Sally Ash to Retire

[luctor et emergo]

Just as tiring as the aquisation that you are getting something for nothing...

[Paul C]

Carry on. It won't be long before CRT make substantial increases in the licence fee for those without a home mooring in order to help maintain the network.

 

 

And you base that statement on what? This gets tiring as I know people will say "I keep repeating myself" there is no such thing as a licence for boater "without a home mooring!

 

In fairness, CRT might decide to also increase the licence fee for those WITH a home mooring too - whether they differentiate them is probably the key issue.

 

And also in fairness, he didn't say "different licence", he said "different licence fee". The licence fee is more for a 70ft boat than a 30ft boat, but the licence is essentially the same thing.

[cotswoldsman]

 

 

 

 

And also in fairness, he didn't say "different licence", he said "different licence fee". The licence fee is more for a 70ft boat than a 30ft boat, but the licence is essentially the same thing.

The licence fee is the same for all boats it is calculated on price X length

[David Schweizer]

And you base that statement on what? This gets tiring as I know people will say "I keep repeating myself" there is no such thing as a licence for boater "without a home mooring!

Are you trying to say that those boaters without a home mooring should pay for the maintenance?

 

Some while ago, BW proposed to increase (double?) the licence fee for those licence applicants who did not have a declared place where their boat could be kept, but after some time, the proposal was withdrawn. I would not be as assertive as Mango, but I would not be surprised if CaRT sought to reintroduce the proposal at some time in the future.

Edited April 4, 2014 by David Schweizer

[luctor et emergo]

 

Some while ago, BW proposed to increase (double?) the licence fee for those licence applicants who did not have a declared place where their boat could be kept, but after some time, the proposal was withdrawn. I would not be as assertive as Mango, but I would not be surprised if CaRT sought to reintroduce the proposal at some time in the future.

But what would be their rational, other than pandering to those who whine that 'CCers' get 'something for nothing'?

[David Schweizer]

But what would be their rational, other than pandering to those who whine that 'CCers' get 'something for nothing'?

 

I am not declaring a position on the issue, mereley stating what I percieve to be the historical background.

 

From recollection at the time, it was suggested that BW received a significant income from mooring fees. for very little (often no) cost, which contributed towards the operation and maintainance of the canals, and that those boaters who did not make such an "additional payment" might be asked to make it in a different way.

 

And yes, I recognise all the arguements that those who pay for a mooring have security of tenure etc. not enjoyed by boaters without a declared mooring, although that proved to be a faulted assumption in my experience when BW evicted us!!

Edited April 4, 2014 by David Schweizer

[cotswoldsman]

 

Some while ago, BW proposed to increase (double?) the licence fee for those licence applicants who did not have a declared place where their boat could be kept, but after some time, the proposal was withdrawn. I would not be as assertive as Mango, but I would not be surprised if CaRT sought to reintroduce the proposal at some time in the future.

It was dropped because they could find no way of justifying it and I do not think that has changed.

[Timleech]

It was dropped because they could find no way of justifying it and I do not think that has changed.

 

I think the main justification, practical if not necessarily moral, would be that it would reduce the major financial incentive that exists to declare no home mooring.

 

Tim

[cotswoldsman]

 

I think the main justification, practical if not necessarily moral, would be that it would reduce the major financial incentive that exists to declare no home mooring.

 

Tim

Think that would be difficult to justify

Do you think I would get a rebate when I pay my £500 for a Winter Mooring?

Edited April 4, 2014 by cotswoldsman

[mango]

And you base that statement on what? This gets tiring as I know people will say "I keep repeating myself" there is no such thing as a licence for boater "without a home mooring!

Are you trying to say that those boaters without a home mooring should pay for the maintenance?

There is an urgent need for money to carry out repairs and do planned preventative maintenance to avoid expensive bills later. The government has made it clear that it is not going to provide more money. Those who are paying for a BW mooring are at least making a contribution. The growing number of boats without a home mooring provide an opportunity to raise more money through licensing. It is also unfair that shared ownership boats which are often in use more than hire boats pay the same licence fee as a boat with a single owner.

[Timleech]

Think that would be difficult to justify

Do you think I would get a rebate when I pay my £500 for a Winter Mooring?

 

There would be some logic to you doing so.

 

Tim

[cotswoldsman]

There is an urgent need for money to carry out repairs and do planned preventative maintenance to avoid expensive bills later. The government has made it clear that it is not going to provide more money. Those who are paying for a BW mooring are at least making a contribution. The growing number of boats without a home mooring provide an opportunity to raise more money through licensing. It is also unfair that shared ownership boats which are often in use more than hire boats pay the same licence fee as a boat with a single owner.

Ok so lets go pay as you cruise as your system might mean about 5 different types of licences

There is an urgent need for money to carry out repairs and do planned preventative maintenance to avoid expensive bills later. The government has made it clear that it is not going to provide more money. Those who are paying for a BW mooring are at least making a contribution. The growing number of boats without a home mooring provide an opportunity to raise more money through licensing. It is also unfair that shared ownership boats which are often in use more than hire boats pay the same licence fee as a boat with a single owner.

I think what you are saying is for example the guy I cruise with Stan who is 78 has no need for a mooring pays for a Winter Mooriing relies on his state pension and some savings should pay more to cruise about 400 miles a year than someone in a marina

[carlt]

Gazumping is not the same thing as selling to the highest bidder.

It is in regard to house sales which is the analogy Mango uses.

[mark99]

The enemy of genuine CC'ers is not other boaters with moorings but people who stick themselves to a towpath, don't budge and are not really interested in boating, our great waterway resources or heritage - but are seeking to exploit the waterway as a cheap home without playing by the rules we all have to abide by.

Edited April 4, 2014 by mark99

[DeanS]

 

I think the main justification, practical if not necessarily moral, would be that it would reduce the major financial incentive that exists to declare no home mooring.

 

Tim

 

I pay £145 for my home mooring.

If I CC-ed, I would spend more than that using diesel to keep moving, to make it to the next water point before I ran out, to make it to the next distant elsan point before I overflowed, and on boat maintenance, loss of work hours being unable to hold down a local job in the area, because I have to keep moving along.

 

WHAT financial incentive are you talking about? There is none. It is a fantasy that being a CC-er is cheaper. Being a CM-er is a different story.

[nicknorman]

It is in regard to house sales which is the analogy Mango uses.

No, not in house sales. Selling to the highest bidder is normal and sensible, gazumping is where, having agreed to sell for a certain price, a higher price is subsequently accepted. It is essentially reneging on an agreed sale to get a higher price.

I pay £145 for my home mooring.

 

Per year? Seems too cheap or is there a missing zero?

[DeanS]

No, not in house sales. Selling to the highest bidder is normal and sensible, gazumping is where, having agreed to sell for a certain price, a higher price is subsequently accepted. It is essentially reneging on an agreed sale to get a higher price.

 

Per year? Seems too cheap or is there a missing zero?

 

per month.

[carlt]

Selling to the highest bidder is normal and sensible,

Apart from house auctions and sealed bid tenders I have never bought or sold a house to the "highest bidder".

 

You put an offer in, at or below the asking price, and that offer is accepted or refused.

 

There is no bidding in a traditional house sale.

[PaulG]

Those that have been gloating at Ms. Ash's retirement have yet to meet her successor:

 

Edited April 4, 2014 by PaulG

[Athy]

You jest. Why would Joan Collins want that job?

[Timleech]

 

 

WHAT financial incentive are you talking about? There is none. It is a fantasy that being a CC-er is cheaper. Being a CM-er is a different story.

 

I referred to the financial incentive to not declare a home mooring, said nothing about cruising, continuous or otherwise. That incentive is one of the factors which lead to there being a lot of CMers, as well as people who do the absolute bare minimum to try to avoid attention, especially where there's a shortage of remotely 'affordable' housing.

 

Tim

[mango]

Ok so lets go pay as you cruise as your system might mean about 5 different types of licences

I think what you are saying is for example the guy I cruise with Stan who is 78 has no need for a mooring pays for a Winter Mooriing relies on his state pension and some savings should pay more to cruise about 400 miles a year than someone in a marina

My main point is that CRT need more revenue to maintain the system. I have suggested a way of generating more revenue.

 

I cannot afford to own a boat, so I do my boating on boats belonging to others and on hire boats. The world does not owe me a living. If you are concerned about helping those with little money then there are the alternatives of donating money or working for charity that will provide support.

[Ronniesonic]

The enemy of genuine CC'ers is not other boaters with moorings but people who stick themselves to a towpath, don't budge and are not really interested in boating, our great waterway resources or heritage - but are seeking to exploit the waterway as a cheap home without playing by the rules we all have to abide by.

 

simply put & pretty much bang on the money Mark.

 

The KANDA mob can be rightly pigeonholed in this group.

[cotswoldsman]

My main point is that CRT need more revenue to maintain the system. I have suggested a way of generating more revenue.

 

I cannot afford to own a boat, so I do my boating on boats belonging to others and on hire boats. The world does not owe me a living. If you are concerned about helping those with little money then there are the alternatives of donating money or working for charity that will provide support.

I do work to help those that have little money and I work with a charity called CRT as a volunteer and other projects sitting on a train now to go to a meeting with CRT

Oh and I am unemployed have been for 12 year still will start State Pension in October

[mark99]

You jest. Why would Joan Collins want that job?

 

 

LOL Sid James stylee.