More on Licences

[fuzzyduck]

Thanks to Mrs Jean M Dobbs, and her letter to towpath times in january where she rails about "Legal licence dodgers" http://www.mortonsmedia.net/webdata/pdfs/tpt/tpt-jan06.pdf (Warning 7Mb PDF, look at pages 8 and 9)) my ears pricked up, and I decided to Fire off an FOIA request to BW, to get the full picture. For this purpose I used the following text. Now i've heard from many people that "if the marina connects to the canal, you have to have a licence" so this might be of interest to some of you. Some of the rest of you might already know this, but i've seen alot of people get the wrong idea.

 

I think the upshot is "you may not need a licence if you moor in a private marina" But the marina owner might need you to have a licence.

 

 

Please consider the following request for information, as a formal request under the Freedom of Information act 2000, under which BW is, i believe covered.

 

I have reason to believe there are a number of marinas / waterways where boats moored at that marina / waterway do not have to have a licence while moored, despite the fact that the moorings connect directly, or indirectly to BW managed Canals or rivers.

 

Can you provide me with a list of such locations, and if possible, the reason such locations are considered to have different rules to the majority of the system.

 

Sincerely

 

 

now every time I've mentioned this subject to others that my boat is moored on non BW waters, and not subject to needing a long term licencing, has given me a funny look, and said are you sure? to which i've refered back to the marina manager who's said, "yes i'm sure" Anyway, to get clarification and the big picture i asked BW the question above. The reply arrived today, which i will reproduce below for the benefit of those of you who might actually care.

 

 

A marina that is constructed on private land, where BW is not the owner of the water space is not part of the waterway. BW's statutory powers to require a boat to be licenced only extend to the waterway itself. Whenever a new marina is constructed, BW makes it a contratual requirement before a connection is made to the waterway that the operator enters into an agreement under which only boats with a valid BW licence are permitted to moor at the marina. Not all marinas (particularly older ones) are covered by such agreements. so long as unlicenced boats remain in the marina there is no offence under the bye-laws.

 

Having taken advice from our legal department I am writing to let you know that to disclose the specific locations of private marinas that do not have an agreement covering the licencing of moored boats would be harmful to the commercial interests of British Waterways and arguably, the marina operators. British waterways is currently seeking to secure new agreements at several locations and public disclosure would be harmful to that process. therefore, we are exempt from disclosing that information under section 43 of the freedom of information Act 200.

 

 

so there's the horses mouth, if your boat does not move from its marina that often, it might be to your advantage to ask if there is such a contract in force with BW. HOWEVER ...

 

I'd be very interested to find out when BW started persueing these new agreements, and if this coincided with them moving into the marina business. to put this in perspective, this is a bit like (in a totally opposite manner) forcing CCers to take a berth in a BW marina if they use it or not. (not that i'm complaining too hard, as i probably am not saving much cash over the year anyway, and the nearest ST licence office is a few miles away)

 

I will also be asking if this strategy has anything to do with then stopping selling short term licences over the internet.

 

I also intend to appeal the "comercial interests" defence with our mate Eugene, and then the information comissioner.

 

Discuss.

[DHutch]

Sounds fair enough.

- In other words, no, you dont need a leicense, but BW would really like it if you did, so they 'bully' the marina opertator signing, becuase they can of cause always stop them conecting the marina at all. (fair enought i guess)

- But they wont give you a list, which is a shame.

 

 

...we are exempt from disclosing that information under section 43 of the freedom of information Act 200

Also. Did the acctually miss of the extra '0' ?

 

 

Daniel

[fuzzyduck]

sorry should have said ... All typos = copyright me

 

It's fair enough depending on their motives, if they're doing it because they have to enforce licencing in their own marinas, they are actually forcing others to compete on their terms, rather than competeing in the marketplace, this might be a monopolies commission issue. They might also be considered to be trying to operate a cartel which would be for the OFT. it'd be like the UK govt trying to contractually get France to add the equivalent of road fuel duty to the cost of their fuel. or can i work Pizza eaters into this?

 

or the above might be utter rubbish.

Edited February 16, 2006 by fuzzyduck

[Pat]

So basically.... you can get away with not having a license in some marinas as long as you never move your boat. Seems pointless to me.

Incidentally, my license arrived today. I paid for it in July. That means I've been cruising around for 7 months without displaying a license. Nobody seemed to care. Probably because Maffi doesn't live in my area!

[DHutch]

So basically.... you can get away with not having a license in some marinas as long as you never move your boat. Seems pointless to me.

Well you could then just use one-liecences on the 2/3weeks you leave the marina.

- Like all the steam boats do (there basicaly all trailable, so people take them home)

 

 

 

I paid for it in July. That means I've been cruising around for 7 months without displaying a license. Nobody seemed to care.

No Comment.

 

 

Daniel

[fuzzyduck]

So basically.... you can get away with not having a license in some marinas as long as you never move your boat. Seems pointless to me.

 

 

but not if you're doing a fit out, and the boat is afloat. or

 

you live on a boat and don't move it. (Don't laugh i've met a fair few people like this) in fact the guy i bought my boat from, lived on a HUGE widebeam with no engine, and used Fuzzy to go boating. live on a 70 footer, licence the 23 footer.

 

you're restoring a boat

[fender.]

So basically.... you can get away with not having a license in some marinas as long as you never move your boat. Seems pointless to me.

Incidentally, my license arrived today. I paid for it in July. That means I've been cruising around for 7 months without displaying a license. Nobody seemed to care. Probably because Maffi doesn't live in my area!

 

The impliactions are interestng. If BW says that boats on private waters connected to BW waters must have licences, then it means that boats on adjacent private waterways would also be seen by BW as needing to have BW licences by decree of simply being connected to a BW waterway. So boats on the Thames tideway would need BW licences because that river is connected to BW's waterways at Limehouse and Brentford. And environment agency navigations would also need a BW licence. Its probably time to scrap the different licensing authorities and have just a single authority.

[fuzzyduck]

The impliactions are interestng. If BW says that boats on private waters connected to BW waters must have licences, then it means that boats on adjacent private waterways would also be seen by BW as needing to have BW licences by decree of simply being connected to a BW waterway. So boats on the Thames tideway would need BW licences because that river is connected to BW's waterways at Limehouse and Brentford. And environment agency navigations would also need a BW licence. Its probably time to scrap the different licensing authorities and have just a single authority.

 

actually in the letter i got they're saying the opposite, but they're working towards this, in a stealthy manner.

 

I agree, we need a single licencing authority.

[alan_fincher]

Incidentally, my license arrived today. I paid for it in July. That means I've been cruising around for 7 months without displaying a license. Nobody seemed to care. Probably because Maffi doesn't live in my area!

Given the recent lengthy respose by Eugene Baston of BW, where he seemed to stress that this should not occur, why don't you volunteer to Eugene as a test case for him to investigate, and explain why there was the 7 months hold up ?

 

I'm sure he could lift the necessary stones to uncover what's gone on internally in BW in this case. If there is not something exceptional about your renewal, perhaps they could learn something from the failure, and streamline the process.

 

I repeat, in their defence, that when we took ownership of our boat, (a bit before July, so similar timeframe), the licence was with us within a week, despite an ownership change.

 

So clearly their performance is variable, (to put it mildly!...).

[DHutch]

Given the recent lengthy respose by Eugene Baston of BW, where he seemed to stress that this should not occur, why don't you volunteer to Eugene as a test case for him to investigate, and explain why there was the 7 months hold up ?

Yeah that would be quite cool. Eugene???

[Maffi]

Probably because Maffi doesn't live in my area!

 

Cheap shot, but only to be expected!

[Moley]

but not if you're doing a fit out, and the boat is afloat. or you live on a boat and don't move it.

you're restoring a boat

 

Sorry, what's this about? My licence is up for renewal end of this month, but she's going nowhere short-term, but I'm on a BW pontoon (which I haven't paid for 'cos they still haven't finalised fees or sent me a bill). Am I missing something, or reading between the lines and making 2+2=5?

[fuzzyduck]

You're making 5, they are saying that boats in offline marinas, where BW do not own the "water space" may not have to have a licence when not on the waterways.

 

if you're on BW pontoon you're on their water space. renew.

[Richard Bustens]

Bary Hawkins Boat yard / marina is one that is like that and also they are a bit cheeper for mooring as they dont have to pay BW any share,

 

I think it was because when the canal company built the canal on the land belonging to whoever the agreement was made back then and never changed, it was part of the agreement for using the land that the land oner had the rights to have the loading and unloading of his goods.

[Pat]

Cheap shot, but only to be expected!

 

 

Sorry Maffi, I admit that was cheap of me. I'm just jealous that you are about to get a brand new boat and I live on a plastic bucket that according to this forum is going to sink the next time the canal freezes over and someone charges past me in a narrowboat...

 

In response to Alan's post: I must admit that the reason it has taken 7 months for my license to be processed is because I am on a new private mooring, that has only recently got residential status. I believe it has taken BW a while to get their files updated etc.

[rog guiver]

Not sure of the actual marina name, but it's on the K&A between Newbury and Reading. The owner actively encourages berth holders to just get a short term licence during the summer months. The marina is just off the canal, along the old course of the Kennet before it reaches the weir.

 

If it were not for BW maintaining the associated weir the marina would have about six inches of water. BW could put a barrier across the "dangerous weir stream" off which the marina gets its access.

 

Go for it BW, take action against what is perceived by the majority of us "good guys" to be licence dodging.

 

Comments Eugene?

[Richard Fairhurst]

I will also be asking if this strategy has anything to do with then stopping selling short term licences over the internet.

AFAIK, no it doesn't. Stopping selling short-term licences over the Internet was purely a result of changes in Waterscape's technology. You can't actually buy any licences for the first time at the moment, long-term or short-term: you can only renew.

 

I also intend to appeal the "comercial interests" defence

Appeal against (sorry, that's an Americanism that really does drive me up the wall).

 

Rog - I think you mean Frouds Bridge Marina. But there are loads around the system that don't require BW licences, believe me.

 

Richard

[rog guiver]

Thanks Richard, that sounds like the marina.

 

I presume that their case is they are not floating on BW controlled water when moored and hence do not need a BW licence. Surely if that is the case the water belongs to someone, if not BW then the EA.

 

All they need is a Gold licence.

[Richard Fairhurst]

Ah, but the Agency is only the navigation authority for certain rivers (Thames, Nene, Great Ouse and tributaries, Wye, Lugg, Medway, Welland, Glen, Ancholme, Suffolk Stour; plus a few oddities, like Lydney Harbour and Canal, Rye Harbour; and I'm not 100% sure of the situation on the Yorkshire Derwent or the Market Weighton Canal).

 

Though the Agency administers certain functions on all the rivers of England and Wales, such as pollution control, it doesn't have power to demand boat licences for them except where it is expressly the navigation authority.

 

Frouds Bridge is at least a fairly predictable case. There are, however, a handful of standard marinas on standard, BW-owned canals that are exempt from the need for licences, for no reason other than it wasn't required by any connection contract when the marinas were first constructed. I believe that there are some on the Llangollen, for example.

[denboy]

just a quicky i know that some parts of the trent and the river soar there are moorings that you do not need a lic colwick park at holme peir point owned buy notts city council above the suspesion bridge at nottingham and shardlow marina and a little bit on the soar at redhill marina i believe these are exempt because these sections are marked as unavigable