Do CRT Volunteers get away with not CC'ing?

[Gybe Ho]

38 minutes ago, TheBiscuits said:

 

Yes. Easily.

 

Whether or not the prediction turns out to be correct is the gamble you'd be taking with the enforcement process ...

 

I do not intend to gamble. I am intrigued as to how the volunteer mentioned in the OP has managed to anticipate the clocking day 50? times in a year assuming enforcement has not already sent letters. If the CRT spotters are so predictable in their schedule of clocking it makes a mockery of the whole system.

[matty40s]

20 minutes ago, Gybe Ho said:

 

I do not intend to gamble. I am intrigued as to how the volunteer mentioned in the OP has managed to anticipate the clocking day 50? times in a year assuming enforcement has not already sent letters. If the CRT spotters are so predictable in their schedule of clocking it makes a mockery of the whole system.

They pass here every Monday, unless it is a Bank Holiday, then its Tuesday. Not difficult to work it out really.

Some areas within a 30 mile radius currently do not have a checker, or an enforcement officer(or whatever they are called this week).

[Alan de Enfield]

21 minutes ago, Gybe Ho said:

 

I do not intend to gamble. I am intrigued as to how the volunteer mentioned in the OP has managed to anticipate the clocking day 50? times in a year assuming enforcement has not already sent letters. If the CRT spotters are so predictable in their schedule of clocking it makes a mockery of the whole system.

 

They actually send a letter to (some / all ?) mooring providers that they will be coming on X day (normally some 3 to 4 weeks in advance) so as to check the licences on the boats on the moorings.

[Cheese]

29 minutes ago, Gybe Ho said:

 

... If the CRT spotters are so predictable in their schedule of clocking it makes a mockery of the whole system.

Agreed. It is exactly the sort of job that ought to have a random element. Rather than the same day every fortnight (or whatever) mix it up a bit. Visit the same stretch three weeks in succession, then give it a break. Or twice the same week if there are 48 hour moorings.  Or go a day earlier than usual some weeks.

[Barneyp]

2 hours ago, ditchcrawler said:

What would be the value of a 14 day mooring?
On a parallel tack I understand some camp/caravans give a free pitch for the season for a sort of care taker. Anyone know about that?

 

In those cases the "employer" is a small business (possibly a farmer), with only one person receiving the benefit in kind., so HMRC are unlikely to find out and will put the limited resources they have for proactive investigations else where.

If CRT did it there could be 100's of people receiving the benefit in kind meaning HMRC may be more interested, also CRT are a government funded organisation so there is more pressure to stick to the rules.

And from the volunteers point of view if some are getting a free mooring why shouldn't they all? This could cause all sorts of issues.

 

 

[Arthur Marshall]

9 minutes ago, Barneyp said:

And from the volunteers point of view if some are getting a free mooring why shouldn't they all? This could cause all sorts of issues

I think that's the crucial point. The two lock keepers I have been aware of who lived on their boats by a set of locks were both CRT employees (probably BW, actually) and so were almost certainly there as part of their contract.

Volunteers would be pushing their luck and I doubt CRT would endorse them breaking the mooring rules. Certainly, in my civil service days, any even apparently harmless clash with my department's rules was a sacking offence.

Edited June 5, 2025 by Arthur Marshall

[Gybe Ho]

1 hour ago, matty40s said:

They pass here every Monday, unless it is a Bank Holiday, then its Tuesday. Not difficult to work it out really.

Some areas within a 30 mile radius currently do not have a checker, or an enforcement officer(or whatever they are called this week).

 

If only my local Constabulary were as predictable in the deployment of their mobile speed camera vans.

 

 

[ditchcrawler]

3 hours ago, Gybe Ho said:

 

I do not intend to gamble. I am intrigued as to how the volunteer mentioned in the OP has managed to anticipate the clocking day 50? times in a year assuming enforcement has not already sent letters. If the CRT spotters are so predictable in their schedule of clocking it makes a mockery of the whole system.

The strange thing is that lots of people want to be seen to prove they are moving and not get penalised by CRT for not moving far enough in the year 

[MtB]

52 minutes ago, ditchcrawler said:

The strange thing is that lots of people want to be seen to prove they are moving and not get penalised by CRT for not moving far enough in the year 

 

Yes it must be beyond irritating to be spotted when about to set off on a 100 mile cruise then be spotted three weeks later in the same place on your return and get a Warning Letter! 

 

 

[Kiwidad]

7 hours ago, MtB said:

 

Yes it must be beyond irritating to be spotted when about to set off on a 100 mile cruise then be spotted three weeks later in the same place on your return and get a Warning Letter! 

 

 

Or, you get a warning letter after a week, and the boat moored in front of you that has been there for three weeks is ignored. Not so @matty40s 😎

[TheBiscuits]

9 hours ago, MtB said:

 

Yes it must be beyond irritating to be spotted when about to set off on a 100 mile cruise then be spotted three weeks later in the same place on your return and get a Warning Letter! 

 

Why would you do a hundred mile cruise in a fortnight and then return to the same place you started? 

 

If it's a home mooring then that pattern is reasonable, but in that case you wouldn't be getting a warning letter.

 

If it's not a home mooring, then you should be getting a warning for this pattern - it's given as an example of what not to do in the guidance.

[Jonny P]

14 hours ago, Gybe Ho said:

 

I do not intend to gamble. I am intrigued as to how the volunteer mentioned in the OP has managed to anticipate the clocking day 50? times in a year assuming enforcement has not already sent letters. If the CRT spotters are so predictable in their schedule of clocking it makes a mockery of the whole system.

 

13 hours ago, Cheese said:

Agreed. It is exactly the sort of job that ought to have a random element. Rather than the same day every fortnight (or whatever) mix it up a bit. Visit the same stretch three weeks in succession, then give it a break. Or twice the same week if there are 48 hour moorings.  Or go a day earlier than usual some weeks.

The purpose of the checks is to build up a picture of movement over the course of a licence. That simply needs the check to be done with sufficient frequency. The advantage of doing it literally every 14 days is that any boat logged in the same place on two successive occasions can immediately receive an overstay warning. It’s also a lot easier to schedule.

 

Simply moving enough to be in a different place on a specific day every two weeks and then returning to the same spot in between isn’t going to provide sufficient range of movement over a year to satisfy CRT. What it will do is avoid receiving a letter every two weeks telling you to move.

 

You also need to bear in mind that enforcement is expensive for CRT so a system that encourages boaters to move in accordance with the law isn’t so daft.

[dogless]

We left the Llangollen canal this week, after being on there for five weeks.

 

The  day before we left,  there was a number checker who was walking from Hurleston to Willey Moor. I spoke to him and mentioned we'd not seen anyone in the five weeks.

 

He checked his records and identified he'd taken our number on 14 May ... you don't always see them but they're around.

 

I asked about the procedure for a boat not displaying a number, a licence or name. He said generally he already knows such boats (there aren't many) but on the rare occasion its a new one he'll knock and hope to speak to the occupiers, but anyway descriptions are recorded and the issue pursued. He said its a "real pain in the arse" but such boats are not ignored. He said its definitely not a good idea if you want a quiet life.

 

Rog

[MtB]

15 minutes ago, dogless said:

He said its a "real pain in the arse" but such boats are not ignored. He said its definitely not a good idea if you want a quiet life.

 

That's pleasing to hear, that the stealth boats are not getting a 'quiet life'. 

 

But is it true though, everywhere?! 

 

 

 

 

Edited June 6, 2025 by MtB
Add a bit.

[dogless]

I suppose the area will play a large part ... as he said, on his particular canal unidentified boats aren't a big issue.

 

I guess that won't be the case in the capital and south West.

 

Personally, I'm content to ensure I'm playing by the rules and leave concerns about such matters to those who's job it is.

 

Rog

 

[Gybe Ho]

4 minutes ago, dogless said:

 

Personally, I'm content to ensure I'm playing by the rules and leave concerns about such matters to those who's job it is.

 

 

I am thinking of fitting a GPS logger so that if the CRT ever make a false allegation I have broken the CC rules I can send them the evidence of their error. When I sailed offshore I originally kept a written deck log of hourly positions, GPS plotters more or less made that unnecessary for navigation but there was still a legal obligation to maintain a log. A few years later I discovered the weather report receiver onboard had been logging my location hourly for years in its digital memory. 

1 hour ago, Jonny P said:

The purpose of the checks is to build up a picture of movement over the course of a licence. That simply needs the check to be done with sufficient frequency. The advantage of doing it literally every 14 days is that any boat logged in the same place on two successive occasions can immediately receive an overstay warning. It’s also a lot easier to schedule.

 

 

I follow your reasoning about simplicity and cheapness but is the present system fit for purpose? Given the incessant howls of protest on CWDF about CMers I suggest not.

 

It sounds as though the monitoring system evolved in more bucolic BW days when spotters kept an eye on their parish. With technology making offgrid living afloat viable I think there is much more scope for abuse of the system by both HMers and CCers. Technology could help the spotters.

[ditchcrawler]

1 hour ago, dogless said:

We left the Llangollen canal this week, after being on there for five weeks.

 

The  day before we left,  there was a number checker who was walking from Hurleston to Willey Moor. I spoke to him and mentioned we'd not seen anyone in the five weeks.

 

He checked his records and identified he'd taken our number on 14 May ... you don't always see them but they're around.

 

I asked about the procedure for a boat not displaying a number, a licence or name. He said generally he already knows such boats (there aren't many) but on the rare occasion its a new one he'll knock and hope to speak to the occupiers, but anyway descriptions are recorded and the issue pursued. He said its a "real pain in the arse" but such boats are not ignored. He said its definitely not a good idea if you want a quiet life.

 

Rog

That could account for why the poor chap got stabbed if he had a word with the boat occupant 

21 minutes ago, Gybe Ho said:

 

I follow your reasoning about simplicity and cheapness but is the present system fit for purpose? Given the incessant howls of protest on CWDF about CMers I suggest not.

 

CM do move, they do their 21 miles a year going from bridge to bridge . Also known as bridge hoppers. They know the system and how to keep on the right side of it, that is why they like to make sure they are spotted before moving 

[Jonny P]

26 minutes ago, Gybe Ho said:

 

I am thinking of fitting a GPS logger so that if the CRT ever make a false allegation I have broken the CC rules I can send them the evidence of their error. When I sailed offshore I originally kept a written deck log of hourly positions, GPS plotters more or less made that unnecessary for navigation but there was still a legal obligation to maintain a log. A few years later I discovered the weather report receiver onboard had been logging my location hourly for years in its digital memory. 

 

I follow your reasoning about simplicity and cheapness but is the present system fit for purpose? Given the incessant howls of protest on CWDF about CMers I suggest not.

 

It sounds as though the monitoring system evolved in more bucolic BW days when spotters kept an eye on their parish. With technology making offgrid living afloat viable I think there is much more scope for abuse of the system by both HMers and CCers. Technology could help the spotters.

Just buy a boat and make a genuine attempt to move it under a set of criteria that you can make a reasonable argument are compliant with the law and you’ll have no problem.

 

Social media tends to be far too concerned with what other people are doing.

 

There’s no need for technology or even much communication at all. CRT have not declared war on boaters. They want your licence fee and they want you to adhere to it’s terms and conditions. Which isn’t difficult if you are minded to try. And when it occasionally goes wrong - which it does - an e-mail giving facts and your intentions of how and when you’ll be compliant again will generally suffice.

 

 

 

 

[MtB]

26 minutes ago, Jonny P said:

And when it occasionally goes wrong - which it does - an e-mail giving facts and your intentions of how and when you’ll be compliant again will generally suffice.

 

More specifically on the odd occasion you can't comply (as happened to me when my Dear Old Dad died when I was CCing), they bend over backwards to be helpful and and accommodating if you tell them what is going on in your life. 

 

 

[adam1uk]

I’m always surprised that places where you need to book in aren’t taken as sightings.  In the past couple of months we have been through Harecastle Tunnel both ways, up Watford Locks and down Foxton.  But we haven’t been sighted since September last year.

[Gybe Ho]

8 hours ago, Jonny P said:

Just buy a boat and make a genuine attempt to move it under a set of criteria that you can make a reasonable argument are compliant with the law and you’ll have no problem.

 

Social media tends to be far too concerned with what other people are doing.

 

There’s no need for technology or even much communication at all. CRT have not declared war on boaters. They want your licence fee and they want you to adhere to it’s terms and conditions. Which isn’t difficult if you are minded to try. And when it occasionally goes wrong - which it does - an e-mail giving facts and your intentions of how and when you’ll be compliant again will generally suffice.

 

 

The Letter from the CRT warning of overstays seems to sting for those who are genuinely compliant, particularly when the CRT spotters miss a movement followed by a later return. It is not just a CCer thing.

 

GPS logging is easy to do particularly with the latest mimo x n antennas that have an extra wire for a GPS signal. I would like GPS logging just for peace of mind when away from the boat for over 12 hours. Being able to bat back against an erroneous CRT complaint with a GPS log is just an incidental benefit.

[Jerra]

23 hours ago, Gybe Ho said:

 

If only my local Constabulary were as predictable in the deployment of their mobile speed camera vans.

 

 

Our local ones say on face bokk each morning the rough areas they will be operating on eg by road number or between two named places.

[Jonny P]

20 minutes ago, Gybe Ho said:

 

The Letter from the CRT warning of overstays seems to sting for those who are genuinely compliant, particularly when the CRT spotters miss a movement followed by a later return. It is not just a CCer thing.

 

GPS logging is easy to do particularly with the latest mimo x n antennas that have an extra wire for a GPS signal. I would like GPS logging just for peace of mind when away from the boat for over 12 hours. Being able to bat back against an erroneous CRT complaint with a GPS log is just an incidental benefit.

It’s a very tame letter that reminds you of your obligation to keep moving and gives you a contact should you wish to discuss further.

 

Even if CRT have missed some movement it’s still arguably valid since you’ll only get one if you’re spotted on consecutive occasions in the same place and shuffling is not compliant.

 

It’s very easily dealt with. Those on this forum that I know to be continuous cruisers really don’t seem to have any issues with the process.

 

Edited June 6, 2025 by Jonny P

[Cheese]

10 hours ago, Jonny P said:

 

The purpose of the checks is to build up a picture of movement over the course of a licence. That simply needs the check to be done with sufficient frequency. The advantage of doing it literally every 14 days is that any boat logged in the same place on two successive occasions can immediately receive an overstay warning. It’s also a lot easier to schedule.

But a regular schedule doesn't actually achieve this aim, and can be easy to avoid (if you want to).  Any one spot is only visited 26 times a year. If close to a spotter boundary, once people know the schedule they can moor in the same place for 339 nights a year and yet never be spotted there!  Moving to the other side of the boundary for 26 nights would probably mean they won't be spotted there either.

 

Not suggesting that C&RT need to employ more spotters than they current do; just to make the schedule a bit more random.  If a particular stretch is checked on different days each fortnight, and occasionally twice in a week then not for a month,  then it would be impossible to avoid. There will be occasions where 2 visits are less than 14 days apart, so you can't send an immediate letter, but being spotted somewhere nearby 20+ times a year would be still be picked up. 

[ditchcrawler]

51 minutes ago, Gybe Ho said:

 

The Letter from the CRT warning of overstays seems to sting for those who are genuinely compliant, particularly when the CRT spotters miss a movement followed by a later return. It is not just a CCer thing.

 

GPS logging is easy to do particularly with the latest mimo x n antennas that have an extra wire for a GPS signal. I would like GPS logging just for peace of mind when away from the boat for over 12 hours. Being able to bat back against an erroneous CRT complaint with a GPS log is just an incidental benefit.

You could have had your GPS logger mounted on your bike. If you get a letter and don't deserve it you just contact them and they sort it.