Court rules : A floating caravan is not a boat so you cannot be evicted.

[Tacet]

3 minutes ago, Alan de Enfield said:

 

The Mobile Homes Act 2013 (which we are licenced undeer as a 'Static caravan Park' defines a caravan as :

 

Under this strict definition (it looks as if) a powered boat could not be a caravan, but an unpowered boat could be.

 

 

 

Appendix 2: Definition of a caravan

Section 29 of the Caravan Sites and Control of Development Act 1960

“caravan” means any structure designed or adapted for human habitation which is capable of being moved from one place to another (whether by being towed, or by being transported on a motor vehicle or trailer) and any motor vehicle so designed or adapted, but does not include:

(a) any railway rolling stock which is for the time being on rails forming part of a railway system, or
(b) any tent;

Section 13 of the Caravan Sites Act 1968 – definition of twin unit caravans as amended by the Caravan Sites Act 1968 and Social Landlords (Permissible Additional Purposes) (England) Order 2006 (Definition of Caravan) (Amendment) (England) Order 2006

(1) A structure designed or adapted for human habitation which:

(a) is composed of not more than two sections separately constructed and designed to be assembled on a site by means of bolts, clamps or other devices; and

(b) is, when assembled, physically capable of being moved by road from one place to another (whether by being towed, or by being transported on a motor vehicle or trailer), shall not be treated as not being (or as not having been) a caravan within the meaning of Part 1 of the Caravan Sites and Control of Development Act 1960 by reason only that it cannot lawfully be so moved on a highway when assembled.

(2) For the purposes of Part 1 of the Caravan Sites and Control of Development Act 1960, the expression “caravan” shall not include a structure designed or adapted for human habitation which falls within paragraphs (a) and (b) of the foregoing subsection if its dimensions when assembled exceed any of the following limits, namely:

(a) length (exclusive of any drawbar): 65.616 feet (20 metres);

(b) width: 22.309 feet (6.8 metres);

(c) overall height of living accommodation (measured internally from the floor at the lowest level to the ceiling at the highest level): 10.006 feet (3.05 metres).

(3) The [Secretary of State] may by order made by statutory instrument after consultation with such persons or bodies as appear to him to be concerned substitute for any figure mentioned in subsection (2) of this section such other figure as may be specified in the order.

That interested me too.  The decision does not touch upon whether a boat could also be a Caravan under the Mobile Homes Act.  The lengthy discussion about the relevance of the pontoon perhaps suggests that a boat does not.

 

But a boat can indeed be towed or moved on a road vehicle.  My suspicion is that a boat does not comprise a structure, but against this is the apparent need of the draughtsman to specifically exclude railway rolling stock and tents with no mention of vessels.

[Alan de Enfield]

3 minutes ago, Tacet said:

That interested me too.  The decision does not touch upon whether a boat could also be a Caravan under the Mobile Homes Act.  The lengthy discussion about the relevance of the pontoon perhaps suggests that a boat does not.

 

Obviously a 'full length' NB does not meet the length criteria.

 

........the expression “caravan” shall not include a structure designed or adapted for human habitation which falls within paragraphs (a) and (b) of the foregoing subsection if its dimensions when assembled exceed any of the following limits, namely:

(a) length (exclusive of any drawbar): 65.616 feet (20 metres);

[Arthur Marshall]

You could equally well argue that a boat on hard standing is,  in fact, a caravan with a pointy end...

Occasionally, you do find a judge who isn't an ass.

[Tonka]

28 minutes ago, ditchcrawler said:

I guess the bit its sitting on is a boat

doesn't matter @Higgs stated that CRT have no jurisdiction in a marina so I queried why do you need a licence

[Higgs]

1 minute ago, Tonka said:

doesn't matter @Higgs stated that CRT have no jurisdiction in a marina so I queried why do you need a licence

 

I would just add - no direct jurisdiction. 

 

 

[Paul C]

54 minutes ago, Higgs said:

 

Not necessarily. The judge linked the structure (the caravan on a float) to the land below the water. The fact water was used between the float and the land made no more difference than if the caravan was sitting on the land. The land owned by the marina, and with residential planning permission.

 

This is on a residential site, involving “caravans”. The detail relates to those aspects.

54 minutes ago, Higgs said:

 

 

All water in a marina is governed by the owner of the land. Any water that flows into a marina from the canal becomes governed by the private nature of the marina land, and ceases to be in the jurisdiction of the canal authority. 

 

Canal authorities have no direct jurisdiction in a marina.

 

 

 

 

 

This case is nothing to do with canals.

[Higgs]

2 minutes ago, Paul C said:

 

This is on a residential site, involving “caravans”. The detail relates to those aspects.

 

This case is nothing to do with canals.

 

It does relate to canals when you relate both cases to the influence of the land rights below the water. 

 

 

[pearley]

There are 3 blocks of floating homes at Hartford, this being the only one with caravans on the floats, the others being purpose made homes, all identical bearing the plaque Hartford Houseboat. 

 

None of these, indeed none of the boats either, have planning permission for permanent residency but some, including the one in the article, have Certificates of Lawful Residency.

 

Tingdene originally tried to get the owners of the floating homes on the West Pontoon to leave stating that the pontoon was unsafe and they have in the recent months removed 2 of the homes. I suspect they woukd prefer to turn the area over to boats on finger pontoons. There are about a dozen floating homes in a space that could take 40 boats so potential for a lot more income.

Edited February 7, 2023 by pearley
Just to add one of the East Pontoon floating homes is currently for sale for £120000. I can see no mention in the particulars about residency.

[Paul C]

2 minutes ago, Higgs said:

 

It does relate to canals when you relate both cases to the influence of the land rights below the water. 

 

 

No it doesn’t, at least not in the vast majority of areas of canal and it’s adjoining marinas.

 

There might be one or two isolated cases where residential status is present and the 1983 Mobile Homes Act apply, but I am struggling to think of any such cases.

 

This case is different and it would be unwise to try and extrapolate it to other areas or issues relating to living aboard or mooring or cruising on the canals.

[Higgs]

5 minutes ago, Paul C said:

No it doesn’t, at least not in the vast majority of areas of canal and it’s adjoining marinas.

 

There might be one or two isolated cases where residential status is present and the 1983 Mobile Homes Act apply, but I am struggling to think of any such cases.

 

This case is different and it would be unwise to try and extrapolate it to other areas or issues relating to living aboard or mooring or cruising on the canals.

 

All private marinas using/over private land are private property. And so is the water. Only water property is a notional concept.

 

 

Edited February 7, 2023 by Higgs

[Paul C]

2 minutes ago, Higgs said:

 

All private marinas using private land are private property. And so is the water. Only water property is a notional concept.

 

 

Agree, but…….so what?

[Higgs]

1 minute ago, Paul C said:

Agree, but…….so what?

 

The so what is, I've just made a point. Nothing more.

 

 

[Graham Davis]

32 minutes ago, Paul C said:

 

This case is nothing to do with canals.

 

We all know that but Higgs will use any excuse to saddle up his hobby horse!

[Higgs]

4 minutes ago, Graham Davis said:

 

We all know that but Higgs will use any excuse to saddle up his hobby horse!

 

If you keep bringing it up. But as you're not saying anything, I'll not stir the 'beasty' subject for an empty statement. 

 

 

Edited February 7, 2023 by Higgs

[doratheexplorer]

1 hour ago, Alan de Enfield said:

 

The Mobile Homes Act 2013 (which we are licenced under as a 'Static caravan Park') defines a caravan as :

 

Under this strict definition (it looks as if) a powered boat could not be a caravan, but an unpowered boat could be.

 

 

 

Appendix 2: Definition of a caravan

Section 29 of the Caravan Sites and Control of Development Act 1960

“caravan” means any structure designed or adapted for human habitation which is capable of being moved from one place to another (whether by being towed, or by being transported on a motor vehicle or trailer) and any motor vehicle so designed or adapted, but does not include:

(a) any railway rolling stock which is for the time being on rails forming part of a railway system, or
(b) any tent;

Section 13 of the Caravan Sites Act 1968 – definition of twin unit caravans as amended by the Caravan Sites Act 1968 and Social Landlords (Permissible Additional Purposes) (England) Order 2006 (Definition of Caravan) (Amendment) (England) Order 2006

(1) A structure designed or adapted for human habitation which:

(a) is composed of not more than two sections separately constructed and designed to be assembled on a site by means of bolts, clamps or other devices; and

(b) is, when assembled, physically capable of being moved by road from one place to another (whether by being towed, or by being transported on a motor vehicle or trailer), shall not be treated as not being (or as not having been) a caravan within the meaning of Part 1 of the Caravan Sites and Control of Development Act 1960 by reason only that it cannot lawfully be so moved on a highway when assembled.

(2) For the purposes of Part 1 of the Caravan Sites and Control of Development Act 1960, the expression “caravan” shall not include a structure designed or adapted for human habitation which falls within paragraphs (a) and (b) of the foregoing subsection if its dimensions when assembled exceed any of the following limits, namely:

(a) length (exclusive of any drawbar): 65.616 feet (20 metres);

(b) width: 22.309 feet (6.8 metres);

(c) overall height of living accommodation (measured internally from the floor at the lowest level to the ceiling at the highest level): 10.006 feet (3.05 metres).

(3) The [Secretary of State] may by order made by statutory instrument after consultation with such persons or bodies as appear to him to be concerned substitute for any figure mentioned in subsection (2) of this section such other figure as may be specified in the order.

Which bit would exclude a powered boat?

[Alan de Enfield]

20 minutes ago, doratheexplorer said:

Which bit would exclude a powered boat?

 

 

“caravan” means any structure designed or adapted for human habitation which is capable of being moved from one place to another (whether by being towed, or by being transported on a motor vehicle or trailer)

 

It must be either towed, or transported BY a motor vehicle

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

Edited February 7, 2023 by Alan de Enfield

[Arthur Marshall]

I would think that even a judge would consider the purpose for which a structure was built. A caravan is designed for land use, and so remains a caravan if the site it's on is flooded and it starts floating - it doesn't suddenly turn into a boat. A boat is designed for the wet stuff and doesn't miraculously become something else when on land.

A Carabo, of course, does need a licence when in the water  and presumably whatever checks a caravan needs when on land. So it is possible to be both, but only if that was the design intention.

If the caravan is permanently fixed to the bit that floats on the water, its purpose has been redesignated and it has become a cabin, and therefore part of a boat. If it isn't, it's just a caravan on a raft.

That's my opinion,  m'lud.

[Alan de Enfield]

11 minutes ago, Arthur Marshall said:

That's my opinion,  m'lud.

 

That's the whole point, the Judge (who is the one legally allowed to use her 'opinion' when making a decision) was of a different mind.

[Higgs]

3 minutes ago, Alan de Enfield said:

 

That's the whole point, the Judge (who is the one legally allowed to use her 'opinion' when making a decision) was of a different mind.

 

But not allowed to invent law that doesn't exist, to support an opinion.

 

 

 

Edited February 7, 2023 by Higgs

[Alan de Enfield]

1 minute ago, Higgs said:

 

But not allowed to invent law that doesn't exist, to support an opinion.

 

 

 

 

She has quoted a law which does exist and her decision it that it applies.

[David Mack]

20 minutes ago, Alan de Enfield said:

 

“caravan” means any structure designed or adapted for human habitation which is capable of being moved from one place to another (whether by being towed, or by being transported on a motor vehicle or trailer)

 

It must be either towed, or transported BY a motor vehicle

A powered boat is certainly capable of being towed, or being transported on a motor vehicle or trailer.  The word "must" does not appear in the definition. Neither does the word "only". That a powered boat is also capable of being moved by other means (such as under its own power) does not mean that it doesn't fit the definition.

[Higgs]

1 minute ago, Alan de Enfield said:

 

She has quoted a law which does exist and her decision it that it applies.

 

Then her opinion is not a personal opinion. Only in that, her opinion is supported by law.

 

 

Edited February 7, 2023 by Higgs

[doratheexplorer]

24 minutes ago, Alan de Enfield said:

 

 

“caravan” means any structure designed or adapted for human habitation which is capable of being moved from one place to another (whether by being towed, or by being transported on a motor vehicle or trailer)

 

It must be either towed, or transported BY a motor vehicle

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

Sorry but it doesn't say what you think it says.  It only requires that the structure is capable of being moved in that way.  I've seen narrowboats on the back of lorries on the motorway so they definitely fit the definition.  Also, you've missed off the second part of the sentence:  "and any motor vehicle so designed or adapted".

 

This is presumably included to cover motorhomes, but could easily include boats.  Wikipedia certainly considers a boat is a vehicle ( https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Vehicle ) so there's a good chance the courts would too.

 

 

6 minutes ago, David Mack said:

A powered boat is certainly capable of being towed, or being transported on a motor vehicle or trailer.  The word "must" does not appear in the definition. Neither does the word "only". That a powered boat is also capable of being moved by other means (such as under its own power) does not mean that it doesn't fit the definition.

you beat me to it

[Alan de Enfield]

4 minutes ago, David Mack said:

A powered boat is certainly capable of being towed, or being transported on a motor vehicle or trailer.  The word "must" does not appear in the definition. Neither does the word "only". That a powered boat is also capable of being moved by other means (such as under its own power) does not mean that it doesn't fit the definition.

 

For the sake of discussion :

 

I'd argue that as two alternative modes of movement are given, they are the only options available that make it a caravan. If travelling under its own power was to be included it would either say so, or, would just say "capable of being moved".

 

Self propelled 'motor' caravans are actually included within the Act :

 

 

 

“caravan” means any structure designed or adapted for human habitation which is capable of being moved from one place to another (whether by being towed, or by being transported on a motor vehicle or trailer) and any motor vehicle so designed or adapted, but does not include:

(a) any railway rolling stock which is for the time being on rails forming part of a railway system, or
(b) any tent;

 

 

So we then need to consider the definition of a motor vehicle - taking the Road Traffic Act 1998 we have :

 

“motor vehicle” means, subject to section 20 of the Chronically Sick and Disabled Persons Act 1970 (which makes special provision about invalid carriages, within the meaning of that Act), a mechanically propelled vehicle intended or adapted for use on roads.

 

So a powered boat cannot be a "motor vehicle"

8 minutes ago, doratheexplorer said:

Sorry but it doesn't say what you think it says.  It only requires that the structure is capable of being moved in that way.  I've seen narrowboats on the back of lorries on the motorway so they definitely fit the definition.  Also, you've missed off the second part of the sentence:  "and any motor vehicle so designed or adapted".

 

This is presumably included to cover motorhomes, but could easily include boats.  Wikipedia certainly considers a boat is a vehicle ( https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Vehicle ) so there's a good chance the courts would too.

 

Answered as you were typing.

[Mike Todd]

2 hours ago, Tonka said:

doesn't matter @Higgs stated that CRT have no jurisdiction in a marina so I queried why do you need a licence

'cos the marina owner demands it (is is in a position to do so).