Boaters' Update - changes to communications to CCers.

[David Mack]

1 hour 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. 

Seems pretty clear to me. The letter was a standard letter sent in respect of any overstaying boat, and addressed to the owner name and address on CRT's records. It is more than likely that the letter text and your personal details were put together through an automated mailmerge process and no human actually read the whole letter, let alone considered the point you raise.

[Mike Todd]

3 hours ago, magnetman said:

 

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? 

The legal processes are very different when it involves someone's home, rather than an occasional 'leisure' use. The derive from the experience of the oft-called Rachmman Era and, as I have said several times, I would most definitely not want to go back to that situation (despite squeals from some landlords, mainly at the questionable end of the spectrum) No-fault evictions are not that different and it is most regrettable that the Government decided to drop new legislation on this from the recent King's Speech.

 

The key is that someone should not be deprived of their home without due consideration by a court who can review the evidence and see whether it is unreasonable. There are several stages. Whilst it is true that landlords can be seriously disadvantaged (especially if they are individuals with just a single property) when faced with a rogue tenant, perhaps not even paying their first rental after moving in. But that is a cost that society has considered justified in the face of what happened in the past, unless and until someone can come up with a genuinely better solution (not just one that opens the door to landlords wanting to gain possession so that they can hike up the rents without restraint)

 

I doubt whether a court would necessarily consider a CC boat a de facto residence (even if most are) but it might be necessary for CaRT to prove to the contrary were a case against them brought on that basis. I am fairly confident that CaRT consciously do not want to be in the position of having broken this particular legal position. They are well aware of the conflicting needs and claims but are trying to hold a much better moral position (insofar as the laws of trading permit) than many a company. CaRT certainly need to do due diligence before seeking possession. (And to note re another post, doing this for every sighting would be expensive in respect of the person time taken and also might not be compatible with their risk assessment on lone working)

[Francis Herne]

7 hours 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

 

That's a bit of a coincidence, my one false sighting is also on the Macc at Lyme View Marina. I have six digits so slightly harder to make an error.

 

It's fun to imagine cloning, but perhaps more likely the local checker is prone to typos...

[cuthound]

9 hours ago, magnetman said:

In some cases 'causing no bother' can refer to locals rather than other boaters. 

 

People who live in an area and use the towpath as part of their daily life maybe take the dog for a walk do often care about it. 

 

Seemingly little things like boaters filling bins which are obviously provided for people out walking to put small litter into can really wind people up. 

 

It is the locals you need to pacify not other boaters. 

 

 

 

I agree. Our local community website went into overdrive after someone reported seeing a boater empty his cassette into the cut and another reported the damage being done to trees in a canalside wood by boaters "foraging" for wood by cutting branches off living trees.

 

These boaters do the rest of us no favours at all.

[adam1uk]

19 hours ago, magnetman said:

 

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...

 

It's actually illegal to put domestic or commercial waste in litter bins.  People and businesses have been given penalties for it -- although of course there has to be something in there to identify whose rubbish it is.  I believe in some cases people have been caught because they put things with their names and addresses on in litter bins, which seems like a pretty stupid thing to do for all sorts of reasons.

 

https://www.lichfielddc.gov.uk/news/article/788/two-lichfield-shops-fined-for-fly-tipping

 

https://www.westerntelegraph.co.uk/news/18863799.reminder-domestic-waste-left-litter-bins-neyland/

[LadyG]

There is no end to stupidity.

I found some really stinking rubbish from a tenant ( up two stairs),  in my bin, included letters addressed to him.

I knocked his door and handed it back to him,  no more rubbish in my dry waste recycling bin after that.

Edited December 4, 2023 by LadyG

[beerbeerbeerbeerbeer]

😳I have a confession: I was caught out with me bin bag the other month. Had to dump me boat for 10days in a kind of rush/hurry/emergency and catch a train
No CRT bins and I couldn’t leave the bag aboard anywhere, didn’t want to attract killer rats. 
So dumped it next to the bins in a well to do village. 
 

Sometimes it happens. 
Very very rarely in my case. 
Certainly not a habit of mine. 

Oh and yes it was a 48hr mooring too. But I don’t feel a twinge of guilt about that. 

But the bin bag did prey on my mind/conscience I knew I was doing bad. 
 

eta: apologies folks of Gnosall

Edited December 4, 2023 by beerbeerbeerbeerbeer