14 day stay rule

[onionbargee]

anyone know what the legal basis is for the 14 days in any one place rule, i cant find it in my BW byelaws book.

[Chris Pink]

worms can open

[mayalld]

anyone know what the legal basis is for the 14 days in any one place rule, i cant find it in my BW byelaws book.

 

For continuous cruisers (the 14 days in one "place" rule), then the relevant legislation is s17 British Waterways Act 1995

 

For everybody (the default position that nobody can moor on a particular mooring for longer than 14 days) is governed by condition 2.1 of your licence conditions. The right to make conditions for a licence is governed by s43(3) and s43(8) of the Transport Act 1962

[Naughty Cal]

worms can open

 

Could you close it again please?

[valrene9600]

anyone know what the legal basis is for the 14 days in any one place rule, i cant find it in my BW byelaws book.

 

 

It means you move on after 14 days.

Unless you want to be more specific in your question and then i guess the the can of worms will explode.

 

The rules apply to ALL not just C/Cruisers.

[carlt]

The rules apply to ALL not just C/Cruisers.

Does it?

© either—

 

(i) the Board are satisfied that a mooring or other place where the vessel can reasonably be kept and may lawfully be left will be available for the vessel, whether on an inland waterway or elsewhere; or

 

(ii) the applicant for the relevant consent satisfies the Board that the vessel to which the application relates will be used bona fide for navigation throughout the period for which the consent is valid without remaining continuously in any one place for more than 14 days or such longer period as is reasonable in the circumstances.

 

The "either" and "or" would suggest that, if you have a permanent mooring, part (ii) does not apply to you.

[Baloo]

I read on this forum somewhere a few weeks ago that you could stop 14 days on long term mooring sites as well.

I dont know if this had any truth in it, seems a bit strange doesn't it?

Cant find the thread anywhere

[carlt]

I read on this forum somewhere a few weeks ago that you could stop 14 days on long term mooring sites as well.

I was told by a BW patrol officer that, if the mooring was vacant, then the 14 day rule would apply, if I choose to stop on it.

[mayalld]

Does it?

 

 

The "either" and "or" would suggest that, if you have a permanent mooring, part (ii) does not apply to you.

 

That is correct.

 

If you are not a CCer, then condition 2.1 applies.

 

I was told by a BW patrol officer that, if the mooring was vacant, then the 14 day rule would apply, if I choose to stop on it.

 

I believe that he has misinformed you.

[tomsk]

I was told by a BW patrol officer that, if the mooring was vacant, then the 14 day rule would apply, if I choose to stop on it.

 

 

I would be interested to hear any other views on the above statement from suitably knowlegable individuals conversant with the appropriate Bye-laws/license conditions

[Chris Pink]

If you are not a CCer, then condition 2.1 applies.

 

It is unlawful for British Waterways to impose terms and conditions that contradict the 1995 Waterways Act.

 

NABO, I am informed, also take this stance.

[cotswoldsman]

Just stay until you are asked to move by BW. BW can't ticket you until 14 days after they have seen you at the mooring. There are certain parts of the system where you will never see a BW mooring officer all winter.

[mayalld]

I would be interested to hear any other views on the above statement from suitably knowlegable individuals conversant with the appropriate Bye-laws/license conditions

 

Schedule 2 para 2 of the licence conditions

 

It is unlawful for British Waterways to impose terms and conditions that contradict the 1995 Waterways Act.

 

NABO, I am informed, also take this stance.

In what way do the conditions contradict the 1995 act?

[Chris Pink]

In what way do the conditions contradict the 1995 act?

 

see Carl's highlight above.

[capnthommo]

Could you close it again please?

 

oops! i read the original "worms can open", to mean 'the worms are able to open'..........Duh!

i'll go now, shall i?

nigel

[seadog42uk]

This rule predates BW by a long way, it was set as 14 days in one parish with no return within one calendar year, because the bans for getting married in church was set at 21 days. Therefore to stop marriages between people from boats and those from the land.

[David Schweizer]

I was told by a BW patrol officer that, if the mooring was vacant, then the 14 day rule would apply, if I choose to stop on it.

If you are referring to Permitted Moorings, based upon my experience, the Warden was incorrect. The mooring is allocated for the exclusive use of the named boat and owner, and cannot be officially used by any other person without the consent of BW, and that means the Regional Office not just any employee. If the mooring has no tennant, boats may be permitted to use it on a short term basis, at the discretion of the Regional Office, When I occasionally took up this option some years ago, a pro rata fee was applied.

 

If the mooring has tennant but is unoccupied, no one has the right to use it except for BW and only in an emergency. I can assure you that I was less than pleased when, on more than one occassion, I returned to my permitted mooring to find another boat left on it unoccupied. This repeated inconsiderate behaviour was one of the reasons why I gave up my towpath mooring in favour of a private off side mooring with a Caretaker on site.

Edited October 6, 2009 by David Schweizer

[Chris J W]

This rule predates BW by a long way, it was set as 14 days in one parish with no return within one calendar year, because the bans for getting married in church was set at 21 days. Therefore to stop marriages between people from boats and those from the land.

 

That sounds very 'urban myth' to me, I must say.

 

Any sources for this claim?

 

From http://www.howtobooks.co.uk/family/wedding...-of-england.asp

 

Publication of banns

 

The banns are read aloud in the church on three successive Sundays before the wedding and, if the couple live in different parishes, the banns must be read in both. You need to be resident in the parish for seven nights before the first Sunday of reading the banns right through to the last Sunday (a minimum of 22 nights) and the wedding must take place within three months of the banns being read.

 

The banns were originally a means of publicising the wedding to make sure no one had any objections, so if you are known by any name other than the one on your birth certificate you should give that one as well.

 

There is a small fee for reading the banns but, if one of you is divorced, it's the only way you can be married in the Church of England.

 

 

My bold in there would appear to blow the 'myth' from the water straight away.

 

When I was married we had our service in Pembroke and it would have been very difficult for us to have been resident in the parish for seven nights considering we were living in Kent at the time. So there is some lee-way. (Well, there was 20+ years ago!)

 

Edit due to being complete cobblers as pointed out by Mac. Serves me right for using Google after a beer or three.

Edited October 7, 2009 by Chris J W

[Mac of Cygnet]

That sounds very 'urban myth' to me, I must say.

 

Any sources for this claim?

 

From http://www.howtobooks.co.uk/family/wedding...-of-england.asp

 

Publication of banns

 

The banns are read aloud in the church on three successive Sundays before the wedding and, if the couple live in different parishes, the banns must be read in both. You need to be resident in the parish for seven nights before the first Sunday of reading the banns right through to the last Sunday (a minimum of 22 nights) and the wedding must take place within three months of the banns being read.

 

 

My bold in there would appear to blow the 'myth' from the water straight away.

 

I also was fascinated by this claim, and would like to know seadog's source.

 

But I'm afraid that the myth is not blown from the water by your 'seven nights', as the relevant section is 'for seven nights before the first Sunday of the reading of the banns right through to the last Sunday (a minimum of 22 nights)

 

Mac

[mayalld]

see Carl's highlight above.

 

I have seen his highlight.

 

Imposing some limit in accordance with the Transport Act does NOT contradict the 1995 Act.

 

The 1995 Act lays down an absolute limit for staying in one "place" for bona fide navigators.

 

The licence terms lay down a general limit for staying in one "location" for all boaters.

 

Some try to claim that there are contradictions because the limit is the same at 14 days, but the use of the same limit is merely a convenience, rather than any attempt to make the 14 day rule extend beyond what the 1995 act allows.

 

BW could easily have set the mooring limit for all boats at some different value.

 

Let us consider what the situation would be if they set it at 7 days;

Any mooring would have a 7 day limit, after which you could move to a different mooring through the bridge. Those with home moorings could bridge hop every 7 days, whilst bona fide navigators could remain in the same "place" for 14 days, but would have to move to a different "location" at that place halfway through the fortnight.

 

And if they set it at 21 days;

Those with home moorings could stay at a single location for 21 days, whilst bona fide navigators would have to move on after 14 days.

[mayalld]

That sounds very 'urban myth' to me, I must say.

 

Any sources for this claim?

 

From http://www.howtobooks.co.uk/family/wedding...-of-england.asp

 

Publication of banns

 

The banns are read aloud in the church on three successive Sundays before the wedding and, if the couple live in different parishes, the banns must be read in both. You need to be resident in the parish for seven nights before the first Sunday of reading the banns right through to the last Sunday (a minimum of 22 nights) and the wedding must take place within three months of the banns being read.

 

The banns were originally a means of publicising the wedding to make sure no one had any objections, so if you are known by any name other than the one on your birth certificate you should give that one as well.

 

There is a small fee for reading the banns but, if one of you is divorced, it's the only way you can be married in the Church of England.

 

 

My bold in there would appear to blow the 'myth' from the water straight away.

 

When I was married we had our service in Pembroke and it would have been very difficult for us to have been resident in the parish for seven nights considering we were living in Kent at the time. So there is some lee-way. (Well, there was 20+ years ago!)

 

Without knowing your circumstances, it is difficult to say what went on (and given that if you were married in Pembroke, it wasn't CofE), but if you were not resident in the parish, there are two options;

 

Publication of banns in the parish(es) where you were living and the parish where you married (which would require 22 days residence somewhere, even if not in the parish where you were to marry)

Marriage by special licence.

[Chris Pink]

Talk about waffle Dave, come on, I expect better of you.

 

If a law says you can stay somewhere for 14 days or you must have a home mooring then that is clear, one or the other.

 

There is no law that allow BW to set general mooring restrictions - and they have so many laws to choose from.

 

Any other interpretation makes the first part of Section 17 (3) redundant and that is unlawful.

 

Otherwise, by your argument, BW could set 7 days for all boats as a condition of licence - and they can't do that.

Edited October 7, 2009 by Chris Pink

[mayalld]

Talk about waffle Dave, come on, I expect better of you.

 

If a law says you can stay somewhere for 14 days or you must have a home mooring then that is clear, one or the other.

 

There is no law that allow BW to set general mooring restrictions - and they have so many laws to choose from.

 

Any other interpretation makes the first part of Section 17 (3) redundant and that is unlawful.

 

Otherwise, by your argument, BW could set 7 days for all boats as a condition of licence - and they can't do that.

 

Have you actually read a WORD of what I said?

 

The fact that the 1995 act lays down a limit of 14 days for bona fide navigators, and is silent on the subject of those with a home mooring doesn't interfere with the right that BW have to regulate the waterways under s43(3) and (8) of the Transport Act 1968.

 

As you always do, you are seeking to find holes in the law that simply aren't there.

[Chris Pink]

Have you actually read a WORD of what I said?

 

Yes, i did, despite the piffle detectors screaming.

 

We are not discussing the board's rights to charge for services and facilities. (1962 Act Section 43)

 

This is a clear case of allowable restrictions and terms and conditions.

 

You have been in this place many times in our discussions and it falls (as it has every time before) on the 'lime green boat' argument.

 

If your argument holds water then BW can make it a condition of licencing that your boat is painted lime green.

[fender]

Have you actually read a WORD of what I said?

 

The fact that the 1995 act lays down a limit of 14 days for bona fide navigators, and is silent on the subject of those with a home mooring doesn't interfere with the right that BW have to regulate the waterways under s43(3) and (8) of the Transport Act 1968.

 

As you always do, you are seeking to find holes in the law that simply aren't there.

 

Laws are human creations therefore they are not real and do not exist - except by way of coercion and consensus.

 

If people dont want those laws, then there is trouble, and if people are not happy with certain laws, then it is time for change.