Overstaying

[sebrof]

It makes me a little bitter and I enjoy the canal just a little less.

 

Nev

 

 

I remember an interview I heard. The interviewee was an American jazz singer. He said: "I never bore a grudge. You know why? While you're bearing your grudge, the other fellow's out dancing."

[Albion]

snipped

BW allocated a longish length of tow-path as winter moorings, advertised it as such, and came and marked it with some temporary signs. There hasn't been a jot of evidence of any of those Winter Moorings being taken up.

 

Meanwhile there are several boats less than 100 yards away,(on a rather better bit!), that haven't moved since at least October, (other than to the water point and back).

 

 

This is a very valid point in Skipton. A section of 14 day moorings was set up every winter and booked and used. Gradually each year fewer boats are using the winter mooring section and moving onto the adjacent visitor moorings, some moving about a little, some not other than for water. This year, for the first time, a very conscientious couple have decided that they are not going to pay for a winter mooring in the designated section because they see so many others getting away with winter overstaying on visitor moorings when they are sticking to the rules (and paying for sticking to the rules) that they have finally decided to do as all the others do. Without strict enforcement by BW you get a gradual return to the 'sod it' mentality.

Roger

[carlt]

Without strict enforcement by BW you get a gradual return to the 'sod it' mentality.

Roger

...and yet there are many ccers who believe they are being forced to pay for a reduction in services.

 

Forcing someone to pay for a "service" that is not wanted demonstrates BW's "sod you" mentality.

[Albion]

...and yet there are many ccers who believe they are being forced to pay for a reduction in services.

 

Forcing someone to pay for a "service" that is not wanted demonstrates BW's "sod you" mentality.

 

But if they're not moving then they aren't CCers, they're CMers, and what they do is just what they do because they have been allowed to get away with flouting the rules, rather than a comment on BW.....for whom I don't fly a flag by the way, as the top brass seem to me to have served themselves rather than the boater or their employees over recent years.

Roger

[Chris Pink]

There are certainly people here who would take winter moorings if the charges were not so punitive.

 

I agree with this. Up here the winter moorings (towpath, no services) are exactly the same price as my mooring (fully serviced, secure, nice big garden, secure parking.

 

I reckon if they were, say £500, that BW would get alot more income. As it is, I think only two boats took up the winter moorings here.

Edited February 9, 2011 by Lady Muck

[mayalld]

 

2. Perhaps, as is evidenced locally to me that the charge of £1000 for winter mooring, for whatever period is seen as too much.

 

Oh, that's a good one!

 

SO, if somebody thinks the price for something is too much, they can simply opt out of paying.

 

Cloud cuckoo land!

[Naughty Cal]

Oh, that's a good one!

 

SO, if somebody thinks the price for something is too much, they can simply opt out of paying.

 

Cloud cuckoo land!

 

Yes.

 

There is no requirement to take a winter mooring.

[carlt]

But if they're not moving then they aren't CCers, they're CMers, and what they do is just what they do because they have been allowed to get away with flouting the rules, rather than a comment on BW.....for whom I don't fly a flag by the way, as the top brass seem to me to have served themselves rather than the boater or their employees over recent years.

Roger

When I was a ccer there were no winter moorings we just stopped and waited, until BW lifted the restriction of services, and carried on our way.

 

I wasn't voluntarily flouting the rules, BW were preventing me from continuing my journey.

 

Winter moorings, for ccers who don't want to stop, but are forced to, are no different to a traffic warden ticketing cars that are stopped at a red light.

[Willber G]

I agree with this. Up here the winter moorings (towpath, no services) are exactly the same price as my mooring (fully serviced, secure, nice big garden, secure parking.

 

I reckon if they were, say £500, that BW would get alot more income. As it is, I think only two boats took up the winter moorings here.

Why was this post by Chris Pink edited by Lady Muck? I read the original and it didn't seem to break any rules.

[Albion]

1. They are hardly 'conscientious' according to your account above.

 

2. Perhaps, as is evidenced locally to me that the charge of £1000 for winter mooring, for whatever period is seen as too much. Seems as likely an explanation as a 'sod-it' mentality. There was certainly no let up in 14 day enforcement except during periods of ice. It is very easy to fit your pet theory to the facts rather than consider other explanations that might not support your views. There are certainly people here who would take winter moorings if the charges were not so punitive.

 

 

 

If you continue to use such imprecise labels to try and isolate a 'they' then you will of course see only what you want to see.

 

I'm not going to become the subject of one of your personal abuse campaigns Chris so I will just reply to your points the once, and once only.

Firstly, I am as entitled to my point of view as anyone else, even you.

The couple involved, as I made clear in my earlier post, were very conscientious but, finally, seeing the continuing abuse of the system around them and having paid significant sums for their winter moorings in the past have decided that they might as well join the club rather than being the mugs that continue to follow the rules. Your point about the costs involved might well be valid. although I don't think it is a much as you are claiming here, but I may be wrong. Irrespective of the costs, it is the system that is in place, but high costs are bound to encourage earlier defection I agree.

You cannot say that enforcement of the 14 rules was consistently applied except during the ice here in Skipton because you have no knowledge of the situation here. You may have knowledge local to you but it doesn't apply here as I have witnessed with my own eyes for years.

I, by highlighting the word 'they', was only referring to a specific within Carl's post. I wasn't trying to create a group at all but you have taken it out of context to manufacture a point that supports your own theory about me. If you continue to do that then you will only see what you want to see within my posts.....Oh, hang on, that sounds familiar, wasn't someone making just that point earlier?

Roger

 

When I was a ccer there were no winter moorings we just stopped and waited, until BW lifted the restriction of services, and carried on our way.

 

I wasn't voluntarily flouting the rules, BW were preventing me from continuing my journey.

 

Winter moorings, for ccers who don't want to stop, but are forced to, are no different to a traffic warden ticketing cars that are stopped at a red light.

 

Absolutely no problem with hanging about if there is a restriction or ice Carl, that is only common sense. I'm talking about people who can move but don't choose to.

Roger

[deletedaccount]

There are tons untaken winter moorings round here, especially on the river.

 

They wanted so much money for crap moorings on the river nobody took them up. There's a good 10-20 boats worth of space down there too. At 500 quid they'd have sold some imo.

[mayalld]

Yes.

 

There is no requirement to take a winter mooring.

 

Indeed not, there are two options available;

 

1. move every 14 days, unless it is impossible to do so
2. take a winter mooring, and not be obliged to move

You can't decide to not move and not take a mooring.

[carlt]

Indeed not, there are two options available;

 

1. move every 14 days, unless it is impossible to do so
2. take a winter mooring, and not be obliged to move

You can't decide to not move and not take a mooring.

I understood that, if stuck behind a winter long stoppage, you are required to take a mooring, though I may be wrong.

 

That was told when I almost got stuck, some years ago, when I had given up my LT mooring, in Cropredy.

[mayalld]

I understood that, if stuck behind a winter long stoppage, you are required to take a mooring, though I may be wrong.

 

 

That would not always seem to be "reasonable in the circumstances"

 

However;

• Contriving to get stuck behind a stoppage every year may not be "reasonable in the circumstances"
• Looking at the particular location I am talking about, if Marple and Bosley locks are closed for the winter, then frozen canals excepted, the boater should cruise back and forth along the whole length of open canal from Bugsworth to Fools Nook for the duration, rather than sitting tight in one spot.

Edited February 9, 2011 by mayalld

[GSer]

I understood that, if stuck behind a winter long stoppage, you are required to take a mooring, though I may be wrong.

 

.

 

 

That was how it was explained to me by a BW 'warden', if it was a posted stoppage and you chose to ignore the warnings and got trapped you would be expected to pay up at winter mooring rates until you moved on.

[Naughty Cal]

That would not always seem to be "reasonable in the circumstances"

 

However;

• [*]Contriving to get stuck behind a stoppage every year may not be "reasonable in the circumstances"[*]Looking at the particular location I am talking about, if Marple and Bosley locks are closed for the winter, then frozen canals excepted, the boater should cruise back and forth along the whole length of open canal from Bugsworth to Fools Nook for the duration, rather than sitting tight in one spot.[/list]

 

But that is only your opiion on the matter.

 

Surely there is little difference between sitting tight at the stoppage site and crusing up and down a stretch of the same canal. The boat is still going to be in the area and still needs to be moored somewhere.

[Albion]

That was how it was explained to me by a BW 'warden', if it was a posted stoppage and you chose to ignore the warnings and got trapped you would be expected to pay up at winter mooring rates until you moved on.

 

If you could keep moving up and down a lengthy pound though (as they can in Skipton), still complying with the sufficient movement rules, then I would have thought that this was unreasonable.

If you would have moved but cannot due to ice or other act of God (landslips for example) then it would also be unreasonable to charge IMO.

If you have got yourself into a situation where you are trapped, by lack of foresight (deliberate or otherwise,) without room to move then I would have thought that it would be a more reasonable requirement.

Roger

[canaldrifter]

BW mooring charges. If they are overpriced, they won't be used. Simples.

 

BW, and Sally Ash in particular, have never learned that lesson, not even through her silly mooring auctions.

 

BW penalties. Although the signs threaten fines, BW has no right to impose them under the Act. All they can do is refuse a licence application or remove persistent offenders. That costs them money. Anything else requires the cooperation of the boater.

 

It will be interesting to see whether the trust, whatever they call it, will have new legislation to give it clout. If it does, I hope the consultation process with boaters is effective otherwise we'll end up with another set of unworkable rules that cannot be policed.

 

Tone

[cotswoldsman]

I think BW need to re look at its Winter Mooring policy. The problem is they have made it very expensive as all winter moorings are based on using prime sites such as normal 48h/7d/14d moorings and are priced per canal so a winter mooring in the south appears to cost far more than a winter mooring in the north. Now some people like myself do not want to be moored in a town/village or surrounded by other boats. I would rather be in the middle of nowhere (back of beyond) where I do not have to worry about other boaters when I run my engine etc. When I contacted BW about this I was told I could only use designated BW designated winter moorings. I ended up taking moorings from a farmer far cheaper than BW. OK I was going away for 3 months so why would I want to be close to facilities etc. I think a lot of CCers that have taken winter moorings in the past have been put off by these high charges. This year a lot of CCers got stuck in the ice and could not make there chosen destination and have found themselves stuck at stoppages surely they should not now have to pay the BW high charges!!

[mayalld]

But that is only your opiion on the matter.

 

Surely there is little difference between sitting tight at the stoppage site and crusing up and down a stretch of the same canal. The boat is still going to be in the area and still needs to be moored somewhere.

 

Yes, it is only my opinion on the matter.

 

You say "surely there is little difference", but I would disagree;

• If it were made clear that beingin a 20 mile isolated pound didn't give you a right to stop moving, I rather suspect that some people wouldn't contrive to be trapped there.
• If made to move, they would be more likely to moor at sites other than the 3 or 4 unofficial winter moorings, which would leave space for leisure use of those other sites.

[sueb]

When I was a ccer there were no winter moorings we just stopped and waited, until BW lifted the restriction of services, and carried on our way.

 

I wasn't voluntarily flouting the rules, BW were preventing me from continuing my journey.

 

Winter moorings, for ccers who don't want to stop, but are forced to, are no different to a traffic warden ticketing cars that are stopped at a red light.

 

A lot of boaters don't know of those times when there were few rules and certainly no 'continuous cruising guidlines'. Life was so much more simple.

Sue

[carlt]

Life was so much more simple.

 

Seemed to work, too.

[alan_fincher]

A lot of boaters don't know of those times when there were few rules and certainly no 'continuous cruising guidlines'. Life was so much more simple.

Sue

 

Seemed to work, too.

But to be fair, you are not comparing like with like.

 

It is undoubtedly the case that the sheer number of boats that are full-time lived aboard, (officially/semi-oficially/unofficially/whatever), has risen dramatically, even in the last few years, and almost certainly continues to do so.

 

Back when much smaller numbers of people were doing it, many of the potential issues were avoided, simply because there were in many areas not enough to cause problems.

 

I'm not making a statementb that ist does always cause problems, BTW - in many less congested areas it probably still does not. Just that I don't think harking back to "the old days, when I lived in a shoe boax on a simple pontoon", is particularly relevant to the current situation.

[carlt]

 

I'm not making a statementb that ist does always cause problems, BTW - in many less congested areas it probably still does not. Just that I don't think harking back to "the old days, when I lived in a shoe boax on a simple pontoon", is particularly relevant to the current situation.

There may be more boats, in the water, than 20 years ago but I'm not convinced that, this time of year, there are any more boats moving around.

 

The fact remains that, if a ccer is prevented from moving, by stoppages, then they shouldn't have to pay a fee for the inconvenience.

[alan_fincher]

The fact remains that, if a ccer is prevented from moving, by stoppages, then they shouldn't have to pay a fee for the inconvenience.

I don't disagree with that, as a general principle.

 

I'm actually surprised people say BW staff have told them they must.

 

I have, however, heard people freely planning how to use stoppages to their advantage to get "trapped in" somewhere, and it is presumably this kind of attitude that has caused BW to claim to be more hard line in some areas.

 

I say "claim to be", because I see precious little effort being made to move on some boats that have been around here 3, 4, (or even more) months.

 

I'm not saying there is a particular problem caused by them not being moved - but clearly nobody has coerced people here into paying extra to stay in the town. That's presumably why nobody bothered to pay!