Boat dwellers to be able to claim the £400 energy allowance.

[MtB]

It's now Feb 8th 2023. 

 

Has everyone got their £200 grant now, as overconfidently announced by the NBTA?

 

Just wondering.... 

 

 

[LadyG]

57 minutes ago, MtB said:

It's now Feb 8th 2023. 

 

Has everyone got their £200 grant now, as overconfidently announced by the NBTA?

 

Just wondering.... 

 

 

Has anybody?

[Arthur Marshall]

On 04/02/2023 at 14:57, Alan de Enfield said:

 

 

Are you saying that CCers can only be liveaboards and liveaboards can only be CCers ?

I'm saying, as I've said many a time before, that is is virtually impossible to be on a genuine continuous cruise if you don't live on board. I've no interest in arguing points of law which were originally written because there were people living on their boats who didn't need a mooring because they were, surprise surprise, cruising round the system. The fact that some people have bent the original meaning of the law so that it now means something else from that which was intended is, I suspect, a concern of CRT and they are looking at ways to circumvent it, as they are,  in effect,  providing free online moorings for these people for a considerable percentage of the year. And they'll want them paying for.

I live comfortably in my house. If I nipped out for an hour or two a couple of times a month (except, obviously in winter) and moved the boat a mile or six, no-one in their right mind would consider that I was on a bona fide continuous cruise. Not even if I spent a whole weekend on it and moved it thirty miles one warm day in July before buggering off home for another fortnight.

So, no, in my opinion, the only people validly claiming to be continuous cruisers are those living on, who do. Everyone else without a mooring is (in my opinion) gaming the system, and I suspect that, unfortunately, as a result, all continuous cruisers are going to find their licence costs going through the roof.

If there continues to be a single licence, then it would just be discounted for boats with home moorings. Simple to operate.

And, for god's sake, don't quote reams of Acts at me. I know what they say and it's obvious what they meant,  probably even to the occasional reasonably intelligent judge. And it doesn't mean that someone moving their boat maybe 26 days a year is on a cruise. Just because it suits some people, and it's sort of legal, doesn't make it true. Or do you really think it does?

[Alan de Enfield]

2 minutes ago, Arthur Marshall said:

I'm saying, as I've said many a time before, that is is virtually impossible to be on a genuine continuous cruise if you don't live on board. I've no interest in arguing points of law which were originally written because there were people living on their boats who didn't need a mooring because they were, surprise surprise, cruising round the system. The fact that some people have bent the original meaning of the law so that it now means something else from that which was intended is, I suspect, a concern of CRT and they are looking at ways to circumvent it, as they are,  in effect,  providing free online moorings for these people for a considerable percentage of the year. And they'll want them paying for.

I live comfortably in my house. If I nipped out for an hour or two a couple of times a month (except, obviously in winter) and moved the boat a mile or six, no-one in their right mind would consider that I was on a bona fide continuous cruise. Not even if I spent a whole weekend on it and moved it thirty miles one warm day in July before buggering off home for another fortnight.

So, no, in my opinion, the only people validly claiming to be continuous cruisers are those living on, who do. Everyone else without a mooring is (in my opinion) gaming the system, and I suspect that, unfortunately, as a result, all continuous cruisers are going to find their licence costs going through the roof.

If there continues to be a single licence, then it would just be discounted for boats with home moorings. Simple to operate.

And, for god's sake, don't quote reams of Acts at me. I know what they say and it's obvious what they meant,  probably even to the occasional reasonably intelligent judge. And it doesn't mean that someone moving their boat maybe 26 days a year is on a cruise. Just because it suits some people, and it's sort of legal, doesn't make it true. Or do you really think it does?

 

 

In the last big licence review it was proposed that CCers licence fees should be 2.5 x the price of a licence for a boat 'with a home mooring'.

They backed down and it was never introduced, but, I think the financial environment is very different now, and wouldn't be surprised if it was introduced this time around.

[IanD]

3 minutes ago, Alan de Enfield said:

 

 

In the last big licence review it was proposed that CCers licence fees should be 2.5 x the price of a licence for a boat 'with a home mooring'.

They backed down and it was never introduced, but, I think the financial environment is very different now, and wouldn't be surprised if it was introduced this time around.

 

They'd encounter the same vociferous "it's not fair, think of the children!" resistance from the likes of the NBTA again though, as well as all the other CCers who don't think they should pay more while complaining that the system is falling to pieces around them...

Edited February 8, 2023 by IanD

[MtB]

24 minutes ago, LadyG said:

Has anybody?

 

 

Loads, I'd imagine. The NBTA said so. 

 

Odd though, how quiet they are all being....

 

 

 

[nbfiresprite]

1 hour ago, MtB said:

It's now Feb 8th 2023. 

 

Has everyone got their £200 grant now, as overconfidently announced by the NBTA?

 

Just wondering.... 

 

 

Some of the moorers at the Riverside Island Marina on the River Lark in West Suffolk had their £400 and £200 payments today.   

Edited February 8, 2023 by nbfiresprite

[peterboat]

33 minutes ago, Alan de Enfield said:

 

 

In the last big licence review it was proposed that CCers licence fees should be 2.5 x the price of a licence for a boat 'with a home mooring'.

They backed down and it was never introduced, but, I think the financial environment is very different now, and wouldn't be surprised if it was introduced this time around.

Empty waterways in a year Alan derelict in 5 CRT sacked in 6 years for gross incompetence 

[Arthur Marshall]

1 minute ago, peterboat said:

Empty waterways in a year Alan derelict in 5 CRT sacked in 6 years for gross incompetence 

Did I see a line somewhere suggesting that CRT were privately considering telling the government that under the current conditions they couldn't maintain the system and they'd just hand it back and walk away. That's a fair threat.

[MtB]

35 minutes ago, nbfiresprite said:

Some of the moorers at the Riverside Island Marina on the River Lark in West Suffolk had their £400 and £200 payments today.   

 

Excellent.

 

How many?

 

 

[peterboat]

21 minutes ago, Arthur Marshall said:

Did I see a line somewhere suggesting that CRT were privately considering telling the government that under the current conditions they couldn't maintain the system and they'd just hand it back and walk away. That's a fair threat.

They will of course have milked it dry as well 

[Tracy D'arth]

I wonder if they regret spending   wasting all that money now~?

[nbfiresprite]

21 hours ago, MtB said:

 

Excellent.

 

How many?

 

 

Three so far (All pay council tax on their moorings), two were rejected for not being on the council tax database.

Edited February 9, 2023 by nbfiresprite

[IanD]

11 minutes ago, nbfiresprite said:

Three so far (All pay council tax on their moorings), two were rejected for not being on the council tax database.

So as predicted, boaters who have residential moorings/address and pay council tax can get the payment -- no surprise there, just like people who live in houses, and entirely unlike CCers or CMers or liveaboards-in-marinas-under-the-radar i.e. most boaters on the canals.

 

Now what about all the others that the NBTA hoped would get it after they lobbied so hard for it? 😉

[Paul C]

So it IS, officially, linked to council tax?

[nbfiresprite]

1 hour ago, IanD said:

So as predicted, boaters who have residential moorings/address and pay council tax can get the payment -- no surprise there, just like people who live in houses, and entirely unlike CCers or CMers or liveaboards-in-marinas-under-the-radar i.e. most boaters on the canals.

 

Now what about all the others that the NBTA hoped would get it after they lobbied so hard for it? 😉

 

All three moorings are non-residential and post goes to elsewhere. They fall under the Anglia Revenues Partnership (ARP)( which processes council tax for West Suffolk) rule that require that you produce a council tax bill from another area with your name on it.

[nbfiresprite]

1 hour ago, Paul C said:

So it IS, officially, linked to council tax?

 

More a case of a quick and easy way to verifier that an address is residential when crossed checked with the national grid database.

[Paul C]

1 hour ago, nbfiresprite said:

Three so far (All pay council tax on their moorings), two were rejected for not being on the council tax database.

 

7 minutes ago, nbfiresprite said:

 

............ require that you produce a council tax bill from another area with your name on it.

 

Just for clarity, these three moorings/boaters pay CT on the mooring, not elsewhere? But two were rejected for not being on a CT database (despite paying)?

10 minutes ago, nbfiresprite said:

 

All three moorings are non-residential and post goes to elsewhere. 

 

So they applied, but they're on non-residential moorings? Just like a narrowboat for leisure use, might be on a non-residential mooring in a marina, unoccupied for much of the year?

 

Except these people, let's say, "spent quite a long time on the boat"?

 

[nbfiresprite]

Just now, Paul C said:

 

 

Just for clarity, these three moorings/boaters pay CT on the mooring, not elsewhere? But two were rejected for not being on a CT database (despite paying)?

 

The other two were able to produce council tax bills with their name on it. With the others, the council tax bill for thier home address was not in their name.

 

I'm also have to pay council tax on my mooring for the same reason, it is the way that the Anglia Revenues Partnership (ARP) deside if a mooring should be zoned for council tax. I have had a long term battle with them for a number of years on this subject, the funny thing  is that they send the bill to my home address in Dorset.

[George and Dragon]

On 24/01/2023 at 09:07, Tracy D'arth said:

On the principle that everyone registers with a doctor I did suggest a long time ago that paying via the doctors list may work. Obviously couples on the same boat would possibly get two payments but the doctors listing may prevent even this. It didn't attract any comment, I wonder why?

 

Rather late to this discussion so it may have been covered down thread but the number of patients on GP lists is usually somewhat greater than the resident population, especially in university towns. GPs get paid in part for the number of patients on their list, so they have no incentive to remove a patient whom they haven't seen for some time even if there's a reasonable likelihood they've moved away.

[Tracy D'arth]

10 minutes ago, George and Dragon said:

 

Rather late to this discussion so it may have been covered down thread but the number of patients on GP lists is usually somewhat greater than the resident population, especially in university towns. GPs get paid in part for the number of patients on their list, so they have no incentive to remove a patient whom they haven't seen for some time even if there's a reasonable likelihood they've moved away.

Disgraceful. Should be stopped.

[Steilsteven]

On 28/01/2023 at 16:37, M_JG said:

 

???

 

 

Ah but what is the carbon footprint created by it's manufacture and it's maintenance ?

[Momac]

1 hour ago, Steilsteven said:

Ah but what is the carbon footprint created by it's manufacture and it's maintenance ?

The same question should be  asked when considering the carbon footprint of  anything. 

 

Yachts like the one pictured do have an engine but its clearly better to use sails .  A friend   sails and he  really doesn't  like spending money on diesel. 

Last time out with him  there was no wind . With no sail and the engine in gear  the boat gained half a knot !

 

On the whole sailing seems to me a lot more environmentally friendly than motor boating but you do need  a lot of skill / knowledge and it is physically demanding. I would  consider sailing but my chief officer is not up to it. 

 

 

 

 

 

Edited February 11, 2023 by MartynG

[Guest]

1 hour ago, Steilsteven said:

Ah but what is the carbon footprint created by it's manufacture and it's maintenance ?

 

 

I dont know, do you?

 

But I would reckon it would be offset sooner than a powered craft.

Edited February 11, 2023 by M_JG

[Momac]

2 hours ago, Tracy D'arth said:

Disgraceful. Should be stopped.

Yes the NHS should stop paying GP's .

It would  save the NHS a fortune.