houseboat certificates were introduced by this act so are included. As I recall, CRT are specifically empowered to set Terms and Conditions for House Boat Certificates.

 

Other cases exist where an original requirement to hold and publysts which included addresses have been superseded by GDPR eg parish electoral rolls.