Report Unlicensed Boats!

[carlt]

Yes, they know which boats do and do not have licences, but do they know whether the boats without licences are on their waters?

If they don't then the patrol officers are not doing their job properly.

 

An enforcing authority that requires busybodies to do their investigating and reporting has some fundamental problems.

 

Setting up a snitch-site is an admission that they are incapable of fulfilling their duties.

[Chris Pink]

I think BW should be looking more closely at the crane-in operations around the system where boats are lifted off low loaders and dropped in the water, unlicensed.

 

It seems me to be a little far fetched that someone could afford the expense of shifting their boat around by lorry and crane (anywhere up to £1500 last time i looked) but not have the wherewithall for a licence.

 

How big a problem do you believe this to be?

[Scotty]

Yes, they know which boats do and do not have licences, but do they know whether the boats without licences are on their waters?

I wondered this too

 

When I bought my boat the seller sent BW a change of owner form,

I left BW waters for the River Nene via Gayton where I completed some EA paperwork,

I'm now on the Middle Levels where they log boats on entry at Peterborogh.

 

My Licence expired in May, and I haven't received anything from BW so I guess they know where I am and are happy,

or maybe they're still writing to the previous owner?

[alan_fincher]

Yes, they know which boats do and do not have licences, but do they know whether the boats without licences are on their waters?

They regularly walk the system, recording all boats, (well they do round here anyway). Our marina has all boats recorded several times per year.

 

Whilst nor wanting to make sweeping generalisations, I'd say that unlicenced boats tend to get moved around the system far less than licenced ones, so my bet is that if they do (say) 3 monthly snapshots, they will find most have not moved far in the intervening period.

 

In all honesty, they don't need to know where every single unlicensed boat is, as according to their stats, it's about every twelfth one, I think. If they had a will to go after them, (and I think generally they don't), there are thousands of easy pickings, and they could leave worrying about the harder ones until they have got all the easy ones.

[magnetman]

It seems me to be a little far fetched that someone could afford the expense of shifting their boat around by lorry and crane (anywhere up to £1500 last time i looked) but not have the wherewithall for a licence.

 

How big a problem do you believe this to be?

 

You are assuming that license evasion is by definition related to ability to pay. I don't think it is.

 

I think it is directly related to how easy it is to avoid payment. Thinking completely logically about it, who actually WANTS to pay for a license? Maybe most people do?

 

I've no idea if it is a big problem or not but it is one thing which makes going unlicensed easier and in theory something which could be addressed by the authorities who are claiming that they want to bring evasion down to lower levels.

[carlt]

I wondered this too

 

When I bought my boat the seller sent BW a change of owner form,

I left BW waters for the River Nene via Gayton where I completed some EA paperwork,

I'm now on the Middle Levels where they log boats on entry at Peterborogh.

 

My Licence expired in May, and I haven't received anything from BW so I guess they know where I am and are happy,

or maybe they're still writing to the previous owner?

When I sold a boat and it was moved to the Great Ouse I informed BW, on their change of ownership form, that it would be no longer on BW managed waters.

 

When renewal time came up they sent me a reminder so I sent them a letter pointing out that it wasn't my boat and it wasn't on waters that they managed.

 

They sent me a letter threatening court action.

 

I said "Excellent! Yet another chance to humiliate an organisation not fit to run a bath."

 

The penny must have dropped because they didn't write (on that particular subject) again.

 

The boat is still listed on their snitch-site as unlicenced though, despite it not having seen any water, managed by BW, for 6 years, or more.

 

You are assuming that license evasion is by definition related to ability to pay. I don't think it is.

 

I think it is directly related to how easy it is to avoid payment. Thinking completely logically about it, who actually WANTS to pay for a license? Maybe most people do?

 

I've no idea if it is a big problem or not but it is one thing which makes going unlicensed easier and in theory something which could be addressed by the authorities who are claiming that they want to bring evasion down to lower levels.

Of course, it's going to be even easier to avoid paying the new fuel taxes. But that somehow isn't being portrayed as morally wrong.

Edited October 20, 2008 by carlt

[magnetman]

The boat is still listed on their snitch-site as unlicenced though, despite it not having seen any water, managed by BW, for 6 years, or more.

Thats because it is not licensed with BW, but if it isn't on BW waters then nobody is actually going to check if it is licensed on a BW database, are they?

[carlt]

Thats because it is not licensed with BW, but if it isn't on BW waters then nobody is actually going to check if it is licensed on a BW database, are they?

Of course they are.

 

I'm reporting boats that no longer exist!

[Tomska]

I'm reporting boats that no longer exist!

 

[churchward]

Of course, it's going to be even easier to avoid paying the new fuel taxes. But that somehow isn't being portrayed as morally wrong.

 

I think there is a difference presently at least. One being that we are before the fact in terms of the legislation hasn't come into effect yet so evasion of tax is guess work (as is the meaning of the regulation itself!) and the licence fee is for the use and upkeep of the canals. Whatever we think of BW (and how they spend the money) such an income is vital to the ongoing maintenance of the system no matter who is the governing body. At present I do not see any promise to use any portion of tax raised on red diesel for boat use to be spent on canals etc.

 

Personally I will go with the recommended 60/40 split as I can't work out a more accurate figure I do charge my batteries from the engine and I also have some diesel heating on board so I will go with the value as suggested by the research and what is acceptable to HMRC.

 

Another factor is that such evasion is not noticable like a missing license is.

[carlt]

Another factor is that such evasion is not noticable like a missing license is.

So the acceptability of breaking a law is measured on the likelihood of being detected??

[larkshall]

Hmm, how about the spy who reports the most genuine unlicensed boats get his/her licence paid for a year, and the location of said spy is well reported, so he can be congratulated in person.

[churchward]

So the acceptability of breaking a law is measured on the likelihood of being detected??

 

Nope, I didn't say it was acceptable just not as noticable.

[carlt]

Hmm, how about the spy who reports the most genuine unlicensed boats get his/her licence paid for a year, and the location of said spy is well reported, so he can be congratulated in person.

How about he/she gets a monthly salary and uniform. Then he/she will stop being a curtain twitching busybody and start being a professional enforcement officer.

[Chertsey]

And if your licence isn't visible in one of your windows, why would anyone 'peer' through your 'portholes' in the hope of spotting it amongst the clutter?

How do you tell the difference between looking at a window and looking through a window?

[mayalld]

It seems me to be a little far fetched that someone could afford the expense of shifting their boat around by lorry and crane (anywhere up to £1500 last time i looked) but not have the wherewithall for a licence.

 

How big a problem do you believe this to be?

 

I believe that there is a significant issue, and I know that BW is aware of it.

 

There are more than a few cases of people buying sailaways, and leaving them unlicenced whilst they fit them out.

 

Of course they are.

 

I'm reporting boats that no longer exist!

 

So, you are telling deliberate lies?

[alan_fincher]

There are more than a few cases of people buying sailaways, and leaving them unlicenced whilst they fit them out.

I totally agree, but the fact they exist, does not actually mean that BW patrol officers don't know about them, and where they are.

 

We have plenty hereabouts. They move almost not at all. I have little doubt BW are aware - it comes back to the issue of once they are aware, are they actually going to do anything about it.

 

If it's just a "never licensed" sailaway, the best you could give the "snitch line" is "yet another unmarked, portholed, LB sailaway in battleship grey primer, with some rusting". And, because it has no number, you can't actually check whether it's unlicensed anyway - it may well be, just not displaying it, (and hence wasting someone in BW's time to go and check and find it's one they already know the status of).

[churchward]

How do you tell the difference between looking at a window and looking through a window?

 

When their nose is squashed against the glass you know they have lost all interest in the window itself!

[mayalld]

Hmm, how about the spy who reports the most genuine unlicensed boats get his/her licence paid for a year, and the location of said spy is well reported, so he can be congratulated in person.

 

Well, if I spot any unlicenced boats, I will be sure to report them.

 

Would it make your life easier if I let you know my count for the year?

 

Oh, and veiled threats, however comically meant have no place whatsoever on this or any other forum.

[magnetman]

I totally agree, but the fact they exist, does not actually mean that BW patrol officers don't know about them, and where they are.

 

We have plenty hereabouts. They move almost not at all. I have little doubt BW are aware - it comes back to the issue of once they are aware, are they actually going to do anything about it.

 

If it's just a "never licensed" sailaway, the best you could give the "snitch line" is "yet another unmarked, portholed, LB sailaway in battleship grey primer, with some rusting". And, because it has no number, you can't actually check whether it's unlicensed anyway - it may well be, just not displaying it, (and hence wasting someone in BW's time to go and check and find it's one they already know the status of).

 

BW are aware of them, but they seem to find enforcement difficult, and expensive.

If the crane man didn't put an unlicensed boat on the water in the first place how else would it get there?

It is a weakness in the system.

the crane man is not going to complain because he is making a living doing it. I once had an unlicensed boat craned into the canal, I was surprised there was no requirement for recording of the boat name and my details and if I had opted to not license it i can't quite see how BW could have dealt with the problem, other than spending a lot of money on court action.

[carlt]

So, you are telling deliberate lies?

I have serious objections to the invasion of privacy this snitch-site represents.

 

I have every intention of disrupting it as much as I possibly can.

 

 

 

 

 

BW are aware of them, but they seem to find enforcement difficult, and expensive.

If the crane man didn't put an unlicensed boat on the water in the first place how else would it get there?

It is a weakness in the system.

the crane man is not going to complain because he is making a living doing it. I once had an unlicensed boat craned into the canal, I was surprised there was no requirement for recording of the boat name and my details and if I had opted to not license it i can't quite see how BW could have dealt with the problem, other than spending a lot of money on court action.

So the person contracted to do a job now has to act as an unpaid enforcement officer?

 

Maybe we should rustle up a posse.

[mayalld]

I have serious objections to the invasion of privacy this snitch-site represents.

 

I have every intention of disrupting it as much as I possibly can.

 

By telling deliberate lies, claiming to have seen boats on the canal when you have not?

[carlt]

By telling deliberate lies, claiming to have seen boats on the canal when you have not?

Are you trying to force a confession out of me?

[mayalld]

Are you trying to force a confession out of me?

 

No, you have already made a confession.

 

I am asking that you put it into words that describe what you are doing in plain language, rather than trying to dress up your actions as those of some kind of latter day freedom fighter.

[carlt]

No, you have already made a confession.

 

I am asking that you put it into words that describe what you are doing in plain language, rather than trying to dress up your actions as those of some kind of latter day freedom fighter.

 

The plain language is.

 

I have strong objections to this invasion of privacy and if, in some small way, I can disrupt it, then I will.

 

I believe that is simple enough language for most folk but I can make it available in crayon, if that would help.