Jump to content

Boaters' Update - changes to communications to CCers.


Arthur Marshall

Featured Posts

Just now, ditchcrawler said:

I think its also classed as fly tipping

 

its an interesting one. If it is in the bin and the bin is provided for public use then it must be legal but if it is piled up around the bin...

Link to comment
Share on other sites

It is an interesting topic.

 

Apparently the EA are decommissioning the floating bin store above Shiplake lock because it always has too much random shite in there from all the local squatter boats. 

 

So one wonders what will happen to the rubbish. 

 

Similar with the CRT they are closing some services. 

 

The side effect must be more fly tipping. Sad but I suppose an inevitable outcome when there are people who pay nothing to dispose of as much rubbish as they want. 

 

Waterways bins being used for what is actually trade waste is a real problem. 

 

It is somewhere in the byelaws that you don't do major refurb works to boats on towpaths. You need to be using a commercial site with commercial bins for this sort of work. 

 

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Just checked and three of our spots are incorrect in 2023, two in the Marple/Macc area and one on Stoke Bruerne service moorings. 

 

when we were meant to be at Middlecale farm moorings we were in Newbold tunnel. 
 

Ours is a 5 figure number so maybe we are being checked before the 6th digit is inserted by the checker. Perhaps someone’s cloned our number 😕

 

Overall I’m pleased to be confirmed at travelling the network so widely tbh 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 hour ago, Captain Pegg said:

I moored for 41 days on a 7 day mooring during the summer.

 

I also spent a week or so on a 2 day mooring.

 

Although I am apparently a ‘proper’ boater. Or perhaps it’s easier to make enemies of stereotypes rather than actual people.

And proud of it.

If agreed with CRT, then no problem. If not, then you are the problem.

I would presume it was agreed, and there was a good reason, and you posted this simply as clickbait. Certainly, though, virtually every Ccer I've met has talked about overstaying and how little it matters. To an extent, you can understand it - there's usually no reason a lot of moorings are restricted to 2 days and a genuine liveaboard cruiser might well want to explore an area a bit before moving on. But that's rather the point of the rules...

Link to comment
Share on other sites

2 hours ago, Captain Pegg said:

I moored for 41 days on a 7 day mooring during the summer.

 

I also spent a week or so on a 2 day mooring

 

That's not so bad.  I've previously done just over 4 months on a signed 48hr visitor mooring.

 

It was handy for parking the car and about 40 feet from the services.

  • Greenie 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 hour ago, Arthur Marshall said:

And proud of it.

If agreed with CRT, then no problem. If not, then you are the problem.

I would presume it was agreed, and there was a good reason, and you posted this simply as clickbait. Certainly, though, virtually every Ccer I've met has talked about overstaying and how little it matters. To an extent, you can understand it - there's usually no reason a lot of moorings are restricted to 2 days and a genuine liveaboard cruiser might well want to explore an area a bit before moving on. But that's rather the point of the rules...


Yes Arthur because too many folk show their prejudices without the need for clickbait.

 

My CRT sighting record shows a range of 182 miles this year and includes stays on short term paid moorings of which I can evidence nearly six months. My true range is also longer than the record.

 

The week on a two day mooring was at Marple and was in part because I had to plan around the limited opening times of the lock flights and the fact I don’t live aboard. It just so happens that on the Macc all the VMs seem to be limited to 2 days and when I leave the boat unattended I prefer a solid mooring rather than stakes. At Marple there is only a short length of piling outside the VMs and it was taken so I moored just inside the VMs. For similar reasons I spent 3 days on a 2 day mooring at Congleton. I travel to and from home by train so have some limitations on where I can moor. In each case the moorings were not full either when I arrived or departed. It’s also unlikely they were at any point the boat was there given boat movements were restricted by the lock opening times. 
 

The 41 days were at Whaley Bridge. I had intended to not even stop there but to wind and have lunch at Bugsworth before returning to Marple and descending the flight the next day. I was booked across the HNC the next week and to a mooring at Aspley basin (although none of that would have happened as it was closed).

 

However I arrived at Whaley Bridge in a cloud of steam and smoke with what I suspected and turned out to be a blown head gasket. It being summer and my chosen engine man being busy and wanting a holiday it took a little while to get things sorted. For most of the time the boat was there the canal was cut off by the swing bridge failure near Disley in any case. There were no permit moorings available at Whaley Bridge. The locals I encountered were aware of the situation and I eventually managed to make contact with CRT but their left hand and right hand aren’t well connected so although they knew my situation I can’t say they ‘agreed’. In any case I don’t believe they should ‘agree’ to overstays. They have the ability to decide whether to take enforcement action or not based on the circumstances. I’m not worried that’s going to happen. I did get a letter reminding me about the need to move.

 

The point is that things aren’t always what they seem but boaters do seem very willing to have a go at each other; particularly ones they think aren’t like themselves or are getting something for nothing.

 

Personally I think it’s at least as much about social status as it is about boating habits.

 

Edited by Captain Pegg
  • Greenie 3
Link to comment
Share on other sites

No I knew I owned it just had other things to do. At the time I was paying silly money for a CRT owned residential mooring but had a spare boat so kept it nearby. What was funny was the CRT told me I was living on the towpath boat when their address for me was one of their own moorings. 

 

1. Right hand not knowing what left hand is doing. 

2. They are spying or making assumptions about what boats are lived on. 

 

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

24 minutes ago, magnetman said:

No I knew I owned it just had other things to do. At the time I was paying silly money for a CRT owned residential mooring but had a spare boat so kept it nearby. What was funny was the CRT told me I was living on the towpath boat when their address for me was one of their own moorings. 

 

1. Right hand not knowing what left hand is doing. 

2. They are spying or making assumptions about what boats are lived on. 

 

 


I’m always amused at notions CRT are engaged in malevolent practices.

 

They really aren’t resourced or smart enough for that.

 

Cock-up over conspiracy every time.

 

Having worked in the same sector I also suspect they have a bit of a victim mentality and are paranoid about folk trying to do one on them.

  • Greenie 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 hour ago, Stroudwater1 said:

Just checked and three of our spots are incorrect in 2023, two in the Marple/Macc area and one on Stoke Bruerne service moorings. 

 

when we were meant to be at Middlecale farm moorings we were in Newbold tunnel. 
 

Ours is a 5 figure number so maybe we are being checked before the 6th digit is inserted by the checker. Perhaps someone’s cloned our number 😕

 

Overall I’m pleased to be confirmed at travelling the network so widely tbh 

If you have been cloned it will probably show you have moved very widely as they spot two boats in different locations, maybe one in the north and one in the south

Link to comment
Share on other sites

It was quite funny that they said in the letter something to the effect of 'As you live on the boat you will need to find alternative accomodation if we remove it from our waterways'. 

This letter was sent to me at a CRT residential mooring which was fully paid up and had a different boat on it which is where I was living. 

 

I am unsure as to why they thought I was living on the other boat. The only explanation my logical hyper-systemising brain could come up with is that they made an assumption based on observation as it did look like a lived on boat. All my boats look lived on whether I am there or not. 

 

Maybe all cc boats are assumed to be lived on and it is a standard practice. 

 

 

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 minute ago, magnetman said:

It was quite funny that they said in the letter something to the effect of 'As you live on the boat you will need to find alternative accomodation if we remove it from our waterways'. 

This letter was sent to me at a CRT residential mooring which was fully paid up and had a different boat on it which is where I was living. 

 

I am unsure as to why they thought I was living on the other boat. The only explanation my logical hyper-systemising brain could come up with is that they made an assumption based on observation as it did look like a lived on boat. All my boats look lived on whether I am there or not. 

 

Maybe all cc boats are assumed to be lived on and it is a standard practice. 

 

 

 

They didn't think you did, they were just warning you that if you did you would become homeless when they removed your boat in ten years time 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 hour ago, Stroudwater1 said:

Just checked and three of our spots are incorrect in 2023, two in the Marple/Macc area and one on Stoke Bruerne service moorings. 

 

when we were meant to be at Middlecale farm moorings we were in Newbold tunnel. 
 

Ours is a 5 figure number so maybe we are being checked before the 6th digit is inserted by the checker. Perhaps someone’s cloned our number 😕

 

Overall I’m pleased to be confirmed at travelling the network so widely tbh 


You should query that. You might get the blame for my overstays up north.

 

I wonder if your five digit number is getting a zero added to the end rather than the beginning.

 

I also have a five digit registration but don’t have problems.

 

Despite my sightings being a little sporadic I was sighted on or near that day when we met at the centre of the boating universe.

  • Happy 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 minute ago, ditchcrawler said:

They didn't think you did, they were just warning you that if you did you would become homeless when they removed your boat in ten years time 

My logical brain was unable to understand how I could become homeless when the letter was sent to me at a CRT residential mooring which I was paying for yearly and had another boat on it. 

 

It must be cockup as Captain Pegg suggested. 

 

Maybe it did say 'if' but I am sure it said 'as'. 

 

i suppose an address is just an address and the fact it was a CRT mooring is just a coincidence and not relevant. 

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

 

I still do think that the CRT data loggers might be collecting more than just location and number data. 

 

I actually think there might be a box which says 'does the boat look occupied' it would just be a tap on the screen for the data collector. 

 

I don't see why this would call for any extra resources but maybe it contravenes some sort of privacy law. 

 

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 hour ago, TheBiscuits said:

 

That's not so bad.  I've previously done just over 4 months on a signed 48hr visitor mooring.

 

It was handy for parking the car and about 40 feet from the services.

 

Oh so was it YOU who spent the whole of last summer hogging the best space here on our 48hr VMs? The space closest to the car park, pub, water tap and elsan?

 

I never knew you had a monster fattie! 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

On 01/12/2023 at 21:53, Adam said:

Desperately needed but will have limited impact if the boots on the ground don't act properly. Looking at the salary they pay the enforcement guys no wonder they are reluctant to get involved in actually enforcing anything. 

 

We genuinely CC in the winter and find it frustrating finding good moorings covered in boats that actively don't move and it is more apparent in the winter.

Following the sad well-known case(s), CaRT are taking seriously their duty of care for their staff and only engaging with boaters in enforcement after very careful risk assessments. The enforcement can then be escalated to a sufficiently high level within the organisation and accompanied by security. But be careful who you label as 'enforcement' - the visible staff on the towpath are simply data recording and the front line with boaters who are or who may be non-compliant are the Licence Support Staff. The latter, in the area I know well, are very good and well respected even amongst those who find compliance difficult. Once a case becomes legal enforcement, others take that on. I don't believe that there is any reluctance in the sense you seem to imply - rather that at the front line there is a policy and a corporate culture of trying as hard as possible to enable boaters to be kept out of the legal processes. This can come across to those not versed in the detail as 'letting boaters get away with it'. There is a lot of genuine compassion in CaRT staff.

 

Equally, CaRT selectively use their scarce resources to egregious cases which, almost by definition, become long drawn out affairs and very expensive.

 

It may seem to a CCing boater that some stretches are populated by boats that never move but if you walk the towpath regularly you may well find that this not the case as much as you suggest and that there is a steady rate of turnover. After all, there is the right to remain for 14 days and the debate then is about how far they have to move. CaRT are manifestly tackling the long over stayers and gradually shifting the culture but, in some areas, this will take along time, perhaps until those who arrived in a more relaxed era no longer wish or are able to live with 'no home mooring'. Even those who still struggle to comply are increasingly aware of their obligations and the 6 month licence is helping. However, CaRT do have to make it6 rigorous as there is sometimes a belief on the towpath that individuals may be able to get successive 6 months. But bear in mind that this is about shifting culture and if someone has made real steps towards convincing the Board but not quite made it, it may not be unreasonable to give them time to get there. 

 

Also remember that boaters who have a 'reasonable adjustment' do not have to publicise it. As I see it, as far as possible, the reasonable adjustments are more likely to relax the distance moved in order to maintain the frequency of movement.

3 hours ago, Jerra said:

Presumably you had good reason and weren't just hogging the mooring.

. . . and the Licence Support team would have accepted the reason as well - I know 'cos I asked! But then, all three routes to our winter mooring, were unavailable either for closure or for flooding. But we are back there now - and eventually found a 'proper' mooring for the six weeks it took to re-open.

  • Greenie 3
Link to comment
Share on other sites

40 minutes ago, magnetman said:

My logical brain was unable to understand how I could become homeless when the letter was sent to me at a CRT residential mooring which I was paying for yearly and had another boat on it. 

 

It must be cockup as Captain Pegg suggested. 

 

Maybe it did say 'if' but I am sure it said 'as'. 

 

i suppose an address is just an address and the fact it was a CRT mooring is just a coincidence and not relevant. 

 

If every letter of the type you indicate had to be personalised to that degree then the costs would be even higher. I note that the revised schedule of notices is, in part, based on the need to reduce costs. Much of the procedure has to be standardised and based on simple triggers.

  • Greenie 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 minute ago, Mike Todd said:

If every letter of the type you indicate had to be personalised to that degree then the costs would be even higher. I note that the revised schedule of notices is, in part, based on the need to reduce costs. Much of the procedure has to be standardised and based on simple triggers.

 

It is apparently more expensive for the CRT to execute a S8 if the boat is a residence. 

Do they assume that every cc boat is lived on? 

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.