permission to moor

[otts]

Hi to you all fellow boating enthusiasts, I'm a newbie and need questions answered, sorry if these questions annoys the cc's!

 

Always want to have my own canal boat but could never afford a house and a boat, so considering the living on a boat idea, but want to make sure its all above board and not illegal.

 

So with the first Question:

 

If I get permission to moor up either at an end of a farmers field or another location can I live there residentally on the boat?

[deletedaccount]

people do this

[blackrose]

Hi to you all fellow boating enthusiasts, I'm a newbie and need questions answered, sorry if these questions annoys the cc's!

 

Always want to have my own canal boat but could never afford a house and a boat, so considering the living on a boat idea, but want to make sure its all above board and not illegal.

 

So with the first Question:

 

If I get permission to moor up either at an end of a farmers field or another location can I live there residentally on the boat?

 

Yes, but don't be surprised if the waterways authority approaches you for additional mooring fees. For example, BW call it a garden end mooring and regularly charge half of an equivalent mooring in that area, so in that case you'd be paying for your cruising licence, paying the the landowner for the mooring and also the waterways authority an additional mooring fee. As I said, don't be surprised - BE OUTRAGED!

Edited August 19, 2010 by blackrose

[otts]

Yes, but don't be surprised if the waterways authority approaches you for additional mooring fees. For example, BW call it a garden end mooring and regularly charge half of an equivalent mooring in that area, so in that case you'd be paying for your cruising licence, paying the the landowner for the mooring and also the waterways authority an additional mooring fee. As I said, don't be surprised - BE OUTRAGED!

 

 

This I dont mind if I have to pay both then thats fine, I dont want to dodge the system!

 

Take it you need just to inform british water ways what you are doing?

 

people do this

 

Yes they do, but are they doing it legally, thats the question, dont what to do it then I'll be on the run for the rest of my life!

[blackrose]

This I dont mind if I have to pay both then thats fine, I dont want to dodge the system!

 

Take it you need just to inform british water ways what you are doing?

 

They will ask you where your home mooring as part of the process of getting your cruising licence - I think it's on the form.

[otts]

They will ask you where your home mooring as part of the process of getting your cruising licence - I think it's on the form.

 

So if you dont have an a place to moor u cannot get a license?

[ymu]

Hi to you all fellow boating enthusiasts, I'm a newbie and need questions answered, sorry if these questions annoys the cc's!

 

Always want to have my own canal boat but could never afford a house and a boat, so considering the living on a boat idea, but want to make sure its all above board and not illegal.

 

So with the first Question:

 

If I get permission to moor up either at an end of a farmers field or another location can I live there residentally on the boat?

Not necessarily. The farmer will have to get permission from BW, who will require fees, and they can refuse to let it be residential. I met a couple of boaters being chucked off a private side mooring because they were living there and BW insisted it couldn't be residential - despite it being utterly perfect for residential use. IIRC it was down to the lack of any facilities - apparently residential boaters aren't capable of cruising to the nearest tap when needed ...

 

However, the rules on what makes a residential mooring aren't that clear AFAICT. If it's private and you're away cruising for a few weeks a year, you may well be fine even if it's designated for leisure use.

[deletedaccount]

So if you dont have an a place to moor u cannot get a license?

 

You can get a licence without a mooring.

[ymu]

So if you dont have an a place to moor u cannot get a license?

You can get a licence without a mooring, but you would have to undertake to move the boat to a new area every fortnight.

[blackrose]

So if you dont have an a place to moor u cannot get a license?

 

No, I didn't say that. If you don't have a mooring and you intend to move your boat at least every 2 weeks and for a distance far enough to comply with the continuous cruising rules you can still get a cruising licence. Since you don't want to flout any rules have a look at the many forum threads on BW's interpretation of CCing.

 

Not necessarily. The farmer will have to get permission from BW, who will require fees, and they can refuse to let it be residential. I met a couple of boaters being chucked off a private side mooring because they were living there and BW insisted it couldn't be residential - despite it being utterly perfect for residential use. IIRC it was down to the lack of any facilities - apparently residential boaters aren't capable of cruising to the nearest tap when needed ...

 

However, the rules on what makes a residential mooring aren't that clear AFAICT. If it's private and you're away cruising for a few weeks a year, you may well be fine even if it's designated for leisure use.

 

Good point, but since BW clearly lease a high % of their own non-residential moorings for residential use, that story is a joke. The point here is not to mention the R word - don't even refer to your boat as "home" when talking to them. As long as you have a separate contact address that should be sufficient. Some forum members who like to see rules strictly enforced might want to disagree with me on this point, but unless you're very fortunate there's generally a bit of ducking and diving involved with living on a boat - especially in the beginning.

 

The other reason BW might stop someone from mooring on private land is if they consider it restricts navigation of the waterway.

Edited August 19, 2010 by blackrose

[ymu]

Good point, but since BW clearly lease a high % of their own non-residential moorings for residential use, that story is a joke.

Aye. Utterly ridiculous. It's a lovely spot with space for three boats, three cars and a woodpile, near a bus stop and a short walk to the village shops. But it it now occupied by three empty boats.

Edited August 19, 2010 by ymu

[David Schweizer]

Not necessarily. The farmer will have to get permission from BW, who will require fees, and they can refuse to let it be residential. I met a couple of boaters being chucked off a private side mooring because they were living there and BW insisted it couldn't be residential - despite it being utterly perfect for residential use. IIRC it was down to the lack of any facilities - apparently residential boaters aren't capable of cruising to the nearest tap when needed ...

 

However, the rules on what makes a residential mooring aren't that clear AFAICT. If it's private and you're away cruising for a few weeks a year, you may well be fine even if it's designated for leisure use.

I suspect that it was the Local Planning Authority who imposed the non Residential requirement not BW, althiough BW may have been asked to take the action by the Local Authority.

 

BW do not have any legal right to declare a mooring on private land as suitable or otherwise for residential purposes that is the responsibility of the Planning Authority, however, as already stated, BW can refuse consent to moor if the mooring caues an obstruction.

[ymu]

I suspect that it was the Local Planning Authority who imposed the non Residential requirement not BW, althiough BW may have been asked to take the action by the Local Authority.

 

BW do not have any legal right to declare a mooring on private land as suitable or otherwise for residential purposes that is the responsibility of the Planning Authority, however, as already stated, BW can refuse consent to moor if the mooring caues an obstruction.

I believe there was some nimby action involved, yes. The liveaboard's concerned turned up to <some local inland waterways organisation which I won't name because I might have the wrong one> meeting and were well received until the group found out that they were liveaboards, at which point they became traveller scum. The locals then got very confused because one of them was a geologist and the other trained helicopter pilots - they couldn't seem to get their head around liveaboards having 'proper' jobs. BW got involved a few months later, so the two are likely connected.

[magpie patrick]

I suspect that it was the Local Planning Authority who imposed the non Residential requirement not BW, althiough BW may have been asked to take the action by the Local Authority.

 

BW do not have any legal right to declare a mooring on private land as suitable or otherwise for residential purposes that is the responsibility of the Planning Authority, however, as already stated, BW can refuse consent to moor if the mooring caues an obstruction.

 

 

That's right, BW, as owners of the canal, may have an enforcement notice served on them.

[Proper Job]

In some instances that I am aware of, BW have wanted to 'formalise' moorings as residential (it increases their value).

 

The local planning authority have said no.

[Keeping Up]

If anyone objects to the local Council about you being residential, then the Council are obliged to investigate; if the farmer's field does not have permission to be residential (and it almost certainly won't) then the Council will invite you to apply for planning permission (change of use). If the original complainers then object, the permission won't be granted and you will be required to leave unless you can find grounds for appeal. People who complained and objected to two residential boats at our moorings included local villagers (afraid of "gangs of marauding gipsies" - their words not mine) the local angling club (on the basis that boats and boat-dwellers pollute the waterways which kills the fish) the local ramblers (they were the most vociferous, claiming that a residential boat would "desecrate the environment and also spoil the view from the towpath" and several others. The application was rejected but succeeded on appeal because they had been residential for over 10 years, but the permission on appeal was granted for the specific two boats with the specifically named occupants only.

[David Schweizer]

If anyone objects to the local Council about you being residential, then the Council are obliged to investigate; if the farmer's field does not have permission to be residential (and it almost certainly won't) then the Council will invite you to apply for planning permission (change of use). If the original complainers then object, the permission won't be granted and you will be required to leave unless you can find grounds for appeal. People who complained and objected to two residential boats at our moorings included local villagers (afraid of "gangs of marauding gipsies" - their words not mine) the local angling club (on the basis that boats and boat-dwellers pollute the waterways which kills the fish) the local ramblers (they were the most vociferous, claiming that a residential boat would "desecrate the environment and also spoil the view from the towpath" and several others. The application was rejected but succeeded on appeal because they had been residential for over 10 years, but the permission on appeal was granted for the specific two boats with the specifically named occupants only.

I'm afraid that is not how it works. Whilst the Planning Authority is obliged to take into account any objections, it will base it's decision upon Planning Regulations and any other Planning criteria that needs to be considered eg. Green belt Policy, District plan etc. Two people (or a hundred people!) objecting will not automaticly determine the outcome decision of an aplication.

 

I have witnessed Planning Meetings where the room was full of objectors, all there to support their written submissions, all to no avail because the objections were not based upon valid Planning Crteria,

Edited August 19, 2010 by David Schweizer

[Keeping Up]

I'm afraid that is not how it works. Whilst the Planning Authority is obliged to take into account any objections, it will base it's decision upon Planning Regulations and any other Planning criteria that needs to be considered eg. Green belt Policy, District plan etc. Two people (or a hundred people!) objecting will not automaticly determine the outcome decision of an aplication.

 

I have witnessed Planning Meetings where the room was full of objectors, all there to support their written submissions, all to no avail because the objections were not based upon valid Planning Crteria,

You're quite right of course David, I should have phrased it differently and said "if the original complainers objections are deemed to be valid, permission will be not be granted."

 

In an ideal world this would not be influenced by how well the objectors personally know the members of the Authority.

[David Schweizer]

You're quite right of course David, I should have phrased it differently and said "if the original complainers objections are deemed to be valid, permission will be not be granted."

 

In an ideal world this would not be influenced by how well the objectors personally know the members of the Authority.

That problem does still exist, but it is rapidly disapearing since the Goverment changed the appeal rules. The Planning Authority now has to meet it's own appeal costs irrespective of whether it wins or looses, and if it looses it has to pay the appellant's costs as well. The new rules have served as an encouragement to get the Planning decision right first time.

[blackrose]

Bottom line is that if you insist on asserting your right to residential status on a non-residential mooring then the authorities will probably insist on giving you grief.

 

They know half their non-res moorers are residential. Just play their game, don't tell them you're living on your boat and you can do what you want.

Edited August 19, 2010 by blackrose

[sueb]

Bottom line is that if you insist on asserting your right to residential status on a non-residential mooring then the authorities will probably insist on giving you grief.

 

They know half their non-res moorers are residential. Just play their game, don't tell them you're living on your boat and you can do what you want.

I would add - until someone complains, then action could be taken. Living on a boat doesn't give security of tenure.

Sue

[blackrose]

I would add - until someone complains, then action could be taken. Living on a boat doesn't give security of tenure.

Sue

 

It's all about give & take. If you're.a reasonable person then nobody really needs to complain to the point where action is taken. I've been living on boats for 8 years and only once had a complaint about noise when I was using an angle grinder. I stopped immediately and moved elsewhere to carry on.

 

On the other hand if you're unreasonable about this sort of thing then action can be taken and you don't really have a leg to stand on.

[David Schweizer]

It's all about give & take. If you're.a reasonable person then nobody really needs to complain to the point where action is taken. I've been living on boats for 8 years and only once had a complaint about noise when I was using an angle grinder. I stopped immediately and moved elsewhere to carry on.

 

On the other hand if you're unreasonable about this sort of thing then action can be taken and you don't really have a leg to stand on.

 

Whilst I would not suggest that you fall into this catagory, I have found that the majority of people who propose the "give and take" approach are invariably those who cause inconvenience to others, not thaose who always act considerately towards others.

 

Similarily in my experience, I have found that for every one direct complaint made about what is perceived as inconsiderate behaviour, there are a dozen other people who moan but do not complain, so maybe you have actually upset more people than you think.

 

I am not slow in complaining about behaviour which impinges upon my life, but as yet have only complained to another boat owner about noise on one occassion. In alll the other instances, I have either tolerated it or moved.

Edited August 20, 2010 by David Schweizer

[sueb]

People in houses can feel that the nearby boat dwellers are living without paying council tax and haven't got planning permission. It is those that are the danger. They have nothing to lose by complaining to the council.

Sue

[blackrose]

Whilst I would not suggest that you fall into this catagory, I have found that the majority of people who propose the "give and take" approach are invariably those who cause inconvenience to others, not thaose who always act considerately towards others.

 

Similarily in my experience, I have found that for every one direct complaint made about what is perceived as inconsiderate behaviour, there are a dozen other people who moan but do not complain, so maybe you have actually upset more people than you think.

 

Well that could apply to anyone, but I don't think I've upset more people than I think because I am considerate.

 

 

People in houses can feel that the nearby boat dwellers are living without paying council tax and haven't got planning permission. It is those that are the danger. They have nothing to lose by complaining to the council.

Sue

 

But in those cases action is seldon taken by BW or the council.

 

We had exactly that situation at Brentford a few years ago where 2 residents of the flats overlooking the marina dug up BW's terms & conditions and decided they didn't like people living on their boats in front of their flats (in actual fact they didn't like boats in front of their flats at all, which does make one wonder why they bought properties overlooking a marina?)

 

For a couple of days these people came out and stood on the path in front of the marina with clipboards noting everyone's coming's and goings as evidence of residential use. It was actually quite intimidating.

 

Anyway, in the end BW just told them that they could not police non-residential use of the marina and these people gave up.

 

The point is that if BW tried to kick non-res liveaboards in any one location off their moorings, for doing nothing wrong other than staying on their boats too long, then they would also have to kick out half their moorers throughout the country. They are not in a position to do this as they are complicit and it's a big part of their business.

Edited August 20, 2010 by blackrose