Jump to content

Charges or fines ?


Featured Posts

25 minutes ago, Alan de Enfield said:

 

I came up with a proposal to overcome that (it was discussed here some years ago)

 

Basically it was you paid a lump sum at the start of every year (say £5000) and for every mile you moved you got (say £x) credited to your account (or paid back or whatever)

 

CMers paid £5000 a year

Big Movers paid almost nothing.

Middle of the 'roaders' paid (say) £1000

 

The payments were on a tapering system, something like £2 per mile for the first 500 miles, £3 per mile for the next 500 miles £4 a miles for the next 500 miles.  or it could have been charger 'the other way around' £4 for the 1st 500 miles, £3 for the next 500 miles  £2 for the next 500 miles.

(but I do not have all the original calculations to hand).

 

 

You get the gist.

Trackers would be required and would automatically update your account on a monthly basis.

Can I pay my lump sum by direct debit?

£5000 is a lot of money to stump. 
 

Apart from being complete bonkers the idea kind of smells like the utility companies that take your money up front guessing what your going to use and meanwhile profit off your money in their bank while squirm to give you anything back that you deserve. 
 

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

33 minutes ago, Alan de Enfield said:

You get the gist.

Trackers would be required and would automatically update your account on a monthly basis.

Are you Chinese by any chance Alan?

 

I'm sure there are quite a few people here who would enjoy tracking us on thier apps whilst reminiscing on thier boating past.

 

😉

Link to comment
Share on other sites

4 minutes ago, Goliath said:

Can I pay my lump sum by direct debit?

 

Define 'lump-sum'.

 

4 minutes ago, Goliath said:

.........meanwhile profit off your money in their bank

 

At 0.01% or 0.1%

 

It will cost them more to deposit the amount into the bank than they make in profit / interest.

 

We pay 0.7% charges to NatWest just to deposit or withdraw our own cash (Thats £7 'lost' for every £1000 we deposit and another £7 per £1000 when we take it out)

And folks say "do I get any discount for paying cash ?

No you don't - I should charge you extra.

 

 

Some folks have very strange ideas about running a business.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

3 minutes ago, Alan de Enfield said:

 

Define 'lump-sum'.

 

 

At 0.01% or 0.1%

 

It will cost them more to deposit the amount into the bank than they make in profit / interest.

 

We pay 0.7% charges to NatWest just to deposit or withdraw our own cash (Thats £7 'lost' for every £1000 we deposit and another £7 per £1000 when we take it out)

And folks say "do I get any discount for paying cash ?

No you don't - I should charge you extra.

 

 

Some folks have very strange ideas about running a business.

The discount for cash only works for businesses that can avoid declaring it for tax purposes. Then it makes sense.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Just now, Arthur Marshall said:

The discount for cash only works for businesses that can avoid declaring it for tax purposes. Then it makes sense.

 

I'm sure that works for 'gardeners' or 'painters', or 'brickies' or the self employed "one man bands", but for limited companies it is not so easy.

 

The tax-man started having 'a go' at a friend who was a roofer. he was accused of doing 'cash work' which he denied.

 

It got very nasty with the HMRC following his kids to school, following them into the shop and asking the shop keeper for a copy of their till receipt, followed his wife and did the same for all her shopping, sat outside his house looking to see what satellite chanels they watched, what cars they drove etc etc and basically made their life a misery. HMRC said there is no way you can have this life style on the earnings you are reporting.

 

They offered him away out - agree to a payment of underpaid income tax of £5000 and we'll close the investigation - he agreed.

 

Yes - they do go after the 'little man' as well as the big ones.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 hour ago, Alan de Enfield said:

 

Define 'lump-sum'.

 

 

At 0.01% or 0.1%

 

It will cost them more to deposit the amount into the bank than they make in profit / interest.

 

We pay 0.7% charges to NatWest just to deposit or withdraw our own cash (Thats £7 'lost' for every £1000 we deposit and another £7 per £1000 when we take it out)

And folks say "do I get any discount for paying cash ?

No you don't - I should charge you extra.

 

 

Some folks have very strange ideas about running a business.


Lump sum: money up front, in this case £5000 for the year. 
What else could it mean?

 

 

.1% Sounds like piss all but do the maths on whats reckoned to be 30,000 boats paying £5000 up front. 
 

 

Some businesses have a strange way of running folk. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

13 minutes ago, Goliath said:


Lump sum: money up front, in this case £5000 for the year. 
What else could it mean?

 

 

.1% Sounds like piss all but do the maths on whats reckoned to be 30,000 boats paying £5000 up front. 
 

 

Some businesses have a strange way of running folk. 

 

 

Well yes but it's Alan De E proposing this, and he likes being strange! 

 

Unlike you and me who are not even just a little bit strange at all, obvs.....

 

 

 

 

  • Happy 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

35 minutes ago, Goliath said:


Lump sum: money up front, in this case £5000 for the year. 
What else could it mean?

 

 

.1% Sounds like piss all but do the maths on whats reckoned to be 30,000 boats paying £5000 up front. 
 

 

Some businesses have a strange way of running folk. 

Its only 5 times as much as they get now, we pay for a licence in advance not knowing whether the canals will be open or not

Link to comment
Share on other sites

4 hours ago, Alan de Enfield said:

 

I came up with a proposal to overcome that (it was discussed here some years ago)

 

Basically it was you paid a lump sum at the start of every year (say £5000) and for every mile you moved you got (say £x) credited to your account (or paid back or whatever)

 

CMers paid £5000 a year

Big Movers paid almost nothing.

Middle of the 'roaders' paid (say) £1000

 

The payments were on a tapering system, something like £2 per mile for the first 500 miles, £3 per mile for the next 500 miles £4 a miles for the next 500 miles.  or it could have been charger 'the other way around' £4 for the 1st 500 miles, £3 for the next 500 miles  £2 for the next 500 miles.

(but I do not have all the original calculations to hand).

 

What is the advantage of taking a lump sum up-front rather than pay-as-you-go?   

 

It won't be that it avoids boaters not paying-as-they-go, as surely they are more likely to defaults on the lump sum.

 

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

5 minutes ago, Tacet said:

What is the advantage of taking a lump sum up-front rather than pay-as-you-go?   

 

It won't be that it avoids boaters not paying-as-they-go, as surely they are more likely to defaults on the lump sum.

 

 

 

As was pointed out earlier - there needs to be an incentive to move, if it is pay as you go, CMers will never move.

 

Pay up-front and for ever mile you travel an amount is credited back to you, its an incentive to move.

 

If you don't pay then you have no licence and enforcement starts.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

23 minutes ago, Alan de Enfield said:

 

As was pointed out earlier - there needs to be an incentive to move, if it is pay as you go, CMers will never move.

 

Pay up-front and for ever mile you travel an amount is credited back to you, its an incentive to move.

 

If you don't pay then you have no licence and enforcement starts.

So it’s £5000 plus the license.

 

I’ll let you do the sums, how many miles would I have to move to break even?

(if the aim were to move as many miles to get me 5 grand back)

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

7 minutes ago, Goliath said:

So it’s £5000 plus the license.

 

I’ll let you do the sums, how many miles would I have to move to break even?

(if the aim were to move as many miles to get me 5 grand back)

 

 

Its open for discussion but my thoughts were the £5k included the licence so averaging 20 miles per week (1000 miles pa) you get much of your £5k back

 

500 miles at £5 mile = £2500

500 miles at £4 mile = £2000

 

So the 'licence' portion is only ~£500

 

Numbers are just examples, I originally worked it out using various examples but it was on another (long gone 'puter)

Link to comment
Share on other sites

18 minutes ago, Alan de Enfield said:

 

Its open for discussion but my thoughts were the £5k included the licence so averaging 20 miles per week (1000 miles pa) you get much of your £5k back

 

500 miles at £5 mile = £2500

500 miles at £4 mile = £2000

 

So the 'licence' portion is only ~£500

 

Numbers are just examples, I originally worked it out using various examples but it was on another (long gone 'puter)

Would I be able to beat the figures and earn a reduction on next years license?

 

And you’re suggesting meeting CRTs annual range of travel every week?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

14 minutes ago, Goliath said:

Would I be able to beat the figures and earn a reduction on next years license?

 

And you’re suggesting meeting CRTs annual range of travel every week?

 

 

It was just a suggestion for discusssion, but personally I don't see a problem with doing a long day every x days. You still have to move every 14 days (maximum) anyway.

 

C&RTs 'annual range' of 20 miles / kms is a ridiculous figure anyway and an insult to CCers - we'd pretty much do that most days.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

16 hours ago, Alan de Enfield said:

 

I came up with a proposal to overcome that (it was discussed here some years ago)

 

Basically it was you paid a lump sum at the start of every year (say £5000) and for every mile you moved you got (say £x) credited to your account (or paid back or whatever)

 

CMers paid £5000 a year

Big Movers paid almost nothing.

Middle of the 'roaders' paid (say) £1000

 

The payments were on a tapering system, something like £2 per mile for the first 500 miles, £3 per mile for the next 500 miles £4 a miles for the next 500 miles.  or it could have been charger 'the other way around' £4 for the 1st 500 miles, £3 for the next 500 miles  £2 for the next 500 miles.

(but I do not have all the original calculations to hand).

 

 

You get the gist.

Trackers would be required and would automatically update your account on a monthly basis.

 

Is this a plan to wear out the the system on a regular basis, or leave CRT with loads of dosh to look at? And leaving lots of people out of pocket and wondering where the hell common sense went. 

 

We have companies up and down the country, leaching off the taxpayer, it's time these companies found a new sense of paying it back. Novel idea? We don't need business types forcing us to pay up front, on the off chance we might actual be able to use our own credit, and probably wouldn't be able to, or lose it. 

 

 

 

Edited by Higgs
Link to comment
Share on other sites

On 11/04/2022 at 17:09, Rambling Boater said:

I don't personally 'wish' either way as I enjoy moving about all year around within the current rules.

 

However, perhaps in the future when I become less mobile I may have to consider moving back on land. For me, living on a boat in a marina or other fixed canalside location doesn't seem that appealing at the moment.

 

Us to a “T”. Because of emergency operation and follow up stuck in market harbrough since early March. Spoke with licensing officer he had no issues at all because he could see by our cruising record we were not in his words “piss takers”.  I get fed up seeing the same boats in the same location year in year out. One outside Debdale marina comes to mind always between debdale and around foxton locks. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

On 15/04/2022 at 22:40, Alan de Enfield said:

 

 

It was just a suggestion for discusssion, but personally I don't see a problem with doing a long day every x days. You still have to move every 14 days (maximum) anyway.

 

C&RTs 'annual range' of 20 miles / kms is a ridiculous figure anyway and an insult to CCers - we'd pretty much do that most days.

Met a bloke yesterday at Grindley Brook, moored somewhere above the locks. He said he'd come up from London, been up to Llangollen and back and that was enough mileage for the year, so he wasn't going to move again. I wasn't sure CRT would agree with his argument, but as he was helpfully running me down the locks I didn't mention my opinion.

  • Haha 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

On 14/04/2022 at 11:33, Alan de Enfield said:

2.4 The Trustee must obtain the Settlor’s prior written consent before:

 

[...]

 

2.4.3 restricting pedestrian access to any part of the towpaths within the Infrastructure Property; for example by charging a fee for access, save that consent will not be needed for any temporary restrictions either to allow maintenance/repair works or to protect persons from risks to their safety;

 

Apologies for taking this discussion back 10 days...

 

The above means they have no right to demand an entry fee on the towpath to events such as the Foxton Festival without written permission from whom

The argument I was given when I questioned the charge was that the towpath is a permissive right of way (which may or may not be true). 

Clearly they have the right to charge for parking or pedestrian entry to the funfair or traders area or any part of the site that is not included in 'the towpath'.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Surely the settlor is the person who owns the property, in this case the towpath,  who presumably is usually CRT. If it wasn't, they wouldn't be the ones maintaining it.

A permissive right of way just means the owner lets you use it, same as at a few permissive bridges and winding holes. The owner can withdraw permission should they so wish.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

On 14/04/2022 at 11:33, Alan de Enfield said:

Because the transfer documents from Government control to 'private limited company' control specifically stated that they cannot charge for the use of towpaths without the approval of the Governement.

 

So sorry @Arthur Marshall, I should have included the first sentence of @Alan de Enfield's reply. I think the settlor is the Government.

Edited by George and Dragon
clarification.
Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 hour ago, George and Dragon said:

So sorry @Arthur Marshall, I should have included the first sentence of @Alan de Enfield's reply. I think the settlor is the Government.

Specifically, it is theWATERWAYS INFRASTRUCTURE TRUST TRUST SETTLEMENT between The Secretary of State for Environment, Food and Rural Affairs and Canal & River Trust the prevents charging for towpath access without permission. 


 

Quote

 

2.4
The Trustee must obtain the Settlor’s prior written consent before:


2.4.3 restricting pedestrian access to any part of the towpaths within the Infrastructure Property; for example by charging a fee for access....... 

 

The Settlor is The Secretary of State for Environment, Food and Rural Affairs. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

39 minutes ago, Allan(nb Albert) said:

Specifically, it is theWATERWAYS INFRASTRUCTURE TRUST TRUST SETTLEMENT between The Secretary of State for Environment, Food and Rural Affairs and Canal & River Trust the prevents charging for towpath access without permission. 


 

The Settlor is The Secretary of State for Environment, Food and Rural Affairs. 

Ah. However, I have my suspicions that the Sec of State for that lot doesn't care much. They don't investigate farmers polluting rivers any more and they don't seem bothered that my local farmer has trashed the culvert my septic tank drains into so I think CRT making a few bob that might cut down their grant a bit isn't going to give them sleepless nights.

You have to remember that laws are largely irrelevant these days unless someone rich is losing money.

ETA I forgot to say thanks for the explanation.

Edited by Arthur Marshall
Link to comment
Share on other sites

6 hours ago, Arthur Marshall said:

You have to remember that laws are largely irrelevant these days unless someone rich is losing money.

 

Yes it is fine to break them nowadays apparently provided you apologise (I bitterly regret that you feel this way about what happened), or that you only break them in a "limited and specific way"...

  • 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.