Continuous cruising case - liveaboard homes at risk

[canaldrifter]

 

 

The NBTA also liaises with the settled community and works with public sector bodies such as British Waterways and the Environment Agency in formulating policy and legislation.

 

 

 

Yeah? I don't recognise anyone named on their exec. Never met any one of them at a user group meeting. Just how many members do they have and who do they represent?

 

The fact that they show narrowboats on their headers and call themselves bargees is quite frankly embarrassing for them, and the fact that most of the exec feature in their news item as 'artists', seeking to display their wares makes me think they're totally inconsequential in the scheme of things.... or its a pretty poor wind-up.

 

Tone

[alan_fincher]

Yeah? I don't recognise anyone named on their exec. Never met any one of them at a user group meeting. Just how many members do they have and who do they represent?

Well on the one hand........

 

The NBTA seeks to represent the interests of all live aboard boat dwellers

 

which seems fairly broad brush, and a whole host of you seem to be represented by them, whether you want to be or not (!)

 

But on the other hands........

 

The National Bargee Travellers Association represents and advises Bargee Travellers (itinerants who live on boats) in particular in relation to their housing needs and in defence of their rights under the European Convention on Human Rights.

 

which sounds a bit more exclusive, (I wonder how many of our live-aboards would actually choose to call themselves "itinerant" - a term which should have a fairly neutral meaning, but which many might actually see in a less favourable light, possibly ?).

 

For an outfit claiming so much, they don't actually seem to want to tell us much about themselves.....

 

However, this appears to be their Nick Brown (secretary and Legal Representative) introducing himself of www.ukhippy.com (no less!).......

 

......interesting seeing as Reading Borough evicted me from Reading in early July......

 

Link to Nick The Boatman on www.ukhippy.com

[carlt]

Just how many members do they have and who do they represent?

Oi!

 

That's my line!

[canaldrifter]

Oi!

 

That's my line!

 

I'm learning.....

 

Tone

Edited April 4, 2011 by canaldrifter

[Hastings]

The situation seems quite simple to me. In respect of the recent County Court case, there appear to be two main categories of boater:

1 Those who don't live on their boat

2 Those who do live on their boat.

 

Re those who live on their boat, there seem to be these categories:

 

3 Those who have a paid for permanent mooring, either direct from BW or a marina/riparian owner, and stay on the mooring all or most of the time;

4 Those who continuously cruise;

5 Those who don't have a paid for permanent mooring, but stay in one place or small area all or most of the time.

 

 

The judgment has nothing to do with the first three categories, as almost without exception, such people have a permanent paid for mooring.

 

Categories 4 and 5 are similar only in that neither has a paid for mooring (though I accept that many CCers pay for a winter mooring for a few months). The main difference is that genuine CCers move round the system (all, or a substantial part of it) every year, and most, from discussions with many, move several times a week by a few miles each time. So they will only be on one particular canal for at most a week or two.

 

Category 5 are people who have a reason that they have to be in a particular area, e.g. work, friends, school etc. If they want to stay there, the issue is simple. They obtain and pay for a permanent mooring, so contributing as a by-product to the provision of local canal amenities and canal maintenance.

 

I can see no reason why people who live in one area on a boat should be noticeably different from those who live in a house. It's the lifestyle that they choose, not whether to opt in or out of society and their obligations to it.

 

And of course, all liveaboards (except genuine CCers) should be paying Council Tax too. I'm not arguing that from a legal point of view, as the legal position here is somewhat obfuscated, but from a social obligation angle. If you use the services, you should pay for them.

[carlt]

 

And of course, all liveaboards (except genuine CCers) should be paying Council Tax too. I'm not arguing that from a legal point of view, as the legal position here is somewhat obfuscated, but from a social obligation angle. If you use the services, you should pay for them.

I snipped all the first bit of your post because it looked too much like Deans's "boater categorisation" thread and I do like to retain the will to live, at least until Wednesday lunchtime.

 

Surely you should substitute "social obligation" with "my own personal opinion" because many people would love to pay the appropriate proportion of CT, but there is no mechanism to do so. Others believe their boat and mooring taxes contribute enough to the public purse, to cover the reduced amount of local service, they take advantage of.

 

I'm not sure why the CCer uses any less local services, than any other boat dweller, they just use those services provided by different local authorities.

Edited April 4, 2011 by carlt

[alan_fincher]

I agree with Carl.

 

It is very hard to see how a boater constantly on the move is necessarily using any less services than one who is not.

 

There is no hard and fast measures on this of course, but I have certainly seen blogs by people having a hefty crop of library tickets and bus passes for use in whatever area they find themselves at a time.

 

Presumably if the same boaters need to call the Police, or visit an A&E department, or simply put some bottles in the recycling, they will do so, whether constantly moving, or never progressing beyond the same pound.

 

Can you explain why you think there is a distinction, please ?

[Chris Pink]

Boy what a rant! Better answer it hadn't I

Right, I don't have a clue. I only know what is in the public domain, here, NBW and KandA, therefore I must confess that I don't know the whole story but enough I think to recognise that much of what you have asserted over the years, like that nobody needs a mooring if they move every 14 days is plain wrong.

"Their right" etc, "they" were a hypothetical group postulated by Carlt as part of an exchange between us, I am guilty of assuming Mr Davies was supported by the people behind the Cbeebies KandA website, if I am wrong and they just left him hung out to dry then I apologise, nonetheless the inept moronic style of this particular shop front does seem to encourage people in the now shown to be mistaken belief that this lifestyle is lawful and is encouraging people to play for higher stakes than they can afford on a very weak hand.

I have no reason to believe Mr Davies is part of any group but the notion that he has gone so far so self destructively entirely alone speaks of either an overwhelming hubris or someone who shouldn't cross the road without a grownup, are you really telling me that no one said "you go for it mate" or otherwise reinforced the belief that he could win this?

Ok, you tell me that his losing his home is not so clear cut, well I am at fault there I should know that internet sources are liable to be either half arsed or spouted in persuit of a hidden agenda, here it is.

 

 

As for crowing, you'd love me to wouldn't you, then you could point at me and decry my glorying in someone losing their home, unless they haven't, I've had both versions from the same evidently unreliable source. Yes the headline does back up my tired, repetetive and apparently vindicated point of view rather than your tired repetetive and apparently discredited one.

Sore loser?

 

Your ability to make eloquent debate doesn't completely disguise the emptiness of your words. "Sore loser" sorry? what have i lost? Last time I looked, everything I had before was still there.

 

The statement I made "he has lost his home" was the knowledge available at that time, this thread (and other sources) shows that it is not so clear cut. Unlike you I am capable of changing my thinking to match emerging facts. Would you prefer I stuck to my earlier assumption to keep thing simple for you to understand?

 

Paul Davies is very much on his own, he has little support amongst the boaters I speak to. He was very unwise to take this to the extent he has and there were any number of strategies that would have avoided the danger of losing his boat. He was told many times that he would not only most likely lose but also that he was in danger of making life worse for everyone else by pursuing an argument that was so extreme. He has not made himself at all popular by his actions.

 

This judgement applies to him, him alone and there are characteristics of his case that mean that BW would find it difficult to apply the same arguments again. I would refer you to his frequent comments on kanda.boatingcommunity.org.uk showing him at odds with opinion on there almost as much as with BW. His argument that it is not necessary to move at all is one example.

 

Interesting that although the KandA site does not suit your particularly narrow mindset (how could it?) both anecdotal evidence and that of the webmaster who monitors traffic show that it is a much used and valuable resource. I consider to be one of its strengths that you seem to fear its words to the extent you appear to.

 

And yes, you do give the appearance of crowing, you are the vociferous and spiteful voice in the two threads on this subject, endlessly repeating your mantra "it serves him right" and "now look out everyone else".

Edited April 4, 2011 by Chris Pink

[Tim]

On the license application form, if you choose to continuously cruise, you tick the appropriate box on the declaration which states "The boat will cruise continuously. I understand and will comply with BW's mooring guidance for continuous cruisers" It seems to me that a number of people are making a false declaration, some by not complying with the guidance, the rest by stating that they understand it! It appears that from the many threads on the subject, not many seem to understand (or perhaps want to understand) the guidance.

[alan_fincher]

Paul Davies is very much on his own, he has little support amongst the boaters I speak to. He was very unwise to take this to the extent he has and there were any number of strategies that would have avoided the danger of losing his boat. He was told many times that he would not only most likely lose but also that he was in danger of making life worse for everyone else by pursuing an argument that was so extreme. He has not made himself at all popular by his actions.

 

This judgement applies to him, him alone and there are characteristics of his case that mean that BW would find it difficult to apply the same arguments again. I would refer you to his frequent comments on kanda.boatingcommunity.org.uk showing him at odds with opinion on there almost as much as with BW. His argument that it is not necessary to move at all.

 

Chris,

 

Thanks for publishing that view, which I think probably puts this particular ruling into a bit more perspective.

 

Looking at the K&A Boaters Web Site I can see.....

 

1) They have quite reasonably withheld from saying too much themselves until more detail of the judgement is available....

 

but

 

2) Have published (on separate pages) BW's press release on the subject, as well as a National Bargee Travellers version "edited and approved by Paul Davies".

 

(Curiously the NBTA version does not appear to have been put on their own web-site.)

 

I can see they are probably simply only trying to show both sides of a story, but they have probably done themselves no favours, in that it is quite easy to arrive on the "Paul Davies Version" via Google, giving a possible impression that the K & A Boaters site is supporting his position in some degree.

 

Are you aware yourself of very much about "NBTA", (who I suspect most of us had not heard of before). Despite the "National" bit they also appear to be largely K&A based. Do they have much support amongst K&A boaters on issues other than the immediate matter of Mr Davies ?

[GUMPY]

Interesting that although the KandA site does not suit your particularly narrow mindset (how could it?) both anecdotal evidence and that of the webmaster who monitors traffic show that it is a much used and valuable resource. I consider to be one of its strengths that you seem to fear its words to the extent you appear to.

 

From your position you would say that wouldnt you!

 

BTW the link from wizzard communications back to chrispink.co.uk is broken since you revamped your site.

[Chris Pink]

 

Thanks for publishing that view, which I think probably puts this particular ruling into a bit more perspective.

 

 

Are you aware yourself of very much about "NBTA", (who I suspect most of us had not heard of before). Despite the "National" bit they also appear to be largely K&A based. Do they have much support amongst K&A boaters on issues other than the immediate matter of Mr Davies ?

 

It's a very long story but essentially it boils down to an argument about £86 that got way out of hand (I kid you not).

 

NBTA are Reading based, I believe they are trying to set up a community boatyard on the Thames on the model of the Jericho boatyard in Oxford. They have no real presence on the Western K and A, though there are personal links.

 

I tend to agree that the use of 'bargee" is a little quaint, I have always preferred 'boatie scum"

Edited April 4, 2011 by Chris Pink

[alan_fincher]

NBTA are Reading based, I believe they are trying to set up a community boatyard on the Thames on the model of the Jericho boatyard in Oxford. They have no real presence on the Western K and A, though there are personal links.

 

Thanks,

 

So more accurately.....

 

The NBTA seeks to represent the interests of all live aboard boat dwellers – “Bargee Travellers” in the Reading area

 

.... then !

[Chris Pink]

 

BTW the link from wizzard communications back to chrispink.co.uk is broken since you revamped your site.

 

Thank you for that.

 

The NBTA seeks to represent the interests of all live aboard boat dwellers – “Bargee Travellers” in the Reading area

 

 

We're all entitled to our aspirations, Alan.

 

incidentally I have it on very good authority that you used to be a bit of a hippy back in the day.

[alan_fincher]

incidentally I have it on very good authority that you used to be a bit of a hippy back in the day.

Which particular day would that be, then ?

[Hastings]

I agree with Carl.

 

It is very hard to see how a boater constantly on the move is necessarily using any less services than one who is not.

 

There is no hard and fast measures on this of course, but I have certainly seen blogs by people having a hefty crop of library tickets and bus passes for use in whatever area they find themselves at a time.

 

Presumably if the same boaters need to call the Police, or visit an A&E department, or simply put some bottles in the recycling, they will do so, whether constantly moving, or never progressing beyond the same pound.

 

Can you explain why you think there is a distinction, please ?

 

 

I agree that for purposes of using state/community facilities such as police, health, rubbish disposal, etc., there is no real distinction between resident boaters who genuinely continuously cruise, and those who reside in one place or area. But no-one has invented an administrative way of charging CCers Council Tax, as they can be in one Council area one day, and three or four more within a week! Realistically, as estimates suggest that there's probably only a fairly small number of CCers who do continuously cruise all over the place, is it worth the bureaucratic effort of trying to get them to pay Council Tax. We'd need new laws, and it would have to be paid into Treasury funds, not local authority. Not worth the effort for the perhaps £2m to £3m involved.

[cotswoldsman]

I agree that for purposes of using state/community facilities such as police, health, rubbish disposal, etc., there is no real distinction between resident boaters who genuinely continuously cruise, and those who reside in one place or area. But no-one has invented an administrative way of charging CCers Council Tax, as they can be in one Council area one day, and three or four more within a week! Realistically, as estimates suggest that there's probably only a fairly small number of CCers who do continuously cruise all over the place, is it worth the bureaucratic effort of trying to get them to pay Council Tax. We'd need new laws, and it would have to be paid into Treasury funds, not local authority. Not worth the effort for the perhaps £2m to £3m involved.

 

Who is it that estimates there are not many people that genuinely CC I was in Banbury yesterday and out of maybe 7 boats 4 were CCers.

An income of £2 million at an average of £500 per boat would suggest over 3,000 what you call genuine CCers

[carlt]

Not worth the effort for the perhaps £2m to £3m involved.

Having spoke at length, on this very subject, with LGOs in one of the most canal ridden regions, they have a similar attitude to the many liveaboards, with non-res moorings, they are turning a blind eye to.

 

This may of course change, as the ConDem screw turns ever tighter on Local Govt.

[jenlyn]

Can't see the councils charging ccers a council tax in its present form as such, I would argue that my boat was a çhattel

[ymu]

It's not just CCers who don't pay council tax - there are plenty of liveaboards with moorings who don't pay it either.

 

There is a case for all liveaboards to be paying something more to make up for the fact that they're not paying CT anywhere. The argument that they can't access most council services doesn't really hold water. Although if we did have to pay it, there would have to be arrangements made to allow CCers access to those services we currently can't access whether we want to or not - schools, libraries (if there are any left by now), Sure Start, housing benefit,etc.

[alan_fincher]

I agree that for purposes of using state/community facilities such as police, health, rubbish disposal, etc., there is no real distinction between resident boaters who genuinely continuously cruise, and those who reside in one place or area. But no-one has invented an administrative way of charging CCers Council Tax, as they can be in one Council area one day, and three or four more within a week! Realistically, as estimates suggest that there's probably only a fairly small number of CCers who do continuously cruise all over the place, is it worth the bureaucratic effort of trying to get them to pay Council Tax. We'd need new laws, and it would have to be paid into Treasury funds, not local authority. Not worth the effort for the perhaps £2m to £3m involved.

OK, I had not picked on the fact that your reasons for excluding CCers from council tax were because of what you perceive to be administrative difficulties in collecting it, (rather than some idealogical reason why they are different).

 

It's interesting that you have access to estimates that say what number of CCers genuinely move between administrative districts, versus those that do not, though. What source(s) are you using for this ?

 

I suppose (head down!), it wouldn't be beyond the wit of man for BW to add an amount equivalent to a minimum average council tax to the licences of everybody making a CC declaration, then to redistribute that in some way around the councils likely to be providing the bulk of the services they might use. (OK, OK, how do you apportion that, but it's an idea!....).

 

On the other hand, given the large number of CCers we have that are permanently within the same borough, (Dacorum, Hertforshire, in our case), it seems a shame that the council can't just go and deliver them each an individual bill.

 

Although if we did have to pay it, there would have to be arrangements made to allow CCers access to those services we currently can't access whether we want to or not - schools, libraries (if there are any left by now), Sure Start, housing benefit,etc.

I have no first hand experiences as to what services a CCer can, or can not, easily access, but certainly many say they are able to get library cards, and often bus passes in the areas that they visit regularly, and some claim to have a stack of these for different areas.

 

Perhaps it is down to the story you tell when you first ask, I really don't know ?

[RichardN]

Who is it that estimates there are not many people that genuinely CC I was in Banbury yesterday and out of maybe 7 boats 4 were CCers.

An income of £2 million at an average of £500 per boat would suggest over 3,000 what you call genuine CCers

 

 

Good point. The people who cc round the network need to be thought about very carefully as I think they are important.

[ymu]

OK, I had not picked on the fact that your reasons for excluding CCers from council tax were because of what you perceive to be administrative difficulties in collecting it, (rather than some idealogical reason why they are different).

 

It's interesting that you have access to estimates that say what number of CCers genuinely move between administrative districts, versus those that do not, though. What source(s) are you using for this ?

 

I suppose (head down!), it wouldn't be beyond the wit of man for BW to add an amount equivalent to a minimum average council tax to the licences of everybody making a CC declaration, then to redistribute that in some way around the councils likely to be providing the bulk of the services they might use. (OK, OK, how do you apportion that, but it's an idea!....).

 

On the other hand, given the large number of CCers we have that are permanently within the same borough, (Dacorum, Hertforshire, in our case), it seems a shame that the council can't just go and deliver them each an individual bill.

 

 

I have no first hand experiences as to what services a CCer can, or can not, easily access, but certainly many say they are able to get library cards, and often bus passes in the areas that they visit regularly, and some claim to have a stack of these for different areas.

 

Perhaps it is down to the story you tell when you first ask, I really don't know ?

I think you have to be a local resident to use the library - although policy might vary by area. A lot of tips ask for a postcode before letting you in, but they don't demand a CT bill to prove it.

 

I buy my bus pass like everyone else does. Or do you mean free bus passes for the older boater?

 

It may well come down to how well you can play the system in a lot of cases. It usually is.

[romarni123]

It's not just Cars who don't pay council tax - there are plenty of liveaboards with moorings who don't pay it either.

 

There is a case for all liveaboards to be paying something more to make up for the fact that they're not paying CT anywhere. The argument that they can't access most council services doesn't really hold water. Although if we did have to pay it, there would have to be arrangements made to allow USers access to those services we currently can't access whether we want to or not - schools, libraries (if there are any left by now), Sure Start, housing benefit,etc.

There's nothing to stop people using these services,I have a library card,My friends girl goes to sure start and nursery and will be going to the local school in september,she also uses the health center they are on a CC licence and have no problems they also get housing benefit in the winter for their moorings.

[alan_fincher]

I think you have to be a local resident to use the library

Not so in Hertfordshire, for example.....

 

You do however need to be able to show something with a "current address", although that doesn't need to be in the area.

 

Joining the library

Anyone can use the library for studying and for information. You need to join the library if you wish to borrow books and any other items.

 

Can I join?

Any UK resident may join the library, and it is free.

 

How do I become a member?

 

* Apply for membership online – just click on the link called "Join the Library Online" and complete the application form. Your membership card will be sent to you by post.

* Visit any public library in Hertfordshire and complete an application form. You will need to show one form of identification that shows your name and current address, such as a bank statement, rent book, driving licence, utility bill.

 

I buy my bus pass like everyone else does. Or do you mean free bus passes for the older boater?

Yes, I was thinking of the more mature.....