9 minutes ago, waterworks said:

This post is finished now as I have decided any future move will be on land as the cost of keeping a boat on the CRT canal is no longer economical.  £3000+ totally wasted for such an off grid lifestyle.  

It depends, surely, on how much one likes being on the water and how much time you spend on it, not being residential. I still reckon my three grand a year is worth paying for the fun I get out of my holidays, but then I can usually get at least three months a year afloat. I can understand it not being considered worth it if it's only a few weeks and the odd weekend and then a caravan or suchlike would always be a better bet.

1 hour ago, waterworks said:

This post is finished now as I have decided any future move will be on land as the cost of keeping a boat on the CRT canal is no longer economical.  £3000+ totally wasted for such an off grid lifestyle.  

 

So, you are not interested in Canal or River Boating, just a cheap lifestyle?

 

Perhaps your decision is for the best.

 

Others, however, are prepared to pay far more than that for leisure boating, more than twice as much for a arina berth with services.

Edited February 23Feb 23 by Mike Coombes

1 hour ago, Mike Coombes said:

 

So, you are not interested in Canal or River Boating, just a cheap lifestyle?

 

Perhaps your decision is for the best.

 

Others, however, are prepared to pay far more than that for leisure boating, more than twice as much for a arina berth with services.

Can't have been for a cheap lifestyle, must have been for a holiday boat as it was specifically a non-residential mooring being looked for. The OP wouldn't be the first exboater on here who has decided a campervan or caravan makes more sense if you like travelling, especially as the canals breakdown more and more often and routes get more restricted, plus the effects of climate change. I'm hanging on by the skin of my teeth, every year saying I'll give it one more...

We swapped our beloved boat for a motorhome a few years ago as OH is too busy at work for us to justify keeping a boat at the moment. Yes, a motorhome is cheaper to run on an annual basis - no mooring fees, just road tax licence (£300ish) and insurance (£200ish) - and we are enjoying not being limited with where we can go, but it really isn't the same as being on a boat. We will without any doubt be getting our next boat within a couple of years and I just can't wait.

52 minutes ago, MrsM said:

We swapped our beloved boat for a motorhome a few years ago as OH is too busy at work for us to justify keeping a boat at the moment. Yes, a motorhome is cheaper to run on an annual basis - no mooring fees, just road tax licence (£300ish) and insurance (£200ish) - and we are enjoying not being limited with where we can go, but it really isn't the same as being on a boat. We will without any doubt be getting our next boat within a couple of years and I just can't wait.

There are mooring fees on a motorhome/caravan if you can't store it at home, same as a boat.

Mine in Devon is cheap £300pa but I've heard of some in Nottingham being as high as £1400

1 hour ago, GUMPY said:

There are mooring fees on a motorhome/caravan if you can't store it at home, same as a boat.

Mine in Devon is cheap £300pa but I've heard of some in Nottingham being as high as £1400

Very true. Our van is only 6m long and kept on our drive. The overnight camping fees soon add up when out and about.  

Edited February 23Feb 23 by MrsM

On 23/02/2026 at 18:23, Arthur Marshall said:

Can't have been for a cheap lifestyle, must have been for a holiday boat as it was specifically a non-residential mooring being looked for. The OP wouldn't be the first exboater on here who has decided a campervan or caravan makes more sense if you like travelling, especially as the canals breakdown more and more often and routes get more restricted, plus the effects of climate change. I'm hanging on by the skin of my teeth, every year saying I'll give it one more...

 

He - or she - states " £3,000 +totally wasted for such an off grid lifestyle.

 

Methinks the punter was looking for the cheapest option-non residential, leisure only-and was going to see if he/she could 'get away with it'.

 

Looks like the 'off grid lifestyle' was too expensive.

24 minutes ago, Mike Coombes said:

 

He - or she - states " £3,000 +totally wasted for such an off grid lifestyle.

 

Methinks the punter was looking for the cheapest option-non residential, leisure only-and was going to see if he/she could 'get away with it'.

 

Looks like the 'off grid lifestyle' was too expensive.

The last farm I moored at had several people living on board and I'd imagine that would be about £3000 a year for mooring fees and licence for a 65 foot boat. Very nice mooring, apart from having to negotiate either Bosley locks or a couple of awkward swing bridges before you could get anywhere, plus nowhere to park the car except a narrow road's grass verge - all of which is why I moved. 

I admit I was confused by the OP talking about a lifestyle while specifying non-residential. No off-grid lifestyle is going to be cheap, because, on the grid, a whole stack of stuff gets done for you by the taxpayer, even if you choose not to realise it and pretend it's all down to your own effort.

I've just spotted from another thread that the OP is currently living on a mooring, so this is presumably looking for a cheaper leisure one to live on illegally under the radar. Does seem a bit odd as he appears elsewhere to be a staunch law'n'order enforcer, at least for other people, but I suppose such hypocrisy is common enough.

Edited February 25Feb 25 by Arthur Marshall

On 12/11/2025 at 00:27, matty40s said:

Pretty sure the red dotted plot is for sale...there are 4 plots on the offside, the most Northerly one is possibly for sale. No road access...all the present moorers have tenders, or you can walk down the farmers field from the road.

The moorers do not pay an EOG fee as this was a historical wharf and they are responsible for bank maintenance.

Just North of Gayton, nearest bridge is the no45, footpath up to Gayton village.

And a cracking spot it is

On 25/02/2026 at 20:47, Arthur Marshall said:

 

I've just spotted from another thread that the OP is currently living on a mooring, so this is presumably looking for a cheaper leisure one to live on illegally under the radar. Does seem a bit odd as he appears elsewhere to be a staunch law'n'order enforcer, at least for other people, but I suppose such hypocrisy is common enough.

 We found who is reporting boaters living on leisure moorings to the council .

 

 

2 hours ago, waterworks said:

 We found who is reporting boaters living on leisure moorings to the council .

 

 

What did the council do about it? Presumably they can't evict them if they're on CRT water, and they can't charge tax if the mooring isn't technically residential. I can't see they can do anything except pass the information on to CRT who will probably ignore it for fifteen years.

What's more interesting is what did you do to the person reporting it!

2 hours ago, Arthur Marshall said:

What did the council do about it? Presumably they can't evict them if they're on CRT water, and they can't charge tax if the mooring isn't technically residential. I can't see they can do anything except pass the information on to CRT who will probably ignore it for fifteen years.

What's more interesting is what did you do to the person reporting it!

I imagine it would all depend on how many residential boats we’re talking about on non residential moorings.
 If one or two boats then the council/CaRT may do nothing. If it’s say 20 boats out of a total of a 20-30 berth Marina/linear mooring, then the council may look at it differently, as that could be a lot of council tax it could use locally.

 I’m sure the council can still prosecute the boaters/moorings operator for non payment of council tax, if they can prove the case of full time residency 

Edited February 28Feb 28 by BoatingLifeUpNorth2

2 hours ago, Arthur Marshall said:

What did the council do about it? Presumably they can't evict them if they're on CRT water, and they can't charge tax if the mooring isn't technically residential. I can't see they can do anything except pass the information on to CRT who will probably ignore it for fifteen years.

What's more interesting is what did you do to the person reporting it!

That is a really good question. If nothing happens I guess that might open the door for a larger scale micky-taking than we currently see. And if it leads to a major clamp down, that would be tough on all those that live quietly and harmlessly under the radar. 

1 minute ago, MrsM said:

That is a really good question. If nothing happens I guess that might open the door for a larger scale micky-taking than we currently see. And if it leads to a major clamp down, that would be tough on all those that live quietly and harmlessly under the radar. 

I’m sure CaRT knows it goes on and turns a blind eye as they’re getting moorings revenue from certain locations. If CaRT started enforcing the non-residential mooring then where do the evicted boats go? You could end up with a sudden large increase in CCers/CMers in a small area putting more pressure on CaRT facilities. Better to ignore and leave them put in a Marina or linear moorings then open a can of worms on the system.

 The council may look at it differently. They’re not interested where the boats go, they just want the council tax off them.

1 hour ago, BoatingLifeUpNorth2 said:

I’m sure CaRT knows it goes on and turns a blind eye as they’re getting moorings revenue from certain locations. If CaRT started enforcing the non-residential mooring then where do the evicted boats go? You could end up with a sudden large increase in CCers/CMers in a small area putting more pressure on CaRT facilities. Better to ignore and leave them put in a Marina or linear moorings then open a can of worms on the system.

 The council may look at it differently. They’re not interested where the boats go, they just want the council tax off them.

I think you are probably right.

9 hours ago, BoatingLifeUpNorth2 said:

The council may look at it differently. They’re not interested where the boats go, they just want the council tax off them

But if CRT insist the moorings are leisure only, I can't see how CT can be charged. The logical thing would be to take CRT to court for a change of use of the moorings, which I doubt the councils could afford and hardly worth while economically.

Except, of course, CRT could then charge three times as much for the moorings... but this is all assuming that these are CRT moorings in the first place, which they may well not be.

1 minute ago, Arthur Marshall said:

The logical thing would be to take CRT to court for a change of use of the moorings, which I doubt the councils could afford and hardly worth while economically.

To which CRT's defence would be that their mooring conditions only permit non-residential use, and CRT are not breaching planning regulations.

38 minutes ago, David Mack said:

To which CRT's defence would be that their mooring conditions only permit non-residential use, and CRT are not breaching planning regulations.

 Then CaRT will give the moorers the option either use the boat as leisure or they’ll terminate their moorings, for breach of contract.

45 minutes ago, Arthur Marshall said:

But if CRT insist the moorings are leisure only, I can't see how CT can be charged. The logical thing would be to take CRT to court for a change of use of the moorings, which I doubt the councils could afford and hardly worth while economically.

Except, of course, CRT could then charge three times as much for the moorings... but this is all assuming that these are CRT moorings in the first place, which they may well not be.

 The council may go after the boaters first then the moorings operator or vice versa. If it’s their place of residence and they are loving on board I don’t think it makes a difference, CT will have to be paid for by someone. I don’t think the council would be bothered with one or two on linear moorings, but could be for large numbers living under the radar in marinas,  especially in towns or cities where they are using council facilities and not paying CT.

50 minutes ago, BoatingLifeUpNorth2 said:

 Then CaRT will give the moorers the option either use the boat as leisure or they’ll terminate their moorings, for breach of contract.

 The council may go after the boaters first then the moorings operator or vice versa. If it’s their place of residence and they are loving on board I don’t think it makes a difference, CT will have to be paid for by someone. I don’t think the council would be bothered with one or two on linear moorings, but could be for large numbers living under the radar in marinas,  especially in towns or cities where they are using council facilities and not paying CT.

The final problem will be that you can't charge council tax without an address, and a leisure mooring doesn't have one. My old live on mooring just used the farm address and all mail got dropped in a box and we sorted our own. My previous leisure ine, where people did live on, wouldn't accept any mail at all. I doubt CRT moorings have any individual postal addresses at all. If the old poll tax couldn't nail us, which it didn't, I can't see how council tax can.

And I still think whoever did report it was a petty minded pillock!

2 hours ago, BoatingLifeUpNorth2 said:

Then CaRT will give the moorers the option either use the boat as leisure or they’ll terminate their moorings, for breach of contract.

They may technically have the right to do so, but why would they? The boater would simply become a CCer, they'd lose the mooring income (which is more than the CCer premium), and the boat would probably still hang around in the same general area.

2 hours ago, BoatingLifeUpNorth2 said:

The council may go after the boaters first then the moorings operator or vice versa. If it’s their place of residence and they are loving on board I don’t think it makes a difference, CT will have to be paid for by someone.

On what grounds? 

The CT rules are very clear on what creates a liability to pay council tax, and there is simply no basis to charge CT on a boat or a mooring that is not designated as a residential mooring, no matter how unreasonable that may seem to councils or local residents who object to boaters 'freeloading' on local services and facilities.

For the limited sums of money being missed it simply isn't worthwhile for a local authority to push cases with very limited chance of success.

4 hours ago, David Mack said:

They may technically have the right to do so, but why would they? The boater would simply become a CCer, they'd lose the mooring income (which is more than the CCer premium), and the boat would probably still hang around in the same general area.

On what grounds? 

The CT rules are very clear on what creates a liability to pay council tax, and there is simply no basis to charge CT on a boat or a mooring that is not designated as a residential mooring, no matter how unreasonable that may seem to councils or local residents who object to boaters 'freeloading' on local services and facilities.

For the limited sums of money being missed it simply isn't worthwhile for a local authority to push cases with very limited chance of success.

That basically what I’ve said previously, that CaRT know it’s happening so would be more of an issue making them CCers in a small area. Better leaving them where they are and paying moorings.

 Also councils won’t be bothered with a couple of boats, but could be bothered in 20-30 under the radar residential livaboards in a city centre Marina. Where they could prosecute and get £50K in fines?

  We seem to be talking about CaRT moorings/Marinas. I imagine it would be easier for a local council, to go after a large quantity on under the radar residential boats for CT in a private Marina leased from CaRT. As it will stipulate in their lease the residential status of the marina and numbers allowed.

 I heard the council prosecuted boats for non payment of CT a few years ago at Bluewater Marina Thorne, £5K fines were the figure mentioned. Whether it’s true on not??

Edited March 1Mar 1 by BoatingLifeUpNorth2