Jump to content

London boaters fight for moorings


Featured Posts

36 minutes ago, magnetman said:

It's a shame Tony Dunkley isn't on here. 

 

He's great at doing extensive ranting about how the boat he once owned was subjected to a S8 then sold by them to a new owner but is still technically his boat. 

 

It seems a valid argument but there are times when what actually happens in the real world takes precedence over what an individual may think is right or wrong. 

 

The London situation is interesting as there are a lot of people with plenty of money (those new widebeams are not free) so in theory a group funded court case against CRT could be done.

 

Problem being that nobody is really that interested in living on a boat unless it is super cheap so most do toe the line. There will always be alternatives for most people. 

 

Annoyingly it can be those who have no other options who get screwed by the CRT

 

 

 

 

 

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?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Yes he does go on TB and is very ranty and occasionally quite abusive. It's amusing for a while but also somewhat tiresome.

 

He won't be getting the boat back as CRT will have sold it by now. 

 

I agree Tony is good for knowledge but he has some significant issues which need to be addressed moving forwards. 

 

 

  • Greenie 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

It would be interesting if someone were refused a licence whose movement pattern was compliant but had banged pins into cracks in asphalt, tied onto safety ladders, moored on lock landings etc.

 

I suspect CRT would go for the traditional “not moved enough” option though.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

3 minutes ago, Paul C said:

It would be interesting if someone were refused a licence whose movement pattern was compliant

 

C&RT determine if the movement is compliant or not, there is no "if you travel 20 miles you are compliant"so, if you have been refused a licence you were non compliant.

 

If C&RT say you are not compliant then it up to you to 'satisfy the board' not for C&RT to tell you how far you must go.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

9 minutes ago, Alan de Enfield said:

 

C&RT determine if the movement is compliant or not, there is no "if you travel 20 miles you are compliant"so, if you have been refused a licence you were non compliant.

 

If C&RT say you are not compliant then it up to you to 'satisfy the board' not for C&RT to tell you how far you must go.

 

 

In addition, I suspect if boater "A" cruises a range of X miles quietly and causes CRT no trouble the board may find themselves more inclined to be satisfied with boater A than with another boater "B" who cruises the same range but generates an endless stream of complaints to CRT from other boaters about anti-social behaviour by them.

 

 

  • Greenie 2
Link to comment
Share on other sites

2 hours ago, waterworks said:

The standard licence is statutory and not a contract, CRT cannot add terms and conditions to it and even if you agreed and signed what they now falsely claim is a contract it is legally void and cannot be enforced. No contract can override statute. 

 

If you have breached a bylaw then they will have to present that to a court and the only penalty is the fine stated in that bylaw, your licence cannot be revoked for any offence. 

I do like a touch of irony.

Made me laff.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 hour ago, Chewbacka said:

Which is why CRT who are in no hurry simply wait for the licence to expire, then say they are not ‘satisfied’ about something (usually cruising patterns) and refuse to issue a licence.  If you do not have a licence for any reason (including because they won’t sell you one), then they will apply to the courts for s8 and as many in this situation have found, you must either remove the boat from their (CRT) waters or they will remove it and you will be responsible for their costs.  If you fail to pay their costs the will sell your boat, returning any surplus to you.

CRT are not dictators that cannot be challenged, if your licence is refused or revoked they can be forced in court to prove it is lawful, just by keeping your boat on their water and stating you live in it you force then to go to court to remove you, they cannot vaguely state " they are not satisfied" and that's it. 


 

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

17 hours ago, Alan de Enfield said:

 

The licence T&Cs (which you have agreed to) state that you must comply with the Bye-laws, if you don't, then you have failed to do what you signed up to do, the remedy of which is termination of your licence.

 

 

10.7. You must comply with relevant legislation, byelaws, and the navigation rules identified in condition 11. You must follow Our lawful directions (spoken or written, including signs). This includes signs that prohibit mooring or limit the mooring time at specific locations. Most navigation signs that You will see as You travel are self-explanatory.

That's not true, as I have already explained, you can prove me wrong by searching the 1965 General Canal Bylaws and quote anywhere it says punishment for breach of any of the bylaws is termination of your licence ?

 

Save you looking, it doesn't, breach of those bylaws is a fine and only a fine.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

10 minutes ago, waterworks said:

CRT are not dictators that cannot be challenged, if your licence is refused or revoked they can be forced in court to prove it is lawful, just by keeping your boat on their water and stating you live in it you force then to go to court to remove you, they cannot vaguely state " they are not satisfied" and that's it. 

...and that is what happens .It often takes two years and maybe accounts for many boats in the London area which don't seem to move much. I'm sure CRT have all the stats,but these days they choose not to publish this.

10 minutes ago, waterworks said:


 

 

 

Edited by Quaffer
not very techie ! sorry.
Link to comment
Share on other sites

48 minutes ago, Alan de Enfield said:

 

C&RT determine if the movement is compliant or not, there is no "if you travel 20 miles you are compliant"so, if you have been refused a licence you were non compliant.

 

If C&RT say you are not compliant then it up to you to 'satisfy the board' not for C&RT to tell you how far you must go.

CRT must have collected evidence of your sightings to decide that, you can collect evidence of where you have been as well. Like I said you have as right to a standard licence by law unless CRT can prove otherwise. 

 

Power to Revoke a standard Licence is limited to breach of the 3 conditions set out in the 95 act and the 83 act section 7 " control of unsafe vessels" which give the boat owner 28 days to remedy a dangerous fault with their craft. If anyone knows any other reason id be interested to know. 

 

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

15 minutes ago, waterworks said:

That's not true, as I have already explained, you can prove me wrong by searching the 1965 General Canal Bylaws and quote anywhere it says punishment for breach of any of the bylaws is termination of your licence ?

 

Save you looking, it doesn't, breach of those bylaws is a fine and only a fine.

 

Not what I said :

 

Breach of the T&Cs results in revocation of the licence.

One of the T&Cs is you must comply with byelaws.

 

Failure to comply with byelaws is a T&C non compliance and results in revocation of licence.

 

You are only reading the byelaws, which you are correct, non-compliance can only result in a fine

Link to comment
Share on other sites

24 minutes ago, waterworks said:

CRT are not dictators that cannot be challenged, if your licence is refused or revoked they can be forced in court to prove it is lawful, just by keeping your boat on their water and stating you live in it you force then to go to court to remove you, they cannot vaguely state " they are not satisfied" and that's it. 


 

 

 

Agree here - and having just clicked thru to the link, it does seem odd that they're claiming they can immediately cancel a licence for inconsiderate mooring etc.

 

ETA: worth mentioning though, nothing in the regulations says that CRT need to go into any level of detail why they're "not satisfied", they could simply say they're refusing to issue a new licence because of it. I dare say they actually do go into the details, its just that there might be a disagreement on what was expected. Is it up to the boater to satisfy them, though (in law). Its judicial appeal territory though.

 

I am guessing, in London, the two separate issues (CCers not moving enough; and boaters using dodgy mooring places) have come together because its one and the same minority of the general boating population who have seemingly ended up on the wrong side of "the line" (in CRT's eyes, of course). Doesn't help if CRT arbitrarily designate previously (assumedly) 'safe' moorings into unsafe ones! Although of course, it could be said that it was never really "on" as a proper mooring spot etc - an argument which would depend of each individual specific circumstance, probably.

 

 

Edited by Paul C
Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 hour ago, Alan de Enfield said:

 

C&RT determine if the movement is compliant or not, there is no "if you travel 20 miles you are compliant"so, if you have been refused a licence you were non compliant.

 

If C&RT say you are not compliant then it up to you to 'satisfy the board' not for C&RT to tell you how far you must go.

CRT must have collected evidence of your sightings to decide that, you can collect evidence of where you have been as well. Like I said you have as right to a standard licence by law unless CRT can prove otherwise. 

 

Power to Revoke a standard Licence is limited to breach of the 3 conditions set out in the 95 act and the 83 act section 7 " control of unsafe vessels" which give the boat owner 28 days to remedy a dangerous fault with their craft. If anyone knows any other reason id be interested to know. 

 

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

4 minutes ago, Alan de Enfield said:

 

Failure to comply with byelaws is a T&C non compliance and results in revocation of licence.

 

 

Revocation, or non-renewal? In any case, I can't see how they could decline the renewal so long as the conditions are met. The "the board is satisfied" stuff is to do with CC cruising behaviour, not T&C compliance.

 

At the risk of repeating myself - is there actually a case, where the T&C non compliance or mooring in eg prohibited areas has resulted in non-renewing of the licence?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

6 minutes ago, Alan de Enfield said:

 

Not what I said :

 

Breach of the T&Cs results in revocation of the licence.

One of the T&Cs is you must comply with byelaws.

 

Failure to comply with byelaws is a T&C non compliance and results in revocation of licence.

 

You are only reading the byelaws, which you are correct, non-compliance can only result in a fine

T&C's don't over ride statute, T&C's may claim to remove a licence, but Statute, if you meet the 3 conditions, a licence cannot be refused.

However getting this across to a Judge, is the problem.

 

Bod.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

5 minutes ago, Bod said:

if you meet the 3 conditions, a licence cannot be refused.

 

Well history shows you it happens - people have been put on short term licences because C&RT are not satified, when it comes to renewal C&RT have refused to issue a licence because the boater has not improved  during the issue of the short-term licemce,

The board being satisfied is one of the conditions for issuing a licence for a boat without a home mooring.

 

13 minutes ago, waterworks said:

CRT must have collected evidence of your sightings to decide that, you can collect evidence of where you have been as well. 

 

 

Agreed, and as I said earlier the onus is on the boater to prove they have moved sufficiently - in fact C&RT suggest that boaters keep a log just for this reason.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Basic principle of UK law

 

Contracts that contravene:

  1. a statute is illegal for a simple reason: the legislature said that the type of contract is not permitted

The statute in question here is the 1995 BW act section 17 which states the three conditions to be met for issue of a standard licence and they are also the three conditions that if breached allow CRT to revoke a licence. So if CRT revoke your licence for breach of it's own non statutory terms and conditions there is nothing in the law to stop you applying for and be granted another one, contract terms do not override statute.   even if you agreed to it.   

 

If you research into the BW past you will find some of the current " terms and conditions" were started as boating guidelines and BW's own lawyer stated on record in 1995 to parliament they had no power to enforce them, over the years since then CRT have been conning new boaters into believing the licence is a contract by mixing up statutory conditions with their own invented conditions,  claiming they can cancel it at any time for any reason as a civil contract, the standard licence is statutory not a contract and you have statutory rights , those rights are why parliament set out the 95 act in law, the licencing part of CRT is in fact still a public body. 

 

Another basic principle of law applies, " a statutory body has only those powers which are endowed by statute" which means CRT cannot change licence terms or conditions without changing the law. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

This is the first para of the standard licence agreement, the red part is a lie. 
 

"GENERAL TERMS AND CONDITIONS FOR BOAT LICENCES 
(EXCLUDING BUSINESS LICENCES) 
Introduction 
In accordance with s.43(3) of the Transport Act 1962, boat licences are subject to the conditions which 
apply to the Use of a boat on any Waterway which We own or manage. These are necessary to protect 
third parties and to help Us manage the Waterways well for the benefit of all Our users. If You breach any 
of these Conditions the Trust can terminate Your Licence
, which may result in the removal of Your boat 
from Our Waterways."
 

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Regardless of the theoretical legal position, if CRT believe you have either not satisfied the CC requirements, or you have broken the Ts and Cs in some way, they may refuse to renew your licence when it expires (but will not revoke an existing licence before its end date). That leaves you with an unlicensed boat on their waterway. You can of course go to court to force them to issue a licence, and you may even succeed (although it's very unlikely). But during the time that court process takes, your boat will be unlicensed, giving CRT the right to remove it from the water. If the first action does succeed you can then go back to court again to claim that the removing of your boat from the water was not in fact within CRT's powers, and seeking return of the boat, payment of your legal costs, recompense for any damage done to the boat, and possibly damages. And again there is a very slim possibility that you might succeed. But the whole process will involve you in significant work, expense and stress. Most people decide instead to (more or less) comply with CRT's requirements, as its a whole lot easier, cheaper and less stressful.

  • Greenie 4
Link to comment
Share on other sites

9 minutes ago, David Mack said:

Regardless of the theoretical legal position, if CRT believe you have either not satisfied the CC requirements, or you have broken the Ts and Cs in some way, they may refuse to renew your licence when it expires (but will not revoke an existing licence before its end date). That leaves you with an unlicensed boat on their waterway. You can of course go to court to force them to issue a licence, and you may even succeed (although it's very unlikely). But during the time that court process takes, your boat will be unlicensed, giving CRT the right to remove it from the water. If the first action does succeed you can then go back to court again to claim that the removing of your boat from the water was not in fact within CRT's powers, and seeking return of the boat, payment of your legal costs, recompense for any damage done to the boat, and possibly damages. And again there is a very slim possibility that you might succeed. But the whole process will involve you in significant work, expense and stress. Most people decide instead to (more or less) comply with CRT's requirements, as its a whole lot easier, cheaper and less stressful.

 

Not going by the number of boats I see which are absolutely not satisfying the CC requirements, and haven't done for months at a time or even longer... 😞

Link to comment
Share on other sites

5 minutes ago, IanD said:

 

Not going by the number of boats I see which are absolutely not satisfying the CC requirements, and haven't done for months at a time or even longer... 😞

Agreed. In practice CRT seem to allow some boats an awful lot of latitude before they take action. That said, we don't know how many of the perpetual non-movers are working their way through the enforcement process, which can take a long time, particularly if the boat is the owner's home.

  • Greenie 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

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. 

 

 

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Another factor is that CRT does often allow people to remain in place or have limited movement under the Equality Act 2010. 

 

Reasonable adjustments. 

 

It might come as a surprise to some what can make people eligible. 

 

As with all things it depends on how well people can do the applications. 

 

CRT do publish the numbers. I'm not sure where it is but I think it's in the hundreds not the dozens. 

 

ETA with the general situation about living on boats "by choice" being a fairly recent phenomenon, chaos in mental health services, everyone getting older and silly housing costs it seems likely these numbers will increase. 

 

https://canalrivertrust.org.uk/enjoy-the-waterways/boating/do-you-know-a-vulnerable-boater/disabled-boaters-information

 

Edited by magnetman
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.