Not having a mooring

[Paul Evans]

Cripes I've done a search for this on t'internet but can't seem to find much about it - just a pub comes up. Any pointers on a website or contact person (I will look again later but thought I should probably have a good look at this option fairly quickly).

 

Try this: CRT Mooring Site

[ditchcrawler]

Try this: CRT Mooring Site

Removed because it was an old link I found.

This is the correct link and bidding ends tomorrow, so I don't know if that is midnight tonight or tomorrow night

Edited February 14, 2013 by ditchcrawler

[carlt]

Car&t are not a housing authority nor are they social services.

This tedious mantra is trotted out time and time again.

 

No, CRT is not a housing authority but, then again, the vast majority of British Citizens do not live in a housing authority property so how on earth is this relevant?

 

CRT rent out moorings to liveaboards with the full knowledge that they will spend much of the time leaning their boat against these moorings, with or without planning permission.

 

This makes them a landlord and with that role comes responsibilities, be it legal or moral.

 

The vast majority of liveaboards do not require nor expect the services of a Housing Authority or Social Services but they do expect and deserve a responsible landlord so please, no more of the "CRT is not a Housing Authority or Social Services" claptrap.

 

It is irrelevant and brings nothing constructive to the discussion.

 

 

Sorry, but 2 miles is to all intents and purposes no different to not moving at all. Why does it limit the distance that you could travel? Are there no bus routes that would get the kids to school from a completely different direction?

 

...but get yourself a mooring...anywhere...and 2 miles backwards and forwards is allowed.

 

I'm afraid that your posts just sound like a whole load of "I want, I want, I want, I don't want to play this game by your rules, go and change the rules to suit me"

 

No mates in danger of becoming CMers any more Dave?

 

Your tune seems to have changed back to the old Daily Mayall ditty.

[KenK]

Removed because it was an old link I found.

This is the correct link and bidding ends tomorrow, so I don't know if that is midnight tonight or tomorrow night

 

Not for the second one that doesn't end untill the 22/2/13 and there are no bids so far.

 

Ken

[14skipper]

This tedious mantra is trotted out time and time again.

 

 

It is irrelevant and brings nothing constructive to the discussion.

 

Only tedious to you because you disagree and who are you to decide what does or does not bring anything to the discussion ?

 

14skipper

[carlt]

Only tedious to you because you disagree

14skipper

 

It's tedious because it is repeated so often yet there is never an explanation why it is remotely relevant to any but a tiny minority of liveaboards.

 

and who are you to decide what does or does not bring anything to the discussion ?

 

I am the person who decides what my opinion concerning what does or does not bring anything to the discussion is.

 

I am then the person who airs that opinion.

[Paul C]

It's tedious because it is repeated so often yet there is never an explanation why it is remotely relevant to any but a tiny minority of liveaboards.

 

 

 

 

Its relevant because of the duties/responsibilities it brings. A housing authority has more responsibilities than a 'landlord'. I'm not even 100% happy that C&RT can be described as a landlord but I'll not worry too much if people choose to use that analogy.

[carlt]

Its relevant because of the duties/responsibilities it brings. A housing authority has more responsibilities than a 'landlord'. I'm not even 100% happy that C&RT can be described as a landlord but I'll not worry too much if people choose to use that analogy.

But so few people (if any) want to take advantage of the extra responsibilitie/duties of a housing authority that it is not relevant.

 

CRT are a landlord, however because they rent out property, whatever its purpose.

 

I rent a workshop from a landlord but I can't live there and, even if I could, it would not turn my landlord into a housing authority.

Edited February 14, 2013 by carlt

[Jerra]

This tedious mantra is trotted out time and time again.

 

This makes them a landlord and with that role comes responsibilities, be it legal or moral.

 

The vast majority of liveaboards do not require nor expect the services of a Housing Authority or Social Services but they do expect and deserve a responsible landlord so please, no more of the "CRT is not a Housing Authority or Social Services" claptrap.

 

It is irrelevant and brings nothing constructive to the discussion.

 

 

I don't think Landlord is quite the right term.

 

Definition of landlord

 

 

• A person who rents land, a building, or an apartment to a tenant.
• A person who owns or runs a boardinghouse, inn, or similar establishment.

 

Nothing there implies a mooring might fit in the description of being a landlord.

 

Yes if you accept CRT are landlords people do have a right to expect a responsible landlord. However CRT will not become your "landlord" until you have a residential mooring as a license to continuously cruise does not confer any right to stay in a single neighbourhood or district.

[carlt]

[/size]

 

I don't think Landlord is quite the right term.

Really?

 

Definition of landlord

 

 

• [*]A person who rents land...

Seems a good enough description of a mooring to me.

 

 

However CRT will not become your "landlord" until you have a residential mooring

[/size][/color]

 

Rubbish. Any mooring will do. As I said, I can't live in my workshop (no residential planning permission) but I still have a landlord.

[Jerra]

 

Rubbish. Any mooring will do. As I said, I can't live in my workshop (no residential planning permission) but I still have a landlord.

 

I don't remember saying you had to live in a place to have a landlord. However the discussion was about living aboard.

 

A landlord would be quite entitled to finish the rental agreement because you are breaking the rules. Totally responsible (unless of course you class breaking the rules as responsible I don't) and totally permitted as far as I know. I am prepared to be corrected of course.

 

To me the issue is simple if you wish to live on the canal you get a residential mooring before you move on or you have personal circumstances that allow you to CC within the rules. Otherwise you shouldn't do it, I don't accept the bending of the rules because they don't fit a persons personal preferences/position.

 

If a landlord (on land) lets a property for use as say a workshop and you try to turn it into a residence he/she could/would terminate the rental agreement.

 

It isn't unreasonable for the owner of the mooring let as a leisure mooring to terminate the agreement if you decide you want to not abide by the rules. In fact as the mooring to be residential would require planning permission it would be irresponsible not to terminate.

[bowten]

[/size]

 

I don't think Landlord is quite the right term.

 

Definition of landlord

 

 

• A person who rents land, a building, or an apartment to a tenant.
• A person who owns or runs a boardinghouse, inn, or similar establishment.

 

Nothing there implies a mooring might fit in the description of being a landlord.

 

Yes if you accept CRT are landlords people do have a right to expect a responsible landlord. However CRT will not become your "landlord" until you have a residential mooring as a license to continuously cruise does not confer any right to stay in a single neighbourhood or district.

More definitions,have you any more legal issues you would care to describe? I pay my licence fee to CRT,that's my rent as far as I am concerned.A rent payable to a TRUST in order to put a boat on a charity's water.An end of garden mooring fee(rent)to be able to moor a boat against the land.

Edited February 14, 2013 by bowten

[KenK]

More definitions,have you any more legal issues you would care to describe? I pay my licence fee to CRT,that's my rent as far as I am concerned.A rent payable to a TRUST in order to put a boat on a charity's land below the water.

 

Isn't the definition of that sinking?

 

I'll get my coat.

 

Ken

[bowten]

More definitions,have you any more legal issues you would care to describe? I pay my licence fee to CRT,that's my rent as far as I am concerned.A rent payable to a TRUST in order to put a boat on a charity's water.An end of garden mooring fee(rent)to be able to moor a boat against the land.

Now edited but it did sound better before someone got smart.

[carlt]

 

To me the issue is simple if you wish to live on the canal you get a residential mooring before you move on or you have personal circumstances that allow you to CC within the rules. Otherwise you shouldn't do it, I don't accept the bending of the rules because they don't fit a persons personal preferences/position.

 

 

But however simple you think it is you are wrong.

 

If you required a residential mooring then the vast majority of liveaboards would have to move ashore.

 

The rules as you describe them don't exist, except in your imagination.

[bowten]

Now then Mr Jerra,perhaps you could have a look around the canals a little closer when you are on that yearly fortnight cruise with a timeshare boat.Perhaps you will see the multitudinous residential moorings,the immense lines of long term moorings or the immense number of continuous cruisers.You might see some of the boaters who have paid significant amounts of money to have the boat of their dreams(mine certainly don't come cheap)and have settled into their lifestyle in a marina,then the awful effects of a recession bites and through no fault of their own cannot afford the marina.Then there are those who chose to CC but cannot anymore,illness perhaps?A marriage breakdown?It could be for any number of reasons and they cannot go gallivanting all round the network because they cannot afford to. Will these people have their boats craned out and sold,or does the landlord decide that it would be best to start listening and learning.

[Higgs]

Now then Mr Jerra,perhaps you could have a look around the canals a little closer when you are on that yearly fortnight cruise with a timeshare boat.Perhaps you will see the multitudinous residential moorings,the immense lines of long term moorings or the immense number of continuous cruisers.You might see some of the boaters who have paid significant amounts of money to have the boat of their dreams(mine certainly don't come cheap)and have settled into their lifestyle in a marina,then the awful effects of a recession bites and through no fault of their own cannot afford the marina.Then there are those who chose to CC but cannot anymore,illness perhaps?A marriage breakdown?It could be for any number of reasons and they cannot go gallivanting all round the network because they cannot afford to. Will these people have their boats craned out and sold,or does the landlord decide that it would be best to start listening and learning.

 

I think it's been fair comment to put the OP in the realistic picture before they leap into a life of CC they seem would like fashioned to suit an idea they wanted to pursue. Realistically, with children and school to think about, CC'ing would be impractical. Forewarned is forearmed. Do you not think that is a sensible way to go about it?

 

If you're talking about a lifestyle that just allows a boater to plonk their boat anywhere regardless, it appeals to me, too. I'd imagine the thought would be entertained by quite a few. It doesn't, however, appear to be possible.

 

You may be able to appeal to social and moral conscience, but I don't think that stategy will work where people have shown little regard and still place themselves in impossible situations.

[Midnight Rider]

A little but it's not worth starting a new thread. I was listening to Ken Bruce's Pop Master radio quiz this morning & came in at the arse end of his introduction of a contestant called Paul -- a CC er from the Midlands I think.

 

Ken ---- How often do you move?

Paul --- Every 14 days as per the rules

Ken ---- How far do you move?

Paul --- Not far, I've got kids at school.

Ken ---- How long before you can come back?

Paul --- Er, 4 weeks.

 

Sound like an AtoBtoCtoA man & he did't do very well in the quiz.

[bowten]

I think it's been fair comment to put the OP in the realistic picture before they leap into a life of CC they seem would like fashioned to suit an idea they wanted to pursue. Realistically, with children and school to think about, CC'ing would be impractical. Forewarned is forearmed. Do you not think that is a sensible way to go about it?

 

If you're talking about a lifestyle that just allows a boater to plonk their boat anywhere regardless, it appeals to me, too. I'd imagine the thought would be entertained by quite a few. It doesn't, however, appear to be possible.

 

You may be able to appeal to social and moral conscience, but I don't think that stategy will work where people have shown little regard and still place themselves in impossible situations.

I am not saying that a boat should be allowed to stay on one mooring for the duration,what I am advocating is the use of zones.In the zoned area you must move every 7 days to another site within your designated zone,no stopping on 24 or 48 hour moorings and an extra payment on top of the licence on order to stay within your designated area.This zone could be a 5 miles radius from the centre,therefore a 10 mile stretch.A lesser payment to CRT for a 10 mile zone because this would be a 20 mile radius.This would mean less perceived harassment,less legal battles and more revenue for the Trust.

Edited February 14, 2013 by bowten

[furnessvale]

I am not saying that a boat should be allowed to stay on one mooring for the duration,what I am advocating is the use of zones.In the zoned area you must move every 7 days to another site within your designated zone,no stopping on 24 or 48 hour moorings and an extra payment on top of the licence on order to stay within your designated area.This zone could be a 5 miles radius from the centre,therefore a 10 mile stretch.A lesser payment to CRT for a 10 mile zone because this would be a 20 mile radius.This would mean less perceived harassment,less legal battles and more revenue for the Trust.

 

Cracking idea! I can see a lot of existing marina and long term on line moorers having a go at that, it has to be cheaper. Just one problem, how many existing CMers do you think it will attract?

 

George ex nb Alton retired

[Alan de Enfield]

Now then Mr Jerra,perhaps you could have a look around the canals a little closer when you are on that yearly fortnight cruise with a timeshare boat.Perhaps you will see the multitudinous residential moorings,the immense lines of long term moorings or the immense number of continuous cruisers.You might see some of the boaters who have paid significant amounts of money to have the boat of their dreams(mine certainly don't come cheap)and have settled into their lifestyle in a marina,then the awful effects of a recession bites and through no fault of their own cannot afford the marina.Then there are those who chose to CC but cannot anymore,illness perhaps?A marriage breakdown?It could be for any number of reasons and they cannot go gallivanting all round the network because they cannot afford to. Will these people have their boats craned out and sold,or does the landlord decide that it would be best to start listening and learning.

 

To apply this to 'bricks & mortar'

A couple / family rent or have a mortgage but due to illness, marriage breakdown or any number of reasons cannot afford the rent /mortgage.

They get into debt so the Building Society force repossession or the Landlord takes action for recovery of debt

 

No doubt they would get some Housing Benefit or other assistance but would this not also apply to the 'boater'

[sueb]

May I have permission to park my Campervan by the beach and live in it?

[Higgs]

I am not saying that a boat should be allowed to stay on one mooring for the duration,what I am advocating is the use of zones.In the zoned area you must move every 7 days to another site within your designated zone,no stopping on 24 or 48 hour moorings and an extra payment on top of the licence on order to stay within your designated area.This zone could be a 5 miles radius from the centre,therefore a 10 mile stretch.A lesser payment to CRT for a 10 mile zone because this would be a 20 mile radius.This would mean less perceived harassment,less legal battles and more revenue for the Trust.

 

From what I gather, this kind of scheme would be restricted in number and not transferable. For people who find themselves in dire straits and locked into a stretch of canal, I would certainly think a period of grace useful to work out a problem.

Edited February 14, 2013 by Higgs

[Jerra]

Now then Mr Jerra,perhaps you could have a look around the canals a little closer when you are on that yearly fortnight cruise with a timeshare boat.

I had heard it suggested anything other than outright owners were second class citizens on this forum your comment above rather proves it.

 

However for the record it isn't a time share it is a shared ownership private syndicate and it is more than a fortnight a year. If you are going to try to be insulting please make sure you comment on facts. My first experience of canals was over 45 years ago and 36 years ago I was sufficiently "into" canals that I honeymooned on them. So the snide remark that tries to imply I know nothing about canals isn't exactly correct.

 

Perhaps you will see the multitudinous residential moorings,the immense lines of long term moorings or the immense number of continuous cruisers.You might see some of the boaters who have paid significant amounts of money to have the boat of their dreams(mine certainly don't come cheap)and have settled into their lifestyle in a marina,then the awful effects of a recession bites and through no fault of their own cannot afford the marina.

I am not sure as a mere share boater what you are trying to get at here but to take the last sentence. The effects of the recession do not only hit those on the water people on land are finding they can't afford the life style they had and many are becoming homeless, through no fault of their own. Incidentally get up to Appleby horse fair and have a word with a few of the travelling folk about the joys of owning a very expensive mobile abode without having a piece of land that they have a rental agreement for or own.

Then there are those who chose to CC but cannot anymore,illness perhaps?A marriage breakdown?It could be for any number of reasons and they cannot go gallivanting all round the network because they cannot afford to. Will these people have their boats craned out and sold,or does the landlord decide that it would be best to start listening and learning.

 

Again not sure of the point you are trying to make are you suggesting landlords of moorings (still not sure that is the correct term) are/or should be any different to landlords on land? Do people on land get evicted? Do bailiffs take property if debts are owing? Do people on land have to change their lifestyle because of illness infirmity etc? By the way I never suggested the boats should be craned out and sold, but if they need to leave the living on the canal life style then yes they will probably have to sell the boat, just like those who can't afford their mortgage any more have to sell their pride and joy. Why should life on the water be any different to the cold hard life on land?

 

Its a hard life more so for some than others. Do you feel a council or housing association would not evict if the tenants didn't stick to the rules of the tenancy? If you do you had better try explaining it to the councils and housing associations that I know of.

[bowten]

Because most boats are owned outright but situated on property owned by someone else,I think this is the crux of the matter.We are not talking about renting property owned by a landlord on the landlords land.My boat is my property.