Jump to content

Free Loaders ?


Featured Posts

Which rule have they broken?

 

There is nothing, in BWA 1995 that says you can't spend 18 days, in one town and, if that stay is part of a "progressive journey around the system", then they haven't upset BW's interpretation, of the law, either.

 

According to BW's interpretation, and statement of what they require to be "satisfied", the fact that the boat is in the same town on day 15 is a breach.

  • Greenie 1
Link to post
Share on other sites

To clarify:

 

Section 17(3)© British Waterways Act 1995 states that BW may refuse a licence ("relevant consent") unless (i) BW is satisfied the relevant vessel has a home mooring 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."

How does the following official summary differ from the licence requirements of a mooring holder on a long cruise? If someone with a mooring bridge-hops or overstays in the same area, he is still breaking the following requirements and will still attract a ticket.

 

Summary

 

Continuous cruisers must be engaged in a genuine progressive journey (a cruise) around the network, or a significant part of it.

They must not stay moored in the same neighbourhood or locality for more than 14 days.

It is the boater's responsibility to satisfy BW that they keep to the rules.

 

Tone

 

I do so wish you had walked on by.

 

I know the temptation to rattle a stick along Dave Lime Green Mayall's cage is so hard to resist but you do realise we're now going to have to put up with 2.35 days of his meaningless twaddle.

 

And now look what you've done.

 

 

 

Firstly, let us consider a boater with a home mooring (such as me).

 

I can cruise down to Marple, spend 2 nights on the visitor mooring between bridges 1 & 2 on the Macc, then move to just above bridge 19 on the PF and stay for 14 days, then back to the visitor mooring for another 2 days, before returning to my mooring. I have spent 18 days in one town, and broken no rules. If I was licenced as a CCer, I would have broken the rules.

 

Next, we need to consider what action BW can take AFTER issuing a ticket.

 

If I was a CCer, they can, ultimately, use their powers under BWA 1995 to withdraw my licence. If I have ahome mooring, they can impose a charge on me, and take court action to recover that charge, but they can't withdraw my licence

 

so you are saying that the definition of 'bona fide navigation' is different for you than for a boat with no home mooring?

 

and your use of the word 'ultimately' is disingenuous, they can 'ultimately' use their powers to take your licence away too.

 

 

 

see, I can't resist teasing the Lime Green Gnome either, he tried twice and was ignored, the third time we just could not resist.

Edited by Chris Pink
Link to post
Share on other sites

Well, thank you for asking the question.

 

Whilst the differences, in terms of the immediate action from staff on the ground, are not obvious, they so exist.

 

Firstly, let us consider a boater with a home mooring (such as me).

 

I can cruise down to Marple, spend 2 nights on the visitor mooring between bridges 1 & 2 on the Macc, then move to just above bridge 19 on the PF and stay for 14 days, then back to the visitor mooring for another 2 days, before returning to my mooring. I have spent 18 days in one town, and broken no rules. If I was licenced as a CCer, I would have broken the rules.

 

Next, we need to consider what action BW can take AFTER issuing a ticket.

 

If I was a CCer, they can, ultimately, use their powers under BWA 1995 to withdraw my licence. If I have ahome mooring, they can impose a charge on me, and take court action to recover that charge, but they can't withdraw my licence

 

Well..... I don't see how the above constitutes a different licence requirement because it wouldn't be contravention of cruising rules anyway. As The PF is a dead end, anyone can cruise up and back with out breaking any rules, and end up in Marple for a total of 28 days if they want to.

 

Tone

Link to post
Share on other sites

 

so you are saying that the definition of 'bona fide navigation' is different for you than for a boat with no home mooring?

 

 

No, I am saying that there is no legal requirement for "bona fide navigation" which applies to those with a home mooring.

Link to post
Share on other sites

 

 

 

 

see, I can't resist teasing the Lime Green Gnome either, he tried twice and was ignored, the third time we just could not resist.

 

I'm not teasing anyone. I respect Dave's right to his opinions, but sometimes I wonder whether his desire to be controversial wins over common sense.

 

I think Dave interprets

 

Continuous cruisers must be engaged in a genuine progressive journey (a cruise) around the network,

 

as meaning that this does not apply to mooring holders. It does..... if they are on a cruise.

 

But it seems a very petty argument that Dave is offering us..... again.

 

Tone

Link to post
Share on other sites

just like i would shop anyone for drink driving or driving without relevant insurance, or for parking in disabled spaces in car parks when they are not entitled.

It isnt about doing things the way i think they should, it is about doing things that are wrong and to the detriment of others.

 

 

carlt post 48

 

Presumably you ring the police every time somebody overtakes you, on the motorway, as you are travelling along at 70mph (because you have never exceeded the speed limit)...or do you just pick and choose the rules you want to be the self-appointed enforcer, for?

 

 

You dissapoint me carl, i credited you with being a little less pedantic! No i dont speed, i am retired so have no need to, even when i was working i stayed within the limits, in my local area i dont often travel along the local motorways without seeing someone pulled as there are several unmarked cars that deal with speeding motorists so i really dont think it necessary to call the police as they do a sterling job, aside from which it would be totally impractical and unproveable, although i would always report an accident or a pedestrian, animal or debris on the motorway that is likely to cause an accident.

 

As for a boat that is static and is not looking likely to ever move and taking up a water point, overstaying on a choice mooring near facilities or taking a lock mooring spoiling the enjoyment and ease of someone cc'ing along a particular stretch then yes i would report them every time as it is just totally selfish and inconsiderate behaviour.

 

I am far from the self appointed enforcer that you describe me as, i am someone who pays their way and shows utmost respect and consideration for others, without sounding like uncle Albert (fools and horses) i spent my career in the forces and was on active service on several occassions, i was injured in the gulf, lost some close friends (and before you say it, yes i chose to be there) ...

 

So now i am looking forward to a quiet life cc'ing and dont see why for one minute i should tolerate any inconsiderate fool tainting my or any other genuine boaters travels if there is something i may be able to do about it.

 

Rick

Edited by dccruiser
Link to post
Share on other sites

 

I think Dave interprets

 

Continuous cruisers must be engaged in a genuine progressive journey (a cruise) around the network,

 

 

 

I have decided to use this definition of the word progressive;

 

’relating to or denoting a style of rock music popular esp. in the 1980s and characterized by classical influences, the use of keyboard instruments, and lengthy compositions.‘

 

Therefore, if a boat with no home mooring makes the journey suggested by Mr Green then as long as they are playing a song by Emerson Lake and Palmer then that will be fine.

  • Greenie 1
Link to post
Share on other sites

I'm not teasing anyone. I respect Dave's right to his opinions, but sometimes I wonder whether his desire to be controversial wins over common sense.

 

I think Dave interprets

 

Continuous cruisers must be engaged in a genuine progressive journey (a cruise) around the network,

 

as meaning that this does not apply to mooring holders. It does..... if they are on a cruise.

 

But it seems a very petty argument that Dave is offering us..... again.

 

Tone

Given that this requirement is BW's interpretation of a part of the 1995 Act that does not apply to boaters with a home mooring, then you are wrong.

 

Well..... I don't see how the above constitutes a different licence requirement

 

OK, ask yourself this;

 

If I, having a home mooring, persistently remain on a towpath for longer than 14 days, what actions are open to BW?

If a CCer does the same, what actions are open to BW?

 

The answers are NOT the same.

Link to post
Share on other sites

In my opinion this is a very unfounded and sweeping statement, there are i guess a few like that for whatever reason, but i think the larger majority are like myself... i have no problem at all with genuine cc'ers and will be one myself later this year, what i and a lot of others have a problem with is those that use a cc license to flaunt the rules and in doing so spoil boating for those of us that genuinly pay our way to enjoy the waterways, just like i would shop anyone for drink driving or driving without relevant insurance, or for parking in disabled spaces in car parks when they are not entitled.

It isnt about doing things the way i think they should, it is about doing things that are wrong and to the detriment of others.

 

Rick

 

Fair enough

 

Really can't be bothered edit..

 

also fair enough :D

Link to post
Share on other sites

 

Presumably you ring the police every time somebody overtakes you, on the motorway, as you are travelling along at 70mph (because you have never exceeded the speed limit)...or do you just pick and choose the rules you want to be the self-appointed enforcer, for?

 

 

If he is voluntarily reporting law breakers, it is entirely up to him which ones he reports.

Link to post
Share on other sites

I also can't be bothered with mayalld's harsh interpretation of the rules then explanation why those rules don't apply to him. Again.

 

ah but that wasn't what I couldn't be bothered with - you need to take out the 'also'.

Link to post
Share on other sites

No, I am saying that there is no legal requirement for "bona fide navigation" which applies to those with a home mooring.

 

 

I see you are choosing not to answer my question, Dave

 

 

“so you are claiming that your hypothetical cruise is not bona fide navigation?”

Link to post
Share on other sites

Who ever is right or wrong on the regulations, doesnt really matter. No one can really deny that there are those who flout the CC guidelines in order to suit their lifestyles.

 

Genuine CCers have no need to worry, and im sure that by far the vast majority of non CCers (i.e boaters who have a home mooring) have no issues with genuine CCers, it is the small minority that quite simply take the p*ss that people have concerns about.

Link to post
Share on other sites

If he is voluntarily reporting (alleged) law breakers, it is entirely up to him which ones he reports.

One can only imagine that there is a limit to one's piety, then.

 

Reporting people who you assume are breaking the law (with no actual evidence), whilst ignoring ones you know are exceeding the speed limit, seems to be a strange way to go.

 

 

As for a boat that is static and is not looking likely to ever move and taking up a water point, overstaying on a choice mooring near facilities or taking a lock mooring spoiling the enjoyment and ease of someone cc'ing along a particular stretch then yes i would report them every time as it is just totally selfish and inconsiderate behaviour.

 

I happen to agree with you that action should be taken, against those who overstay on lock landings, water points or other facilities.

 

Personally, though, I would not report them until I have asked them to move, myself (and if they were blocking a facility I wished to use then I would move their boat for them).

 

Just reporting someone because they appear to be getting away without paying for something, is merely envy, imo, and something I don't suffer from.

 

 

 

Edited to say: Oh, and whilst I don't, in this instance, think I was being pedantic, I am definitely, on other occasions, a bit of a pedant. ;)

Edited by carlt
Link to post
Share on other sites

My sympathies to the OP - only joined the forum 5 days ago and look what they've started! :banghead:

 

In answer to the OP, if you are intending to travel round all/a large proportion of the waterways network (as we are doing) and will be generally moving from one area to another (rather than staying within a limited area) then you are genuinely continuously cruising. As long as you don't over-stay in designated visitor moorings or stay any longer than 14 days on the towpath where no time is specified then you are well within the rules.

 

Most of all - ENJOY YOURSELF - you won't regret it! :cheers:

Link to post
Share on other sites

I see you are choosing not to answer my question, Dave

 

 

"so you are claiming that your hypothetical cruise is not bona fide navigation?"

 

My hypothetical cruise would not be bona fide navigation. Fortunately, the law doesn't require it to be.

 

I also can't be bothered with mayalld's harsh interpretation of the rules then explanation why those rules don't apply to him. Again.

 

I only describe what the law actually is, not what somebody might wish it to be...

Link to post
Share on other sites

 

 

If I, having a home mooring, persistently remain on a towpath for longer than 14 days, what actions are open to BW?

If a CCer does the same, what actions are open to BW?

 

The answers are NOT the same.

 

Now it's getting silly. I'm off.

 

Tone

Link to post
Share on other sites

We have been parked in a 24 hour visitor mooring for nearly 8 weeks, so i suppose you would have reported me by now?????? and we are not currently showing a valid BW licence..

 

We are also part of the tarnished CC club..

Edited by Scooby
Link to post
Share on other sites

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!

Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.

Sign In Now
  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    No registered users viewing this page.

×
×
  • Create New...

Important Information

We have placed cookies on your device to help make this website better. You can adjust your cookie settings, otherwise we'll assume you're okay to continue.