Boater attitudes to licencing POLL

[Doodlebug]

Do check the towpath side when looking at the licences. We somehow managed to loose one of our two licences. I phoned CRT who said it was something like £20 for a new licence but as long as I display it towpath side it will be ok.

[alan_fincher]

Something else - as in starting to realise just how unrepresentative the forum actually is and have a desire to try and boat more than read.

 

If (of those voting so far) 20% of Forum members really do log details of "suspect" boats to run through the CRT licence checker, I can only agree with you.

 

I can imagine people maybe trying it once or twice as a curiosity - but doing it on a regular basis???................

If I spot an out of date licence, I just give a wry smile as it's probably just another fully licenced forum member hoping to wind mayalld up.

Nah!

 

I prefer to wait until he has his boat in a lock, and then, when is attention is not on me, wind a paddle just a tiny fraction, so that he hears a couple of clicks of the pawl on the gear...................

 

(This has even more effect if you can borrow a volunteer lock-keeper sweat shirt and life-jacket before you touch anything on the lock!).

[Rebotco]

On the face of it, my natural instinct would be that its none of my business..........

However that 4%, seemingly insignificant, actually amounts to stealing £1Million pa from CRT.

That affects me, as that is a million a year not being spent on navigation.

So I'm "vaguely miffed" - or if I think about it, "exceedingly miffed"!

[nicknorman]

The 48% or so voting to be miffed but not actually do anything about it, vs the 20% who are prepared to make the tiny effort, comes as no surprise. We are a nation who can sit around moaning all day about how terrible things are, but as to getting off our arses and actually doing something to make it better - no chance! Enjoy your pointless moaning, mr(s) majority.

Edited July 20, 2014 by nicknorman

[jenlyn]

The 48% or so voting to be miffed but not actually do anything about it, vs the 20% who are prepared to make the tiny effort, comes as no surprise. We are a nation who can sit around moaning all day about how terrible things are, but as to getting off our arses and actually doing something to make it better - no chance! Enjoy your pointless moaning, mr(s) majority.

A quiver and a tantrum?

Actually, if you take 1, 2 and 6, it's over 70%.....

Edited July 20, 2014 by jenlyn

[nicknorman]

A quiver and a tantrum?

Merely a depressingly familiar observation!

 

Ah! Have your toys returned?

[bassplayer]

How do you feel about boaters who fail to licence their boats?

Depends on their individual circumstances and how much you judge others....all I can say is that I licence my boat because I can afford it and I want to contribute to benefits I receive from CRT...

[Guest]

 

I can imagine people maybe trying it once or twice as a curiosity - but doing it on a regular basis???................

Nah!

 

 

I was once curious enough to try it........ But just ran our boat through it which came up licensed. I can't recall ever using it before or since.

[Wanted]

The 48% or so voting to be miffed but not actually do anything about it, vs the 20% who are prepared to make the tiny effort, comes as no surprise. We are a nation who can sit around moaning all day about how terrible things are, but as to getting off our arses and actually doing something to make it better - no chance! Enjoy your pointless moaning, mr(s) majority.

 

Maybe Mr(s) majority are being less apathetic towards a cause that means more to them?

 

As I say, as well intended and interesting it may be, an untested forum poll is not in any way representative of reality.

[Machpoint005]

'Vaguely miffed' also implies 'vaguely happy that CRT is reducing the amount of evasion'.

Although I'd question how they know the default rate accurate to within a few percent.

[KevMc]

I went for "Something else" so, to elaborate:

 

I think people who evade their licence are being subsidised by the rest of us and as such are the same as tax evaders etc. But I'm not annoyed enough to check them out on the licence checker because life is too short to allow it to raise my stress levels - and we pay CRT to employ people to do that anyway.

[Machpoint005]

>> we pay CRT to employ people to do that anyway.<<

 

or at least, CRT reckon there is a net benefit in employing people to do so. If it cost more than the additional income gained, I'd question whether that was a good use of funds -- but then, if it were generally known that CRT wasn't mithered, many more boaters would take the p1ss.

[churchward]

I chose the miffed option. I do think that CRT have made good inroads into the issue and 4% is a much reduced number compared to only a few years ago and it can be argued that you would need to spend to get it much lower would be very significant as it becomes a diminishing return for the effort needed to get the last few percent.

 

Sometimes percentages hide or distort the actual issue and a quick calculation shows that 4% equates to aprox 1400 boats that evade the licence. Assuming that the total boats on the system is about 35000.

 

I do agree with others my expectation is that all users of the system should pay their way and so I am still a bit miffed that some do not. However, of course if someone is unfortunate and genuinly can't pay assuming they are using the boat as their home then they deserve some help and should be able to get benefit that will cover it like folk do who need it with paying rent etc on land.

[Steilsteven]

I voted with the last one, because it's absolutely true.

 

I'm vaguely miffed that 96% of boaters pay because, if they didn't, a new ( and possibly better way ) would have to be found to make up for the short fall.

 

Keith

[b0atman]

What is the real number of boats ? those in marinas which do not need licences ,boats hidden away & boats on marina land being "worked" on

[John V]

I chose the miffed option. I do think that CRT have made good inroads into the issue and 4% is a much reduced number compared to only a few years ago and it can be argued that you would need to spend to get it much lower would be very significant as it becomes a diminishing return for the effort needed to get the last few percent.

 

Sometimes percentages hide or distort the actual issue and a quick calculation shows that 4% equates to aprox 1400 boats that evade the licence. Assuming that the total boats on the system is about 35000.

 

I do agree with others my expectation is that all users of the system should pay their way and so I am still a bit miffed that some do not. However, of course if someone is unfortunate and genuinly can't pay assuming they are using the boat as their home then they deserve

some help and should be able to get benefit that will cover it like folk do who need it with paying rent etc on land.

 

 

That I agree with wholeheartidly (and I thought if on benefits, they could but I wait to be corrected)

Edited July 21, 2014 by John V

[Thorfast]

Do check the towpath side when looking at the licences. We somehow managed to loose one of our two licences. I phoned CRT who said it was something like £20 for a new licence but as long as I display it towpath side it will be ok.

 

So do you have to keep swapping it from side you side as you cruise?

[Emerald Fox]

"Don't forget the rich are the biggest avoiders of paying when they can avoid it"

 

If you want to check up on who is taking the piss and robbing the nation blind, how about all the big companies who use tax havens (Channel Islands, Switzerland, Caribbean) to avoid paying what they really should?

 

Is it OK for people to steal from a shop if their circumstances should be taken into consideration?

 

On the other hand, checking other boats to see if they have valid licences smacks a bit of the USSR style where neighbours spying on neighbours go round to the local police station / KGB to get rewarded with a bar of chocolate.

 

Perhaps we should be concentrating more on examining politicians' expense accounts, which restaurants you have paid for them to gorge at, and why they run up huge taxi fares.

 

Could we not force prisoners to dredge the canals?

Edited July 21, 2014 by Emerald Fox

[Delta9]

 

Could we not force prisoners to dredge the canals?

No, because of the slavery abolition act of 1833.

[Guest]

"Don't forget the rich are the biggest avoiders of paying when they can avoid it"

 

If you want to check up on who is taking the piss and robbing the nation blind, how about all the big companies who use tax havens (Channel Islands, Switzerland, Caribbean) to avoid paying what they really should?

 

Is it OK for people to steal from a shop if their circumstances should be taken into consideration?

 

On the other hand, checking other boats to see if they have valid licences smacks a bit of the USSR style where neighbours spying on neighbours go round to the local police station / KGB to get rewarded with a bar of chocolate.

 

Perhaps we should be concentrating more on examining politicians' expense accounts, which restaurants you have paid for them to gorge at, and why they run up huge taxi fares.

 

Could we not force prisoners to dredge the canals?

If C&RT start a chocolate reward, or better still, beer reward, I will dob every unlicensed boat in

How many cans of Guinness per snitch?

(before I get blackballed, that was an attempt at humour)

Edited July 21, 2014 by Guest

[Psycloud]

If "vaguely miffed" is the most angry option, then I shall have to vote in the "something else" category.

 

My something else being that it is totally inexcusable, and they are in the same group of people as benefits scroungers, illegal immigrants, cyclists on pavements, and the yummy mummys who don't understand that 2 yellow lines mean no parking.

 

And before anybody happens to say so; Yes I am seriously fed up with the amount of people in this country who think the rules don't apply to them.

However, a sizeable chunk of the economy is reliant on people not sticking to the "rules". Anyone who works in a enforcement type role, or a care industry for people with "issues" willl be salary dependant on the fact people do things other people don't approve of

[Guest]

However, a sizeable chunk of the economy is reliant on people not sticking to the "rules". Anyone who works in a enforcement type role, or a care industry for people with "issues" willl be salary dependant on the fact people do things other people don't approve of

Somehow reminds me of the police officer who parked the company van on double yellows recently outside of our local bank, whilst using the cash machine

[bassplayer]

No, because of the slavery abolition act of 1833.

I think the idea of getting prisoners to dredge canals is a great idea too. I'm sure many prisoners would be happier doing this...the law really is an ass sometimes...

[Delta9]

I think the idea of getting prisoners to dredge canals is a great idea too. I'm sure many prisoners would be happier doing this...the law really is an ass sometimes...

 

Yes, those pesky anti-slavery laws getting in the way of all our free labour...I wouldn't expect any less of this forum.

[KevMc]

 

Yes, those pesky anti-slavery laws getting in the way of all our free labour...I wouldn't expect any less of this forum.

 

It wouldn't necessarily be slavery - it could be to earn money to pay for their rent, food and perks