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

[beerbeerbeerbeerbeer]

6 minutes ago, Paul C said:

CRT could get in touch with all CCers and ask if its okay to share their data with the local council, for the purposes of maybe getting the £400 grant.

What details could they share that we couldn’t forward ourselves?

 

I could print off or email copies of any details from my personal account on their website. 
I don’t think CRT know anything I can’t evidence myself using the website. 
 

I could even ask CRT to forward my boat movements over the last 12 months and pass them on if required. 
 

Also I think, correct me if I’m wrong, it’s the Government we would have to please, not the council or local authority. 
The council will issue money on the Governments say so.

After the Government have approved a claim they instruct the council to make a bank payment, without further questioning. 

[Paul C]

32 minutes ago, Goliath said:

What details could they share that we couldn’t forward ourselves?

 

 

Its not the data itself, but where it comes from that the government would want to evidence as part of the process. I imagine, just basic info such as name, boat name, boat index (as a unique reference of some kind), and that it has a licence (thus is being used as a boat, not on eg hardstanding). Address isn't particularly useful if its a c/o address. 

 

You could forward that info yourself but then someone without a boat could invent it and forward it too. This is really basic anti-fraud stuff.

[Arthur Marshall]

37 minutes ago, Goliath said:

What details could they share that we couldn’t forward ourselves?

 

I could print off or email copies of any details from my personal account on their website. 
I don’t think CRT know anything I can’t evidence myself using the website. 
 

I could even ask CRT to forward my boat movements over the last 12 months and pass them on if required. 
 

Also I think, correct me if I’m wrong, it’s the Government we would have to please, not the council or local authority. 
The council will issue money on the Governments say so.

After the Government have approved a claim they instruct the council to make a bank payment, without further questioning. 

CRT could certify that details relate solely to CCers, not leisure boaters. The sensible (therefore unlikely) way to do it would be to treat CRT like a council  and let CRT make the payments. They already have contact addresses and in some cases bank details. CRT wouldn't even need to give the govt details, just a total number,  collect the dosh from a generous Treasury and pass it on.

I wonder why the NBTA haven't thought of that. Maybe they have.

[Paul C]

2 minutes ago, Arthur Marshall said:

CRT could certify that details relate solely to CCers, not leisure boaters.

 

But CCers =/= liveaboards

 

There's CCers who don't live aboard; and those with a mooring who do live aboard.

[beerbeerbeerbeerbeer]

How about just going to source and subsidising the coal yards?

 

and the yards pass that on. 
even simpler. 
that’d keep us happy?

 

 

Or is that going backwards 40 years 😃

 

Edited January 23, 2023 by Goliath

[Momac]

1 hour ago, Alan de Enfield said:

 

That was NABOs argument - that the clause was in contravention od the GDPR.

 

C&RT (solicitors) said it wasn't and they could give the information to 'anyone they believe has a legitimate interest' - in the example under discussion does the LA have a 'legitimate interest' re Council Tax,?

 

Does the Government have a legitimate interest re anyone applying for the fuel grants ?

Regarding council tax

Yes its a legitimate interest if there is evidence of tax evasion.

 

Regarding application for grants 

Yes its a legitimate interest if there was evidence of a fraudulent application. (This could deter people making false declarations).

 

 

 

[beerbeerbeerbeerbeer]

Ration books?

[Momac]

7 minutes ago, Goliath said:

Ration books?

 

The problem is identifying who is rightfully eligible to receive the payment .

 

 

 

[LadyG]

28 minutes ago, MartynG said:

 

The problem is identifying who is rightfully eligible to receive the payment .

 

 

 

Correct. I can't see how any database can be set up that is not open to fraud. I think there was an idea that we needed a receipt for £100, (in order to claim £600)!

I don't think any boaters have identified a protocol.

[Ronaldo47]

2 hours ago, Alan de Enfield said:

 

That was NABOs argument - that the clause was in contravention od the GDPR.

 

C&RT (solicitors) said it wasn't and they could give the information to 'anyone they believe has a legitimate interest' - in the example under discussion does the LA have a 'legitimate interest' re Council Tax,?

 

A solicitor's opinion can only ever be what  they believe the law is,  and is not necessarily correct unless on all fours with a precedent case that was decided by the Supreme Court (formerly the House of Lords)  where the facts were identical. Appealing to the courts to get a definitive decision costs money that individuals can seldom afford.   

[LadyG]

8 hours ago, MartynG said:

Regarding council tax

Yes its a legitimate interest if there is evidence of tax evasion.

 

Regarding application for grants 

Yes its a legitimate interest if there was evidence of a fraudulent application. (This could deter people making false declarations).

 

 

 

People could claim they made an error in paperwork, that seems to be considered a legitimate excuse these days.

If someone is paid £600, then chased up for a refund, it's going to tie up even more resources.

Anyway, at this time there is no application form.

If one person owns or rents a house and gets paid £600, and his spouse claims for a boat on the grounds it is cc or on a residential mooring will both receive £600?

Plenty of boats are cc but are not the main residence, but they could have the same paperwork trail as the cc liveaboard. I have a bricks and mortar address with CRT, but I neither live there nor do I pay CT.

It's a mess.

 

Edited January 24, 2023 by LadyG

[Momac]

18 minutes ago, LadyG said:

People could claim they made an error in paperwork, that seems to be considered a legitimate excuse these days.

If someone is paid £600, then chased up for a refund, it's going to tie up even more resources.

Anyway, at this time there is no application form.

If one person owns or rents a house and gets paid £600, and his spouse claims for a boat on the grounds it is cc or on a residential mooring will both receive £600?

Plenty of boats are cc but are not the main residence, but they could have the same paperwork trail as the cc liveaboard. I have a bricks and mortar address with CRT, but I neither live their nor do I pay CT.

It's a mess.

 

All very valid points and loopholes .

I can't see a solution.

Perhaps if someone in your circumstances did pay council tax on the boat  it would be  easy. But you would  probably then be out of pocket overall.

 

[LadyG]

5 minutes ago, MartynG said:

All very valid points and loopholes .

I can't see a solution.

Perhaps if someone in your circumstances did pay council tax on the boat  it would be  easy. But you would  probably then be out of pocket overall.

Edited January 24, 2023 by LadyG
Discussion is going round the houses

[Arthur Marshall]

9 hours ago, MartynG said:

 

The problem is identifying who is rightfully eligible to receive the payment .

 

 

With my suggestion, if all CCers got it, that would include all CCers who lived aboard. Those who don't would get it too, but that's just the same as the second home owners getting it,  a waste of money but a valid bureaucratic convenience.  Those with legitimate residential moorings shouldn't have a problem anyway under the same system as park residents. Those living on leisure moorings, it could be argued, dodge enough in council tax etc to make up the difference.

But it could only be operated by CRT.

[Tracy D'arth]

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?

[Paul C]

One solution would be to allow all boats/boaters to claim the £400, in the same way that second homes etc are able to receive the grant. But this would be inefficient on overpaying to those who aren’t residential. It would be relatively simple to administer though.

 

I don’t think it would be popular with the wider general public, so I suspect it’s a non-starter.

[Arthur Marshall]

25 minutes ago, 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?

Doctors would probably charge too much to pass on the info, and it might even be protected by NHS rules, assuming the information hasn't already been sold to private companies and is then protected as commercially valuable. GPs practices aren't known for doing non-contract stuff for free.

[Paul C]

29 minutes ago, 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?

But that captures people, not households.

[Alan de Enfield]

1 minute ago, Paul C said:

One solution would be to allow all boats/boaters to claim the £400, in the same way that second homes etc are able to receive the grant. But this would be inefficient on overpaying to those who aren’t residential. It would be relatively simple to administer though.

 

I don’t think it would be popular with the wider general public, so I suspect it’s a non-starter.

 

 

Or just give C&RT the money and let them deduct £400 off the next licence renewal.

 

Problems : catches all boats, and doesn't pay the licence dodgers.

[Arthur Marshall]

1 minute ago, Paul C said:

One solution would be to allow all boats/boaters to claim the £400, in the same way that second homes etc are able to receive the grant. But this would be inefficient on overpaying to those who aren’t residential. It would be relatively simple to administer though.

 

I don’t think it would be popular with the wider general public, so I suspect it’s a non-starter.

First question - define a boat owner? Bloke with dinghy? Nope, just get CRT to hand over the CC list and it's done. Government would include a tick box for you to confirm you're residential, which might stop a few double payments.

If you don't CC and you don't have a residential mooring, you don't qualify. If you CC or have a residential mooring, you do. Sorted, surely.

It should even please the Government, as those getting double payments, well off enough to own both a house and a boat, are more likely to vote the right way, just like the 2nd home owners...

6 minutes ago, Alan de Enfield said:

 

 

Or just give C&RT the money and let them deduct £400 off the next licence renewal.

 

Problems : catches all boats, and doesn't pay the licence dodgers.

Only deduct it from CCers. Residential moorers claim under park rules. Licence dodgers are getting subsidised by the rest of us anyway.

[Paul C]

10 hours ago, Paul C said:

 

But CCers =/= liveaboards

 

There's CCers who don't live aboard; and those with a mooring who do live aboard.

 

56 minutes ago, Arthur Marshall said:

With my suggestion, if all CCers got it, that would include all CCers who lived aboard. Those who don't would get it too, but that's just the same as the second home owners getting it,  a waste of money but a valid bureaucratic convenience.  Those with legitimate residential moorings shouldn't have a problem anyway under the same system as park residents. Those living on leisure moorings, it could be argued, dodge enough in council tax etc to make up the difference.

But it could only be operated by CRT.

I’m assuming you’re happy to have dumpers be paid; and those with a leisure mooring who live aboard, not.

[beerbeerbeerbeerbeer]

Whilst we consider how the money could be paid, I really don’t think that’s really the issue.
 

Whilst the government have kept the vast majority of the population quite with £400 and £200 handouts, in some cases multiple times. (Businesses will have received £1000s I guess.)

The government simply don’t need to bother with the ‘left overs’ when the rest of the people can be bought out with a few hundred pound. 
 

I hear people are now being paid not to use electricity ?  World's gone mad. 
 

The news today reckoned of the 27billion the country has borrowed 7billion has been for helping out with  energy bills. 

True or no 🤷‍♀️I don’t know. 
Maybe I misheard or misunderstood. 
If the figures are correct then by comparison a  few hundred quid for a few thousand boaters is minute.  
 

Edited January 24, 2023 by Goliath

[Lady M]

I still find it hard to believe that any boater is spending the average £2.5k pa on heating, cooking & lighting. 

[Arthur Marshall]

1 hour ago, Paul C said:

 

I’m assuming you’re happy to have dumpers be paid; and those with a leisure mooring who live aboard, not.

Luckily, my happiness depends more on the way I live my own life than on the way others do.
We are looking for a solution that might get money where it's needed (and as promised by our glorious leaders), and if it's comparable with one for second home owners, which in essence are what dumpers are, why should they be treated any differently? My personal opinion is simply irrelevant.

Leisure mooring livers are saving a fair wallop by not paying residential mooring costs, which are higher, or council tax, so they are saving a fair bit anyway. The thing is to try to find an acceptable compromise, which, as most people forget, is what the art of politics is all about.

I suspect that is the main problem with the NBTA (I may be wrong, of course) - that they either want a perfect solution (in their terms) or nothing. It's a good starting point, but if inflexible it's not one that opens the door to negotiating a result for their members.

 

Edited January 24, 2023 by Arthur Marshall

[wandering snail]

Further to the NBTA's post about claiming the energy grant in certain pilot areas, this from a boater on the Llangollen. Hoping as many boats on that canal as possible have a go at claiming the money: This is an email address for anyone else in Wrexham's area and would like to reach out. They have said the scheme is due to start in another couple of weeks. I have asked them to confirm if this is the trial or the national rollout. WGFSS@wrexham.gov.uk