bridge hopper

[Big COL]

What do you mean you are thinking about what licence to get?

Are you intending to cruise on a "journey around the network or a substantial part of it" or to stay in one area with a permanent mooring?

Not rocket science as far as I can see.

31743[/snapback]

 

He maybe thinking of taking a gold licence, which will open up the rivers not under BW.

[gaggle]

He maybe thinking of taking a gold licence, which will open up the rivers not under  BW.

31744[/snapback]

or even 3,6 or 12 months.

[Sir Nibble]

Or even business/leisure I suppose. Hadn't thought of that. Back to sleep.

[Liam]

I think his intentions and questions are quite obvious.. going from the first few posts.

[anthony]

I think his intentions and questions are quite obvious.. going from the first few posts.

31757[/snapback]

 

Just to recap those intentions.

As soon as I have conformation the boat is fit from the Surveyor I will buy it.

I will then see if there is a mooring in the local area.

If there is not i will be on a continued journey until we find one.

If you think Manchester and all its towns inbetwen are the same locality then I would not be satifying the CC concept.

However IM reasonable and believe that moving around this area is a continued Journey especially if you are new to boating.

IM even more reasonable in that I will move along with good will within 14 days leaving no mess or any other sign I had even been there in the 1st place as IM reasonable which conforms to the conditions of being a CC.

 

As IM new to canal boating its far from rocket science as one thing may appeal more than another so I will have to make an informed decission when i get the facts for myself.

In either case IM paying my way so there's no room for complaint from anyone.

 

Now to make a point about this whole upperty CC thing.

If a boater was to moore up somewhere where it says ''free for 5 days then ring this number if you wish to stay longer'' ect ect what does this mean?

If I was a CC or had a mooring I would still have to pay so surely if I was a CC and started to pay then I now have a mooring no different from any other tie up bank side mooring.

 

It seems to me ''a reasonable man'' that if IM paying insurance and a licence IM not being unreasonable or abusing the system at all. IM being honest and paying my way.

I was not aware of this Gold License either so I will now look into this also.

Why anyone would buy a boat and not move around is beyond me.

Buying a boat is no joke and even at 10k not cheap, so where all this argument about CC ect is comming from I do not understand.

It seems BW are looking to make money off the back of a minority which violates equal oppertunities.

This is my position anyway sorry if its not clear but it seems ''reasonable and full of plenty of good will to me''

[Big COL]

Anthony

 

Regardless of your good will or good intent. BW have rules which you agree to abide by. If you have no home mooring then you will have to abide by the rules covering a cc. If in the course of your travels you find a home mooring and pay for it then the rules covering a cc no longer apply, and you have become a home moorer. Under the proposed new scale of fees for you to do this it will cost you 147% more than a boater who has a home mooring. In your case having had to pay the extra and then when you find a home mooring do you think BW would reimburse you the difference.

The new proposals are a can of worms, and have been causing arguments among boaters since it was first announced. Anyway as someone who is just starting as a boater, my advice is don't get involved with the politics, go and buy your boat and enjoy it, you can then form your own opinion. Good luck with the boat.

Edited September 21, 2005 by Big COL

[fender.]

Under the proposed new scale of fees for you to do this it will cost you 147% more than a boater who has a home mooring. In your case having had to pay the extra and then when you find a home mooring do you think BW would reimburse you the difference.

31927[/snapback]

 

No they'd take the money and run. Unlike the Gold Licence where you can get a refund for reverting to a standard licence.

[anthony]

So its a bit like parking a car on the road as opposed to on a drive and having to pay more tax.

You both have the same access and benefits so its up to you how often you go for a drive.

Frankly its robbery and victimisation and thats without even getting into the politics of it.

 

Thanks Col i hope I do enjoy the boat regardless and will try my best to.

[DHutch]

So its a bit like parking a car on the road as opposed to on a drive and having to pay more tax.

Yeah, i have made the exact analogy in my head.

 

Know one walks down the rows and rows of terraced telling all the people who have nowhere other than the pavment to park there car that they have to move it every 14days, and that to count as 'moved' there car has to be altest a in the next town.

- But somhow thats exactly what we do on the canals.

 

But yet somhow it makes sence and seam somhow reasonable?

 

 

 

Daniel

[fender.]

Yeah, i have made the exact analogy in my head.

 

Know one walks down the rows and rows of terraced telling all the people who have nowhere other than the pavment to park there car that they have to move it every 14days, and that to count as 'moved' there car has to be altest a in the next town.

  - But somhow thats exactly what we do on the canals.

 

But yet somhow it makes sence and seam somhow reasonable?

Daniel

31977[/snapback]

 

If motorists were forced to move on every 14 days to the next parish etc, there would be rioting.

[John Orentas]

Not the best analogy in the world, the residents of those terraced houses will have title to the properties because they own or formally lease them they will have invested their lives and labours into the houses and the locality.

 

A better one might be when a community of gypsies moves onto the land opposite your home overnight without permission from the owners of the land or anyone else, they throw out their rubbish and expect someone to take it away free of charge. When told that the land they are occupying was cleared and restored by someone else for a more sustainable use, they say that they want to live there and that's that, everyone else can go to hell.

 

I suspect many of you liberal thinkers (but not me I would add) would be singing a different tune.

[anthony]

Not the best analogy in the world, the residents of those terraced houses will have title to the properties because they own or formally lease them they will have invested their lives and labours into the houses and the locality.

 

A better one might be when a community of gypsies moves onto the land opposite your home overnight without permission from the owners of the land or anyone else, they throw out their rubbish and expect someone to take it away free of charge. When told that the land they are occupying was cleared and restored by someone else for a more sustainable use, they say that they want to live there and that's that, everyone else can go to hell.

 

I suspect many of you liberal thinkers (but not me I would add) would be singing a different tune.

32016[/snapback]

 

AH but this is the biggot tar brush that is very well out of order.

IM talking about people who pay their way no free loading abusers.

I pay my taxes and so does my Missus.

If your anology is correct then anyone with a mooring should pay 140 percent more when they want to use the waterways out of their mooring locality then?

You cant have the best of both worlds and pay less.

[Richard Bustens]

You miss the point Anthony.

 

Someone with a mooring will / should fall into one of these categories ether a home oner paying council tax, or a residential moorer paying council tax that way, there will be others living on BW Linea moorings and they should also pay the council tax, but some wont do this. this payment is for the services you use, have used in the past and will use in the future, and you will use these so it is no good saying you dont use them. as you will do.

 

Most Bridge hoppers etc, will not pay for any services at all using the excuse that they are traveling about and dont know who to pay.

[fender.]

The Open Waterway and its Enemies, by Karl Popper.

 

Volume One: The Spell of Victor.

Volume Two: The High Tide of Prophecy: Baston, Bustens, and the Aftermath

[Richard Bustens]

Well ill take that to mean you dont pay any council tax then Fender.

[fender.]

Well ill take that to mean you dont pay any council tax then Fender.

32138[/snapback]

 

Yes I do. I'm not a liveaboard. I think you should start lobbying for council tax to be paid by tourists and other bona fide visitors to the UK. After all they are using our services for free. Make them PAY PAY PAY! Its logical man!

[Richard Bustens]

And are you happy for people to not pay for the services, meaning that you and everyone else that does pay, has to pay a bit more to allow for them?

[Maffi]

You miss the point Anthony.

 

Someone with a mooring will / should fall into one of these categories ether a home oner paying council tax, or a residential moorer paying council tax that way, there will be others living on BW Linea moorings and they should also pay the council tax, but some wont do this. this payment is for the services you use, have used in the past and will use in the future, and you will use these so it is no good saying you dont use them. as you will do.

 

Most Bridge hoppers etc, will not pay for any services at all using the excuse that they are traveling about and dont know who to pay.

 

You seem to have missed a point, Richard. Bridge Hoppers by their very nature don't move about, even though they claim to do so.

Edited September 22, 2005 by Maffi

[Richard Bustens]

No you miss the point i said bridge hoppers etc,

 

I was trying to avoid using the CC name, but if you insist...

[fender.]

And are you happy for people to not pay for the services, meaning that you and everyone else that does pay, has to pay a bit more to allow for them?

32147[/snapback]

 

Of course. That is how it works. Some dont have the ability to pay whilst others have an ability. Would you ask a tramp sitting in the street begging for money to rent the patch he/she sits on? What I gather from your philosophical acumen is that no matter who you are, bugger it, you pay up! Sure capitalism has a kind of reasoning that seems to make sense sometimes and the attraction of making money is what its all about, but it gets so perverse, excluding or exploiting many people in need.

 

By the way you still aint answered my query about tourists. Its obvious where you stand.

[fender.]

No you miss the point i said bridge hoppers etc,

 

I was trying to avoid using the CC name, but if you insist...

32157[/snapback]

 

But you didnt have to - you were talking about bridge hoppers. You havent said that its a term that should be avoided. People (including myself) are talking about the term CC not being used because it lumps several categories together and clouds the arguements in the light of the new proposals.

Edited September 22, 2005 by fender.

[Richard Bustens]

Stop being pedantic, you knew what i meant, i did not mean the ones that can not pay, but most that can afford a boat can, but some dont want to, it is them i am getting at.

 

Tourists do pay, they pay when they pay there taxes in there home town or if they are foreign they pay when they pay the hotel bill, they pay when they pay to go to various attractions and in many other ways.

[fender.]

Stop being pedantic, you knew what i meant, i did not mean the ones that can not pay, but most that can afford a boat can, but some dont want to, it is them i am getting at.

 

Tourists do pay, they pay when they pay there taxes in there home town or if they are foreign they pay when they pay the hotel bill, they pay when they pay to go to various attractions and in many other ways.

32165[/snapback]

 

In that case then everyone is paying something into the general coffers that helps to run the country. That includes bridge hoppers and bona fide boaters. And we are ALL paying something towards the upkeep of the waterways in particular - those who should buy licences but dont want to are the ones who take the biscuit and all the crumbs.

Edited September 22, 2005 by fender.

[Richard Bustens]

Yes if they dont buy license they are as bad if not worse. it is the same thing it costs the rest more for the ones that dont pay. and that can not be right.

Edited September 22, 2005 by Richard Bustens

[fender.]

Yes if they dont buy license they are as bad if not worse. it is the same thing it costs the rest more for the ones that dont pay. and that can not be right.

32169[/snapback]

 

Well I would concur to agree with this generally. In that case BW should be chasing non-payers and defaulters rather than making the rest of us pay. However you have never really said this to quite that effect you have always gone on about council taxes and not paying etc and its not really that relevant to the canals because many services are paid for through the licence.

 

Some do not have the ability to pay for something upfront and of course that is why we have taxes etc. But to say that 'can not be right' is a bit of a misnomer because sometimes people do find themselves in situations they would not rather be in and if a service they should pay for has to be paid by someone else then you cant say it is not right because it is actually something that is taken into consideration in the costing and adjustment of many service provisions.

 

If someone cant pay a boat licence then they should go to BW and explain their situation, it is really quite simple. It is the same as if someone can't move their boat because of injury or other situation etc they should go to to BW and explain it too. I am quite sure that BW can listen to reason, but as I said, some dont bother and they're taking the biscuit. In some ways BW is responsible for this state of affairs because it has failed so miserably to chase up its dues.

Edited September 22, 2005 by fender.