continuous cruising

[Naughty Cal]

Lack of effective enforcement.

 

This is the nub of the problem with the real piss takers.

Apparently not for much longer in the East Mids area.

 

They are having a crack down. And to be fair not before time .

 

The resident piss takers are in for a big shock!

[lesrollins]

I think the enforcement officier good old Mr England from the G & S should cover all canals now he can clear up

[joerobo]

Every week same rubbish. When im rich i will do the whole network. Until then i will potter within the rules the best i can. Enjoying living on my boat and all the great people i meet.x

[Jim Batty]

 

You're most probably right, certainly more CCrs will appear what with the current housing crises. ...

 

Just read the C&RT thing BB just posted, not very easy for those to comply who work daily for sure, ...

 

Given the 20km and 12 locales/yr movement, a basically healthy person could surely work and 'stay legal' with the help of a bicycle ... with perhaps local buses for the 'long' 10km commutes at the extreme ends of the continuous circuit. Certainly a moped could cover it.

 

Seems like a reasonably good life aboard if you don't really want or can't move very far. It isn't asking very much of people. And if it keeps CRT happy ...

[Ex- Member]

 

Given the 20km and 12 locales/yr movement, a basically healthy person could surely work and 'stay legal' with the help of a bicycle ... with perhaps local buses for the 'long' 10km commutes at the extreme ends of the continuous circuit. Certainly a moped could cover it.

 

Seems like a reasonably good life aboard if you don't really want or can't move very far. It isn't asking very much of people. And if it keeps CRT happy ...

 

Is it legal though? Kanda make some very good points IMO

[junior]

 

Is it legal though? Kanda make some very good points IMO

Are KANDA capable of making a good point? I've never seen anything other than a load of crap attributed to them.

[Tuscan]

In my view for enforcement to work you need to things :

 

Firstly the ability and commitment to carry out the enforcement

And

Secondly the backing of the overwhelming majority of boaters that the enforcement practised is the right solution.

 

Without these two things enforcement of any type invariably fails.

[Jim Batty]

 

Is it legal though? Kanda make some very good points IMO

 

Do you mean is it legal to do a slow, continuous circuit from a 'central point' (e.g. nearest to where you work) 10km in either direction through a series of 12 local neighbourhoods? I thought that was what CRT was essentially suggesting. It's also something that could be easily rolled out across the system. I'm suggesting above that I also think it's something that is reasonable and relatively easy for most live-aboard boaters to comply with -- even on the K&A.

 

Or do you mean is it legal for CRT to institute minimum-movement guidelines like this? I have no legal background so, frankly, don't know.

 

TBH, I view the whole boat movement issue in broad, general terms based on the spirit of past boating -- drawing inspiration from how other, reasonable, more experienced, long-term boaters have operated, plus also guided by CRT's (formerly BW's) intentionally vague (in my view) cruising guidelines. Sure, this form of understanding boat movement invites p*ss-taking by a small minority. I take it the "20km/12 neighbourhood per annum" experiment is aimed at encouraging a bit less p*ss-taking. (It will never be eliminated).

 

Yes, Kanda do make some good points.

 

-- The £25 'extended stay' charges are foolish. I think if they actually were extended stay charges, charged at a local, competitive rate (you can have a nice Thames lock overnight mooring with electric for around a tenner, so an unserviced extended stay mooring might be worth £8?) they would be respected by a greater number of boaters.

 

-- 'Neighbourhood' and 'place' are ambiguous. And it's probably daft (is it illegal?) to try and map neighbourhoods, and I suspect CRT would simply be creating unhelpful flashpoints (and court cases?) in coming up with them.

 

-- Sure, the "20km/12 neighbourhood per annum" circuit I described above (work do-able by bicycle, etc.) is a 'progressive' journey in one sense - in the CRT new experiment sense. But it isn't really progressive in the previous 'progressive journey around the system' sense. The experimental sense seems a looser one, and I think its an improvement. It's an improvement because there are a huge number of continuous cruisers who do move regularly, do cover a great deal more than 20km/yr, (some even work, gasp!), but who have no wish to cover the entire system (or even much more than a chunk of it) for a large number of reasons. Of course the new, experimental sense of 'progressive' is not an improvement for anyone who wants to CC and simply tie-up at one of, say, three mooring spots per year. But THAT is the problem being addressed.

 

My tuppence worth, anyway.

Edited April 30, 2014 by Jim Batty

[Wanderer Vagabond]

As a Continous Cruiser who has just ovewintered at the western end of the Kennet and Avon my thoughts are that the requirement to move between neighbourhoods proposals is neither particularly onerous nor disadvantageous to other cruisers who are either holidaying, weekending or taking extended cruises. The main point to consider is that there are a lot of boats moored at this end of the canal and people are living on a lot of them. Any suggestion that if they want to do this they should move offline into a marina is countered by the fact that there are very few residential moorings available (anywhere!). Loads of marina moorings who will turn a bit of a blind eye to people living in them but technically they are defrauding the local council of Council Tax by doing so. Those who disapprove of people living on boats in this fashion are basically saying 'just go away' without really addressing the problem.

 

Since the policies of a variety of Governments has resulted in a general shortage of affordable places to live, quite a few imaginative people have tried moving onto the canals to afford to live near a place of work. This may not be in compliance with the 'Rules' but as has been discussed here, the rules have never been particularly clear since the requirement is to "... use the boat to genuinely cruise in a mainly progressive fashion...... from place to place and must not stop for more than 14 days in any one place....". From what I've seen during the winter probably a majority of the Continous Moorers do comply with the 14 movement requirement (with a few notable exceptions) but who, until now, has been able to define what constitutes cruising in a progressive fashion? If we were to insist that all these boats had to go onto at least one other waterway there is either the Thames which would involve them all going up (and back down) Caen Hill which would create water supply problems or a short trip out onto the Avon, and back. What CRT have now done is explain what they will accept as being cruising in a progressive fashion.

 

I will concede that it can sometimes be a bit frustrating chugging along on tick-over past lines of moored boats but then if you are in any hurry, why are you on a narrow boat? The difference in speed between tick over and cruising is probably 2mph, so even if you are going at cruising speed you still aren't going to get anywhere particularly quickly! The only real complaint that I would have of some of my fellow moorers during the winter are against those who chose to moor on either swing bridge moorings, water points or lock moorings. To me that just shows contempt for other boaters and I will concede that after I had struggled past the one's who had moored on the swing bridge moorings I made a point of giving the engine full throttle as I pulled away to give them the pleasure of the prop wash, childish I know but it made me feel better!

 

My own position as a Continuous Cruiser is that I don't really want to stay anywhere for more than 14 days. I would rather be running the engine under load going somewhere rather than idling to charge the batteries (and it's better for the engine). The reason that I don't want a Home Mooring is quite simply because I wouldn't be using it so what is the point of wasting money paying for a marina mooring that is going to be empty 95% of the time. Since people have to live somewhere, and the result of Government policy (of whatever party) is that there isn't much affordable housing, I'm intensely relaxed about people living on the Canals (continuous moorers or whatever else you want to call them), I do and I'm happy for anyone else to do so!

[Alan de Enfield]

........The main point to consider is that there are a lot of boats moored at this end of the canal and people are living on a lot of them. Any suggestion that if they want to do this they should move offline into a marina is countered by the fact that there are very few residential moorings available (anywhere!). Loads of marina moorings who will turn a bit of a blind eye to people living in them but technically they are defrauding the local council of Council Tax by doing so. ..........

 

So if by living 'residential' in a non-residential marina is de-frauding the LA, why is living permanently on a non-residential bit of bank not doing the same ?

 

Why is one 'OK' and the other not 'OK' ?

[Ex- Member]

Or do you mean is it legal for CRT to institute minimum-movement guidelines like this? I have no legal background so, frankly, don't know.

 

 

Well I haven't been informed by C&RT about this proposal. I've been cruising by the general guidelines given. To suddenly impose new rules in one specific area seems to bit unfair when giving such short notice.

 

As Kanda point out, C&RT seem to be making new rules but wording them differently, especially with regard to a place. I think they make some good points, so just asking the question. There's some posters with quite a lot of legal knowledge with regard to boating.

[jenlyn]

The sun's out, there's water in the canals, and quite a few lock gates are not as leaky as last year. The cc'ers are out enjoying every moment of it, whilst some of you are in here discussing it heh heh. Enjoy your summer people :-)

[Jim Batty]

... I'm intensely relaxed about people living on the Canals ...

 

Brilliant! I intensely like it!

[Alan Saunders]

Well I haven't been informed by C&RT about this proposal. I've been cruising by the general guidelines given. To suddenly impose new rules in one specific area seems to bit unfair when giving such short notice.

 

As Kanda point out, C&RT seem to be making new rules but wording them differently, especially with regard to a place. I think they make some good points, so just asking the question. There's some posters with quite a lot of legal knowledge with regard to boating.

Email received today at 11:28am:

Kennet & Avon interim 12-month local mooring plan

30 April 2014 Dear Boater,

 

You are receiving this information as your boat has been sighted on the Kennet & Avon canal in the past 12 months or you have a home mooring on the canal.

 

An interim 12 month local plan comes into effect on K&A between Bath and Foxhangers from Thursday 1 May 2014. The following guidance explains what the plan means for boaters without a home mooring and those with a home mooring.

 

The following guidance can also be found on our website along with a list of Frequently Asked Questions about the local plan and a map showing the 14 ‘neighbourhoods’ that are referred to in the plan. ...

They have reduced the number of valid mooring 'places', calling them 'neighbourhoods'; boats that previously moored in a legal 'place' miles from the 'honeypot' locations and causing no inconvenience to others will now be subject to 'enforcement'. This is the way that laws work; for the better good of the many a few innocents will be (and have been) fined, jailed, made homeless or executed.

 

There is a concession; you can continuously, repeatedly, cruise from Eastern Bath to Foxhangers (20km range) and there are specific rules that ensure that you will not be hassled by the CRT enforcement officers when your interpretation of the rules differs from theirs.

 

I fail to see how this scheme will reduce the perceived congestion problem. The twelve month trial may prove me wrong.

 

Alan

Edited April 30, 2014 by Alan Saunders

[Wanderer Vagabond]

"So if by living 'residential' in a non-residential marina is de-frauding the LA, why is living permanently on a non-residential bit of bank not doing the same ?

 

Why is one 'OK' and the other not 'OK' ?"

 

 

 

Not quite sure where I asserted that one was 'OK' and the other was 'not OK' I was merely pointing out that by living permanently in a marina as a resident (whether on residential or non-residential moorings) you should be paying Council Tax, if you're not then you are defrauding the Local Council.

 

As regards paying council tax whilst living permanently alongside a bit of Canal bank, I would suggest that the logistics of collection would defeat most councils. Unlike when you are moored in a marina, on the canal bank you still have no address or postcode, so how are the council to write to you with the bill? You are in much the same situation as a rough sleeper in any city, how can they pay council tax with no address? Likewise if your only address is a boat (not in a marina) how can you take out a TV licence? They wont allow you to buy one unless you have a recognisable address.

[nine9feet]

I was merely pointing out that by living permanently in a marina as a resident (whether on residential or non-residential moorings) you should be paying Council Tax, if you're not then you are defrauding the Local Council.

 

Surely you are only "defrauding the Local Council" if you have taken steps to avoid payment. The council will require payment of Council Tax if the Valuation Office has banded the mooring and added it to the list. The rules are not as straightforward as you have portrayed and this subject has been covered in depth previously. The relevant section of the VOA manual is at http://www.voa.gov.uk/corporate/Publications/Manuals/CouncilTaxManual/council_tax_man_pn/ct-man-pn7.html#P73_861

[cotswoldsman]

u Likewise if your only address is a boat (not in a marina) how can you take out a TV licence? They wont allow you to buy one unless you have a recognisable address.

Not right just do as lots of boaters without a Home Mooring do and go on line and buy one no post code required

[Wanderer Vagabond]

Not right just do as lots of boaters without a Home Mooring do and go on line and buy one no post code required

I'm not doubting what you say but what do you put on page 2 of the online application to the question "address to be licensed" with postcode?