Licences

[Allan(nb Albert)]

6 hours ago, Rambling Boater said:

Allan, do you know why BW tried to make having a home mooring a legal requirement? Was it all about them collecting revenue?

 

I always thought that the CC'ing thing came about due to a number of boaters arguing that it wasn't fair to be forced to have (pay for) a home mooring if you choose to travel around the country.

 

Sorry if I've asked you before, but maybe the answer never really sunk in!

 

 

 

 

I have never seen any BW document that gives an explanation regarding the aims of the Bill. As such it would be unfair to suggest it was about collecting revenue.

My personal view is that BW simply wished to put an end to people living on the waterways and concentrate on the leisure aspects of the canals. 

 

Edited October 2, 2023 by Allan(nb Albert)

[magnetman]

I assumed it was because someone had spotted what was likely to happen if moorings were not needed. You would be likely to get a bias and certain popular areas packed full of boats moored to non long term towpath moorings. 

 

Look what happened. It was obviously going to happen and it did happen. 

 

 

Canals are in fact a public amenity rather like a park. There is payment needed to use the boating lake but you can walk around for free. 

 

Someone at BW presumably spotted the potential for canals to be annexed by small groups of people living on boats..

 

How often do you see people living in public parks? 

[Momac]

15 minutes ago, magnetman said:

 

 

How often do you see people living in public parks? 

There are dwellings within national parks boundaries.

[magnetman]

8 minutes ago, MartynG said:

There are dwellings within national parks boundaries.

Indeed and the CRT have some residential moorings. 

I Was referring to people living outside of ordinary protocols. 

 

I think the dwellings in parks will often be houses with addresses rather than boats or caravans. 

 

I even heard of a case where some caravan people were followed away from a park by police. Shocking !

[Paul C]

38 minutes ago, Allan(nb Albert) said:

My personal view is that BW simply wished to put an end to people living on the waterways and concentrate on the leisure aspects of the canals. 

 

 

No other waterways allow CCing, so I guess they just thought it okay to insist on having a mooring.

 

[Arthur Marshall]

4 minutes ago, Paul C said:

 

No other waterways allow CCing, so I guess they just thought it okay to insist on having a mooring.

 

But prior to those Acts, wasn't the default position that every boat had to have a, mooring? The Act just allowed an exception under certain conditions.

[Allan(nb Albert)]

53 minutes ago, Arthur Marshall said:

But prior to those Acts, wasn't the default position that every boat had to have a, mooring? The Act just allowed an exception under certain conditions.

Absolutely not. There  was no requirement in any previous legislation.

The original Bill (that eventually became the 1995 Act) attempted to make it compulsory for all craft to have a mooring. 

 

Quote

 

Notwithstanding anything in any enactment the board may refuse a consent in respect of any vessel unless -
(a) the vessel complies with the standards applicable to that vessel;

(b) an insurance policy is in effect in respect of the vessel ...
(c) the board are satisfied that a suitable mooring place will be available for the vessel, whether on an inland waterway or elsewhere.
 

 

The Bill also allowed consent to be withdrawn if a mooring was no longer available.

Edited October 2, 2023 by Allan(nb Albert)

[Momac]

1 hour ago, Paul C said:

 

No other waterways allow CCing, so I guess they just thought it okay to insist on having a mooring.

 

Sure about that ?

The application for  a Thames License, which is the Environment Agency rather than C&RT , have an option to declare continuous cruising 

[magnetman]

Don't tell 'em Pike! 

 

A lot of people think you have to have a mooring to obtain a Thames registration. We want it to stay that way

 

 

 

[sueb]

I don't believe BW realised that insisting on a mooring would create problems. Unfortunately moorings were in very short supply when they tried to bring in the legislation. They hadn't understood that people wouldn't have used the moorings if they had one so making the problem worse. A friend was refused a licence for not having a mooring. He went to see the BW manager in his boating gear, a harris tweed jacket, with his usual tie and check shirt. Explaining, with his officers accent, That when he went abroad on holiday, doing wildlife cruises etc. he put his boat into a marina and payed his dues to them. He got his licence. Thank you George for making continuous cruising legal. 

[MtB]

6 hours ago, MartynG said:

There are dwellings within national parks boundaries.

 

Indeed, I nearly bought one once. It was £280k for a lease with 67 years left to run. 

 

About the same size inside as a 70ft narrowboat. 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

[Unicorn Stampede]

Information from NABO says that surcharge will be an increasing 5% charge after inflation is applied each year, to a maximum of 25% in 5 years.

 

Guess we can wait for the confirmation, but seems reliable.

[Alan de Enfield]

42 minutes ago, Unicorn Stampede said:

Information from NABO says that surcharge will be an increasing 5% charge after inflation is applied each year, to a maximum of 25% in 5 years.

 

Guess we can wait for the confirmation, but seems reliable.

 

It doesn't seem enough, thats going to make no difference to the 'financial black hole'.

Is that just for NBs with a home mooring ? If so what are the rumours for CCer boats and fat boats ?

[Momac]

35 minutes ago, Alan de Enfield said:

 

It doesn't seem enough

Feel free to make a donation.

[Arthur Marshall]

1 hour ago, Unicorn Stampede said:

Information from NABO says that surcharge will be an increasing 5% charge after inflation is applied each year, to a maximum of 25% in 5 years.

 

Guess we can wait for the confirmation, but seems reliable.

Surely that's the licence increase not the surcharge.

It can't be the surcharge , because you can't apply a percentage increase to something that currently exists. It's a few per cent above inflation and is what we are expecting

[wandering snail]

41 minutes ago, Arthur Marshall said:

Surely that's the licence increase not the surcharge.

It can't be the surcharge , because you can't apply a percentage increase to something that currently exists. It's a few per cent above inflation and is what we are expecting

It's the ccer surcharge on top of the licence fee increase from April, yet to be announced, that will be increased above inflation. 

[Allan(nb Albert)]

1 hour ago, Alan de Enfield said:

 

It doesn't seem enough, thats going to make no difference to the 'financial black hole'.

Is that just for NBs with a home mooring ? If so what are the rumours for CCer boats and fat boats ?

I understand these figures relate to a surcharge being placed on those without a "home mooring" and "fat boats". They will be on top of any (yet to be announced) above inflation increases.

By "financial black hole", I assume you mean CRT's "growing funding gap".

**** Edited to add - Sorry, I have cross posted with wandering snail

Edited October 3, 2023 by Allan(nb Albert)

[magnetman]

 

There was a clue somewhere in the press release about this. 

 

 

Boat licence fees will need to rise above the baseline inflation rate for each of the next five years. In addition, we are introducing a surcharge for boats that continuously cruise and increasing the surcharges for wide beam boats to reflect the greater utility they receive.
 

The NABO seem to just be regurgitating the first sentence which is a known known. 

 

It is unknown unknowns which are interesting.

 

(post edited to remove speculation)

 

 

 

This 

 

"Boat licence fees will need to rise above the baseline inflation rate for each of the next five years." (CRT)

 

is uncannily similar to this 

 

"Information from NABO says that surcharge will be an increasing 5% charge after inflation is applied each year, to a maximum of 25% in 5 years." 

 

 

Edited October 3, 2023 by magnetman

[wandering snail]

14 minutes ago, magnetman said:

 

There was a clue somewhere in the press release about this. 

 

 

Boat licence fees will need to rise above the baseline inflation rate for each of the next five years. In addition, we are introducing a surcharge for boats that continuously cruise and increasing the surcharges for wide beam boats to reflect the greater utility they receive.
 

The NABO seem to just be regurgitating the first sentence which is a known known. 

 

It is unknown unknowns which are interesting.

 

(post edited to remove speculation)

 

 

 

This 

 

"Boat licence fees will need to rise above the baseline inflation rate for each of the next five years." (CRT)

 

is uncannily similar to this 

 

"Information from NABO says that surcharge will be an increasing 5% charge after inflation is applied each year, to a maximum of 25% in 5 years." 

 

 

Please read my reply, THIS IS THE SURCHARGE AMOUNT ON TOP OF THE LICENCE FEE.

[magnetman]

I realise the NABO comment uses the word 'surcharge' but I have a suspicion it is erroneous. 

 

I think what they are referring to is boat licence fee increase over time. 

 

Read this, which came from the horse's mouth, very carefully then do it again.

 

Boat licence fees will need to rise above the baseline inflation rate for each of the next five years. In addition, we are introducing a surcharge for boats that continuously cruise and increasing the surcharges for wide beam boats to reflect the greater utility they receive.

 

 

 

[peterboat]

So it looks like all boaters over the next 5 years might have extreme rises in the cost of the licenses and for those same 5 years CCers, widebeams and CCing widebeams are going to pay an extra 5% on top of that above inflation rise? I can see license evasion hitting an all time high very quickly

[Alan de Enfield]

26 minutes ago, peterboat said:

So it looks like all boaters over the next 5 years might have extreme rises in the cost of the licenses and for those same 5 years CCers, widebeams and CCing widebeams are going to pay an extra 5% on top of that above inflation rise? I can see license evasion hitting an all time high very quickly

 

I read it as there will be a 5% increase (surcharge) applied annually for 5 years (although where they get that giving a 25% surcharge I dont know as a compound 5% gives 27.6% over 5 years)

 

So, if 'inflation+' based licence fee is running at (say) 8%, add in the 5% surcharge and fatties and CCers in 5 years time will be paying an increase of  84% compared to todays fees.

 

Presumably a CCer which is a fattie will have the 5% surcharge 'twice' in 5 years time will be paying a 129% increase compared to todays fees.

 

NBs with a home mooring (no surcharge) will, in 5 years time, be paying a 47% increase compared to todays figures..

[Allan(nb Albert)]

4 minutes ago, peterboat said:

So it looks like all boaters over the next 5 years might have extreme rises in the cost of the licenses and for those same 5 years CCers, widebeams and CCing widebeams are going to pay an extra 5% on top of that above inflation rise? I can see license evasion hitting an all time high very quickly

Not quite. As I understand it -

All private boats will suffer above inflation increases over the next five years. On top of those increases, those without a home mooring will pay a surcharge (on the above inflation increase) as follows -

Year 1 - 5%

Year 2 - 10%

Year 3 - 15%

Year 4 - 20%
Year 5 - 25%

The position with wide boats is somewhat confusing as surcharging for those is already being phased in up until 2025 based on previous policy.

Licence evasion has already more than doubled in the last couple of years but is not yet back to British Waterways levels of over 10%
 

[Alan de Enfield]

4 minutes ago, Allan(nb Albert) said:

Not quite. As I understand it -

All private boats will suffer above inflation increases over the next five years. On top of those increases, those without a home mooring will pay a surcharge (on the above inflation increase) as follows -

Year 1 - 5%

Year 2 - 10%

Year 3 - 15%

Year 4 - 20%
Year 5 - 25%

The position with wide boats is somewhat confusing as surcharging for those is already being phased in up until 2025 based on previous policy.

Licence evasion has already more than doubled in the last couple of years but is not yet back to British Waterways levels of over 10%
 

 

If I'm working it out correctlry, that formula gives a 200% increase over the 5 years - that is more in line with what I anticipated and almost aligns with the original BW proposals of a 2.5x multiplier.

 

So a licence costing £1000 today will be £2000 by 2028

[MtB]

14 minutes ago, Alan de Enfield said:

 

If I'm working it out correctlry, that formula gives a 200% increase over the 5 years - that is more in line with what I anticipated and almost aligns with the original BW proposals of a 2.5x multiplier.

 

So a licence costing £1000 today will be £2000 by 2028

 

£2000 would be a 100% increase. A 200% increase would get us to £3000.