Ordered to Return to Moorings

[jelunga]

What is reasonable about exceeding one's legal powers?

 

If you can point to where CRT are given the authority to dictate how someone uses their paid for mooring then their actions may be seen as "reasonable".

I think in CRT's mooring terms and conditions there is a clause about how long you can be away from the mooring.

[carlt]

I think in CRT's mooring terms and conditions there is a clause about how long you can be away from the mooring.

Really?

 

Here's the link to their mooring T&Cs....Clicky

 

If you could find and quote the relevant passages I'd be grateful because I can't find them.

[Jerra]

I think in CRT's mooring terms and conditions there is a clause about how long you can be away from the mooring.

I can't see anything to that effect on those I have just quickly read. However the agreement does give them the right to make local mooring rules and refuse to issue a new permit at the end of the agreement. Interestingly one of the two I read also said that amendments to local rules could be posted on a notice at the mooring. If you rarely (if ever return to the mooring) presumably you may miss these, consultation over such changes would be difficult if not impossible while you were away "bridge hopping". .

[jelunga]

Really?

 

Here's the link to their mooring T&Cs....Clicky

 

If you could find and quote the relevant passages I'd be grateful because I can't find them.

I saw them whilst looking at auction moorings some 2 idd yrs ago. It nay well have been specific to a particular mooring but agree it dies not appear in tge general ones you linked to

[luctor et emergo]

So by refusing to let you a mooring, crt are effectively turning you into a cc'er, even though you do not wish to, or can't, follow the 'CC guidelines', leaving you open to sanctions?

Even though you have not broken any laws, rules, or guidelines?

 

I have a bad feeling about this..

[madcat]

I have a bad feeling about this and a lot of other things CaRT are up to, I'm up for real resistance to all this, there mostly wasn't a problem and they will end up upsetting a lot of their customers in the process just to go after a very small minority of non compliant boaters.

It's all a total waste of time and destroyer of goodwill, I'm sitting on the wall at the moment but will jump off on the side that doesn't have the guard dog.

[Grace and Favour]

I have a bad feeling about this and a lot of other things CaRT are up to, I'm up for real resistance to all this, there mostly wasn't a problem and they will end up upsetting a lot of their customers in the process just to go after a very small minority of non compliant boaters.

It's all a total waste of time and destroyer of goodwill, I'm sitting on the wall at the moment but will jump off on the side that doesn't have the guard dog.

There's a great deal of speculation going on this thread - - no-one yet knows the wording of the request, nor the reasoning behind it.......

[Tuscan]

It means you can not take a Winter Mooring on a restricted Visitor Mooring ie 24 h/48h/5day/7day a Winter Mooring can be anything from 1 month to 5 months. You are allowed to arrive 14 days before for free but not allowed to stay for 14 days afterwards. Yes maybe not very well worded but hey I understand it!!!Just to re clarify when it says Permit can not be used on a Visitor Mooring it does not mean you can not visit. So for example if you need to go to Tesco etc and stay in town for a few days that is fine provided you do not overstay the permitted time limit

Last year I could take a winter mooring at Foxton or Marsworth Visitor Moorings there were spaces reserved for the purpose close to the facilities, can I get a winter mooring there or not . Reading CRTs definition on their web site it looks like this option has been quietley removed.

 

In the recent years several boaters I know have taken winter moorings on VM's on purpose to br moored against a solid edge , good towpath, and able to access facilities without moving their boat even if iced in. Now it would appear they will have to bridge hop to do this whereas before they would have paid. Thus what little revenue CRT may have got will be lost and turn a couple of boaters I have spoken to into potential overstayers. The fact that the price has dropped is irrelevant as there is now little incentive to pay for some.

[Paul C]

I find the 2013/2014 winter moorings proposals bizarre. Then again, I found the price they charged for 2012/2013 winter moorings just as bizarre too.

[MtB]

So by refusing to let you a mooring, crt are effectively turning you into a cc'er, even though you do not wish to, or can't, follow the 'CC guidelines', leaving you open to sanctions?

Even though you have not broken any laws, rules, or guidelines?

 

I have a bad feeling about this..

 

Hey you're beginning to sound like Carl with this madly convoluted argument!

 

Nothing in the licence conditions says your home mooring has to be rented from CRT. A privately owned marina mooring fits the criteria so CRT are not forcing ghost mooring holders (or any other mooring holders) to be CCers by denying them renewal of their CRT moorings.

 

 

MtB

 

 

Edit to add: On a related subject, with the rate at which reserve prices on CRT moorings are climbing, the cost differential between online moorings and marina moorings may well disappear in the next few years. I think they have realised fewer online moorers paying higher prices = the same income but fewer customers to 'manage', = easier life for the staff

Edited July 5, 2013 by Mike the Boilerman

[carlt]

 

Hey you're beginning to sound like Carl with this madly convoluted argument!

 

 

Sorry Mike but, despite my explanation you still don't accept that my place that I can put a boat is not "lawful or reasonable"?

 

The fact that you do not recognise the storage of boats on the hard as a routine, ordinary occurrence highlights your inexperience, not the "unlawful or unreasonableness" of such a practice

... CRT are not forcing ghost mooring holders (or any other mooring holders) to be CCers by denying them renewal of their CRT moorings.

 

 

 

Are you suggesting that CRT are renting out ghost moorings?

[Ange]

Last year I could take a winter mooring at Foxton or Marsworth Visitor Moorings there were spaces reserved for the purpose close to the facilities, can I get a winter mooring there or not . Reading CRTs definition on their web site it looks like this option has been quietley removed.

 

In the recent years several boaters I know have taken winter moorings on VM's on purpose to br moored against a solid edge , good towpath, and able to access facilities without moving their boat even if iced in. Now it would appear they will have to bridge hop to do this whereas before they would have paid. Thus what little revenue CRT may have got will be lost and turn a couple of boaters I have spoken to into potential overstayers. The fact that the price has dropped is irrelevant as there is now little incentive to pay for some.

That's interesting because we've always found the winter moorings in the area we happen to be in tend to be a stretch of muddy towpath with no facilities charged at what we feel is an exorbitant rate, so we've always declined. We hate being stuck in one spot for more than a week, so we're quite taken with the new winter mooring idea, that we can cruise a limited area without feeling that someone might think we're taking the piss.

[MtB]

Sorry Mike but, despite my explanation you still don't accept that my place that I can put a boat is not "lawful or reasonable"?

 

The fact that you do not recognise the storage of boats on the hard as a routine, ordinary occurrence highlights your inexperience, not the "unlawful or unreasonableness" of such a practice

 

Whether I accept it or not is irrelevant. You don't seem to be able to recognise that I'm not putting forward my own opinion, I'm speculating on what a judge's opinion might be.

 

I'm suggesting a judge might not agree with your claim that your hard standing is a reasonable place to keep your boat, but I'd be pleased if he did.

 

 

MtB

[Jerra]

 

Are you suggesting that CRT are renting out ghost moorings?

 

I think he is suggesting people are renting CRT moorings and using them in the same way people may use a ghost mooring. i.e. Never going there.

[luctor et emergo]

Really? You seem to mis understand the concept of a 'ghost mooring'.

[carlt]

I think he is suggesting people are renting CRT moorings and using them in the same way people may use a ghost mooring. i.e. Never going there.

A ghost, or paper, mooring is one that a landowner rents out many times over fraudulently.

[Paul C]

Its important to define "ghost mooring". There's 2 possible definitions:

 

1. A legitimate mooring, but that the boater rarely/never visits. The mooring physically exists, the boat could fit in it, etc etc

2. A 'ficticious' mooring, for example a 'paper' mooring where an elicit moorings manager may pretend to have a contract with the boater, and may well run other moorings, but there is actually not a place where the boat could be kept. Or, a mooring where the boater declared it as such on their licence, but in fact no contract exists, ie they simply invented a mooring, or used the details of a real mooring unknowingly to the moorings manager.

 

Of course, with these things, there are shades of grey too. For example in (2), one might interpret a marina or home moorings where there are more boats than actual space to fit them as such, and they rely on at least 1 or 2 (possibly many more) being out at some time. Or, the mooring may exist but only at certain times of the year (and similarly be shared with other boaters at different times). These kinds of variations are open to interpretation and of course, if it came to court, the judge would need to decide on it based on the relevant facts.

 

Moorings where you say there's a place available if you paid a bit of money, IMHO, can't be counted - otherwise every CCer could say this, and if they're taken to task, pay for that mooring.

 

Moorings where the PLACE is always available but the means to get there and back (into the canal) incur costs, eg in carlt's case, don't fall into the above. Because the law says the place must exist, not the means to get there and back.

[Jerra]

Really? You seem to mis understand the concept of a 'ghost mooring'.

As I understand it it is a non existent mooring which only exists on paper. You can't turn up to a paper mooring and if you have a real mooring and don't turn up to it you are using it in the same way.

[Paul C]

EDIT: Carlt beat me to it, it appears that some people are interpreting my (1) as an illegal ('ghost') mooring.

[carlt]

 

Whether I accept it or not is irrelevant. You don't seem to be able to recognise that I'm not putting forward my own opinion, I'm speculating on what a judge's opinion might be.

 

I'm suggesting a judge might not agree with your claim that your hard standing is a reasonable place to keep your boat, but I'd be pleased if he did.

 

 

MtB

And yet the hard is where so many boats are kept.

 

When I overwintered at Aldebrugh the only boats not on the hard, out of a couple of hundred, were mine and the yard's workboat.

 

You are letting your ignorance of a standard practice cloud your opinion.

 

A judge, even if he began a case as ignorant as you appear to be on such matters, would accept the evidence put before him that keeping a boat on the hard is both lawful and reasonable and standard practice.

You can't turn up to a paper mooring and if you have a real mooring and don't turn up to it you are using it in the same way.

Nonsense!

 

You imply that, if I were to choose to take up a CRT mooring, I would have to give up that mooring if I wanted to go off and travel the whole of the system.

 

Nobody who has suggested that a boat has to return to its mooring, to remain within the law or t&cs has yet provided a shred of evidence that there is any rule or law to that effect.

[MtB]

The term 'ghost mooring' only recently appeared recently, and seems to have coined by CRT AIUI. I first saw it in the CRT boater question and answer document published recently and repeatedly linked to on CWF. From the wording of the (suspected made up) boater question, a ghost mooring is a real, paid for mooring mooring but one that the boater never visits.

 

A paper mooring is different. It is a mooring that may or may not exist, and is often rented out cheaply to multiple boats all at the same time on the informal understanding that the tenants never go there, only using it mooring to nominate in order to avoid being classed as a CCer.

 

 

MtB

And yet the hard is where so many boats are kept.

 

When I overwintered at Aldebrugh the only boats not on the hard, out of a couple of hundred, were mine and the yard's workboat.

 

You are letting your ignorance of a standard practice cloud your opinion.

 

A judge, even if he began a case as ignorant as you appear to be on such matters, would accept the evidence put before him that keeping a boat on the hard is both lawful and reasonable and standard practice.

 

No need to get personally abusive. Play the ball not that man please.

 

Despite your repeated assertions to the contrary I am aware of the practice of keeping proper boats on the hard over winter, but in my experience it is not common practice to store canal narrowboats out of the water on the hard standing over winter. They stay in the cut. A sharp judge will have noticed this too I expect.

 

MtB

[carlt]

The term 'ghost mooring' only recently appeared recently,

 

The term 'ghost mooring' has been around, in my experience, for decades and is interchangeable with 'paper mooring'.

 

I first heard it with reference to a certain rock star who owned a riverside residence and 'let' (without charge) his bankside moorings to far more people than he had space for.

 

This was in the 80s.

[luctor et emergo]

I find the reasoning that somebody who is behaving within the stated (lawfull) rules, but not to the liking of an arbitrary body (be that crt or other boaters), should be punished, disturbing.

 

It smacks of petty minded jealousy. And it is the thin end of a very nasty wedge.

Edited July 5, 2013 by luctor et emergo

[carlt]

 

 

No need to get personally abusive. Play the ball not that man please.

 

Despite your repeated assertions to the contrary I am aware of the practice of keeping proper boats on the hard over winter, but in my experience it is not common practice to store canal narrowboats out of the water on the hard standing over winter. They stay in the cut. A sharp judge will have noticed this too I expect.

 

MtB

I wasn't abusive at all and apologise if it appeared so. Your insistence on not accepting what many others have appeared to display ignorance of standard practice and I merely mentioned this.

 

I would also add that nowhere, when talking about my personal circumstances have I mentioned a canal narrowboat.

 

It is over 20 years since I have owned what you may see (rather blinkered, if I may politely suggest) as a canal narrowboat and it may be worth noting that two of the boats I have owned are at this moment stored, on the hard just like the one I currently own (all lawfully and reasonably).

It smacks of petty minded jealousy. And it is the thin end of a very nasty wedge.

Precisely and I am failing to resist the urge to quote Paster Niemoller.

 

"First they came for the Lime Green boats"...

Edited July 5, 2013 by carlt

[MtB]

I wasn't abusive at all and apologise if it appeared so. Your insistence on not accepting what many others have appeared to display ignorance of standard practice and I merely mentioned this.

 

I would also add that nowhere, when talking about my personal circumstances have I mentioned a canal narrowboat.

 

It is over 20 years since I have owned what you may see (rather blinkered, if I may politely suggest) as a canal narrowboat and it may be worth noting that two of the boats I have owned are at this moment stored, on the hard just like the one I currently own (all lawfully and reasonably).

 

It seemed abusive to me but explanation accepted, thank you. Maybe I'm more grumpy than usual tonight

 

I was wondering if you meant Aldeburgh, Suffolk. I've only been there twice but I didn't notice any narrowboats.

 

I think we can infer from your post that you accept narrowboats generally stay in the water all year around, but as you are planning to get a wooden boat or a sea-going boat which you will use on the cut and keep on the hard in winter (and when you are not using it), you consider your argument holds water.

 

You seem to be basing your argument on normal practice for proper boats and yes I see your point, but will the judge?. Would you feel confident the judge would accept your argument if you owned a narrowboat? It appears to me you are asking the judge to create different rules for different types of boat.

 

I hope you realise I'm playing Devil's advocate, in order to understand better.

 

 

MtB