Jump to content

London boaters fight for moorings


Boaty Jo

Featured Posts

1 hour ago, waterworks said:

I only stated what to my best knowledge is the law, whether or not CRT abide by it in practice is another matter, I think most sane people would agree that they should be held accountable to stick to the law. 

 

The matter of " satisfying the board" about your movements is not a mystery, it doesn't mean CRT can refuse your licence on a whim, CRT have stated what is acceptable to them, unless you fall foul of that your licence cannot be refused. Keep a record if you think CRT will falsely claim you haven't moved far enough. 

 

 

But this is not the point being debated. We are discussing whether CRT can use the 'satisfy the board' requirement to deny a licence to someone with a history of breaching the byelaws. In particular by tying mooring lines to railings and other infrastructure not designed for the purpose.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

20 hours ago, mrsmelly said:

Tony is a great, knowlegable bloke. Does he use the lesser forum called Thunderclap or something like that? Did he ever get his boat back?

He never got his boat back despite being in the right, in his opinion, in fact he is never going to be reasonable. I left TB because of his rantings, vindictive personal, unreasonable, and ultimately wrong.

Edited by LadyG
  • Greenie 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 hour ago, MtB said:

 

 

But this is not the point being debated. We are discussing whether CRT can use the 'satisfy the board' requirement to deny a licence to someone with a history of breaching the byelaws. In particular by tying mooring lines to railings and other infrastructure not designed for the purpose.

From the Act:  "the applicant for the relevant consent satisfies the Board that the vessel to which the application relates will be used bona fide for navigation throughout the period for which the consent is valid"

 

Some on here are narrowly defining 'bona fide for navigation' as only relating to distance travelled/cruising pattern.  I would imagine it's pretty easy to convince a judge that banging pins into concrete is not consistent with 'bona fide for navigation' as a boat used properly for navigation will have no need to bang pins into concrete.  Therefore the board is not satisfied, therefore licence is not issued.

  • Greenie 3
Link to comment
Share on other sites

5 minutes ago, doratheexplorer said:

I would imagine it's pretty easy to convince a judge that banging pins into concrete is not consistent with 'bona fide for navigation' as a boat used properly for navigation will have no need to bang pins into concrete.  Therefore the board is not satisfied, therefore licence is not issued.

 

So by that logic, anyone with a declared home mooring can cheerfully bang pins through concrete or tarmac.

 

There is no "bona fide" clause for a boat with a home mooring ...

  • Haha 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

14 minutes ago, TheBiscuits said:

 

So by that logic, anyone with a declared home mooring can cheerfully bang pins through concrete or tarmac.

 

There is no "bona fide" clause for a boat with a home mooring ...

I wonder if I bang two in and connect wires to my batteries...........................................🤣

Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 hour ago, TheBiscuits said:

 

So by that logic, anyone with a declared home mooring can cheerfully bang pins through concrete or tarmac.

 

There is no "bona fide" clause for a boat with a home mooring ...

Also (edit as misread the comment)

Edited by magnetman
Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 hour ago, TheBiscuits said:

 

So by that logic, anyone with a declared home mooring can cheerfully bang pins through concrete or tarmac.

 

There is no "bona fide" clause for a boat with a home mooring ...

We don't need it. We have no rights to moor anywhere for any length of time except by a concession that allows us to hang around a place for a few days. We don't need to be told that we have to indulge in bona fide cruising because, legally, we aren't entitled to do anything else.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

3 minutes ago, Arthur Marshall said:

We don't need it. We have no rights to moor anywhere for any length of time except by a concession that allows us to hang around a place for a few days. We don't need to be told that we have to indulge in bona fide cruising because, legally, we aren't entitled to do anything else.

 

You know that, I know that, a few others do too.  Doesn't seem to bother many though!

1 hour ago, peterboat said:

I wonder if I bang two in and connect wires to my batteries...........................................🤣

 

Yes.

 

Get someone to stand well clear and video it please, it can go on one of those dubious elf'n'safety DVDs 😁

  • Haha 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Like I said before bylaws have set punishments written into the legislation, in this case fines, a pleasure boat licence cannot lawfully be revoked or refused for breech of any bylaws.  

 

CRT would have to claim their own terms and conditions override the bylaws, which is nonsense. 

 

When CRT ask you if you agree to the licence terms and conditions it's meaningless and carries no legal weight, if you had £50,000 to spare you could in theory take it to court and be issued a licence without signing the terms and conditions, however it's much easier to just agree since an unlawful contract is void even if you agree to it. 

Edited by waterworks
Link to comment
Share on other sites

2 hours ago, TheBiscuits said:

 

So by that logic, anyone with a declared home mooring can cheerfully bang pins through concrete or tarmac.

 

There is no "bona fide" clause for a boat with a home mooring ...

Not at all.  Your position is a logical fallacy.  Just because one sanction exists for an action, it doesn't mean no other sanctions exist.  Criminal damage is criminal damage, but my position is that damaging the towpath by banging pins into it may not lead to non-renewal of a licence for those with home moorings. 

 

Obviously if you know of a time a boater with a home mooring has not had their licence renewed due to this, feel free to share it with the class.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I think if you want to go down the mooring pin rabbit hole CRT's own advice states to use them so they would have trouble claiming otherwise. 

 

https://canalrivertrust.org.uk/media/original/41331-the-boaters-handbook.pdf?v=658e2f

 

What constitutes damage to the towpath I suppose would fall under the legal principle of what is reasonable under the circumstances, bylaws have to be taken through a court CRT has no powers to decide who is guilty of an offence. 

 

In any case FOI proved that CRT doesn't enforce any of the bylaws and never have, ask any Patrol officer and they will refuse to get involved in any breach of them ( if they could even name any of them )  and point you towards the council. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

6 hours ago, waterworks said:

CRT have stated what is acceptable to them,

 

It'd be intyeresting to see that in writing from C&RT.

What C&RT have repeatedly stated is "what  is NOT acceptable" to them, sometimes phrased as 'unlikely to be acceptable'

 

I'm sure you are well aware of this email sent by the Head of Enforcement to a boater ....................... This has been interpreted by many boaters to mean that 20 miles is acceptable but all it means is that those boaters have a poor understanding of the English language.

 

 

London Enforcement Manager Simon Cadek sent an email to a boater who was warned that they were on course for failing their six month restricted licence, telling them what they would need to do to pass.




When we are looking at boat movements we are looking for characteristics of bona fide navigation, these fall roughly into four categories:


· Range: by range we mean the furthest points a boat has travelled on the network, not merely the total distance travelled. While the BW act does not stipulate what that distance is the Trust has previously said that anyone travelling a range of less than say 20 miles (32km) would struggle to satisfy the Trust that they are engaged in bona fide navigation and that normally we would expect a greater range.


. For the avoidance of doubt, a small number of long journeys over a short period of time, followed or preceded by cruising in a small are of the network would not generally satisfy the Trust that you are engaged in bona fide navigation.


· Overstaying: we look to see how often boats overstay, either the 14 day limit on the main length of the canal, or shorter periods where local signage dictates, for example short stay visitor moorings.


While we are flexible with the occasional overstay from most boaters due to breakdown, illness or other emergencies, we will look at the overall pattern balanced with range and movement pattern in order to form a view.


Overstay reminders are issued when a boat is seen in the same area for more than 14 days. While we are unable to say how far you need to travel each time you move, we would advise that you normally travel further than a few km each time.


This will prevent you from getting reminders and depending on the length of other trips you make and how many times you turn back on yourself, should increase your overall range over the course of your licence.


· Movement: Continuous Cruiser Licences are intended for bona fide (genuine) navigation around the network, rather than for a boat to remain in one mooring spot, place neighbourhood or area.


We would expect boats on these licences to move around the network such that they don’t gravitate back to favoured areas too often i.e. in a way that it’s clear to us that they’re living in a small area of the waterway.


The basic principle of this is that these licences are not intended for living in an area and if it looks like a boat is habitually returning to a particular part of the waterway then this would not generally satisfy the Trust.


Within an acceptable range we’d expect a genuine movement, so for example it would not satisfy the Trust if a boat went on a 60 mile trip during the course of say two weeks, then returned to cruise in an area of say 5 miles the remainder of the time (figures are examples only).


Generally speaking, the smaller the range the less we’d expect to see boats back at the same locations. Of course people need to turn around and they’re perfectly free to re-visit places they have been to before, it’s living in a small area on this kind of licence that would cause a problem.

 

 

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

18 minutes ago, waterworks said:

 

In any case FOI proved that CRT doesn't enforce any of the bylaws and never have, ask any Patrol officer and they will refuse to get involved in any breach of them ( if they could even name any of them )  and point you towards the council. 

Just because CRT haven't used byelaws in the past don't mean they won't if it suits them in the future. They've got a court proven hammer in S8 or whatever it is, so why should they change? And the odds are that a court will happily enforce the T&Cs unless the challenger has a boatload of money, and as they generally make sense and cause no problems for anyone not trying to game the system, what's the problem?

You have to remember that no-one in this country cares much about the law. Policemen, judges, politicians, CRT and the general public mostly don't have a clue what it is, and even if they think they do, they cheerfully break it when it suits. Unless you murder someone respectable or steal from a celebrity, you'll be fine as long as you do it quietly.

  • Greenie 3
Link to comment
Share on other sites

I'm not sure what a "mooring pin rabbit hole" is but this also brings into the equation the potential for interfering with animals. 

 

If you did hammer a mooring pin into a rabbit hole and someone who was in the Rabbit Protection League spotted you it could end up in the hands of the RSPCA .

 

They have quite a lot of powers.

 

 

I have on more than one occasion hammered a pin into wasp nests but it seems they don't need a protection league as quite capable of defending themselves from such intrusions. 

 

Maybe the CRT need to introduce some bats and newts in strategic areas. 

ETA and wasps. 

 

Use the wasps ! 

 

 

Edited by magnetman
Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 hour ago, waterworks said:

I think if you want to go down the mooring pin rabbit hole CRT's own advice states to use them so they would have trouble claiming otherwise. 

 

https://canalrivertrust.org.uk/media/original/41331-the-boaters-handbook.pdf?v=658e2f

 

What constitutes damage to the towpath I suppose would fall under the legal principle of what is reasonable under the circumstances, bylaws have to be taken through a court CRT has no powers to decide who is guilty of an offence. 

 

In any case FOI proved that CRT doesn't enforce any of the bylaws and never have, ask any Patrol officer and they will refuse to get involved in any breach of them ( if they could even name any of them )  and point you towards the council. 

 

Why is it a rabbit hole? Its only complicated and debatable if you're basically stupid, I'd have thought the advice of:

 

"Do not attempt to hammer into concrete or other hard surfaces"

 

was pretty clear. Or in other words, what we all know as "normal" use of mooring pins by hammering them into grass is perfectly reasonable and acceptable, yes it doesn't leave the area forensically identical but the hole closes up or is otherwise a non-issue in grass/soil because it is able to heal naturally.

 

Previous non-enforcement of byelaws is not a reliable indication that they are safe to ignore, superfluous, or won't be enforced in the future. If I were stopped for speeding at 90mph on the motorway, and I pointed out "Why officer, you didn't stop me doing 94mph last Tuesday 14th June, or 87mph on Wednesday, or 104mph on Friday. Can you pretend they are irrelevant and let me off? Thanks" I imagine I would be in more bother, not less.

 

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Quite a few years ago, around 2011, I ratchet strapped the front of the boat (30 tonne barge) to a buddleia plant growing out of the side of the towpath because it was right at the end of the mooring and only one ring available. 

 

A BW enforcer (or someone else with a sticky documents enclosed envelope) did attach a notice and quoted something about not damagjng the plants. 

 

It could have been some nutter but I think it was genuine. 

 

The buddleia was bloody handy as a mooring attachment point. Very durable. No issues. 

Edited by magnetman
Link to comment
Share on other sites

2 minutes ago, magnetman said:

I'm not sure what a "mooring pin rabbit hole" is but this also brings into the equation the potential for interfering with animals. 

 

 

 

 

If the rabbit holes were strategically correctly positioned with respect to the bow & stern, you could use an inflatable balloon or perhaps a large one of these (so the rabbits can work their way around it) to moor instead:

 

61PlCtO7KXS._AC_SL1500_.jpg

 

  • Greenie 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

7 hours ago, waterworks said:

I only stated what to my best knowledge is the law, whether or not CRT abide by it in practice is another matter, I think most sane people would agree that they should be held accountable to stick to the law. 

 

The matter of " satisfying the board" about your movements is not a mystery, it doesn't mean CRT can refuse your licence on a whim, CRT have stated what is acceptable to them, unless you fall foul of that your licence cannot be refused. Keep a record if you think CRT will falsely claim you haven't moved far enough. 

 

 

 

In general I think you are incorrect as they try to keep to saying what will not satisfy them. Sadly too many people (especially those interested in boundary conditions) don't understand the difference. But I also realise that CaRT and BW before them, have not found it easy to produce any statements that give people any certainty and most of their attempts have been undermined by those on an agenda. I am aware of certain situations where, under the radar, CaRT are trying really hard to work with those who have specific needs (especially those who come within the disability legislation) and still being reasonably fair to everyone else.

  • Greenie 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

6 minutes ago, Paul C said:

 

If the rabbit holes were strategically correctly positioned with respect to the bow & stern, you could use an inflatable balloon or perhaps a large one of these (so the rabbits can work their way around it) to moor instead:

 

61PlCtO7KXS._AC_SL1500_.jpg

 

My younger daughter who is in the Rabbit Protection League says that the pictured device may contravene the Rabbit Rights Act section R8. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

2 minutes ago, magnetman said:

My younger daughter who is in the Rabbit Protection League says that the pictured device may contravene the Rabbit Rights Act section R8. 

 

Its important to clarify what's meant by inserting the above into the rabbit hole. 

  • Greenie 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

9 minutes ago, Mike Todd said:

In general I think you are incorrect as they try to keep to saying what will not satisfy them. Sadly too many people (especially those interested in boundary conditions) don't understand the difference. But I also realise that CaRT and BW before them, have not found it easy to produce any statements that give people any certainty and most of their attempts have been undermined by those on an agenda. I am aware of certain situations where, under the radar, CaRT are trying really hard to work with those who have specific needs (especially those who come within the disability legislation) and still being reasonably fair to everyone else.

 

 

Repetition adds emphasis ( I posted the same some time ago) - maybe 'waterworks' is 'hard of reading' and doesn't understand the difference.

  • 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
  • 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.