Jump to content

Continual cruising

Boston

By Boston
in General Boating

 Share

Featured Posts

Delta9 Experienced

Delta9

Posted
Posted

 

This is an error of judgement as the law place the onus on the boater.

 

 

MtB

I've seen that mentioned a few times, could you please link me to something that proves it? (I'm not questioning it I just want to see it for myself)

Link to comment
Share on other sites
MtB Veteran II

MtBDonate to Canal World

Posted
Posted

I've seen that mentioned a few times, could you please link me to something that proves it? (I'm not questioning it I just want to see it for myself)

 

 

British Waterways Act 1995:

 

17 ©

 

(ii)the applicant for the relevant consent satisfies the Board that the vessel to which the application relates will be used bona fide for navigation throughout the period for which the consent is valid without remaining continuously in any one place for more than 14 days or such longer period as is reasonable in the circumstances.

 

 

My emphasis. To me this reads as though the onus is on the applicant to satisfy the board, not that the board must conduct it's own enquiries in order to satisfy itself.

 

MtB

Link to comment
Share on other sites
Delta9 Experienced

Delta9

Posted
Posted (edited)

 

 

British Waterways Act 1995:

 

17 ©

 

(ii)the applicant for the relevant consent satisfies the Board that the vessel to which the application relates will be used bona fide for navigation throughout the period for which the consent is valid without remaining continuously in any one place for more than 14 days or such longer period as is reasonable in the circumstances.

 

 

My emphasis. To me this reads as though the onus is on the applicant to satisfy the board, not that the board must conduct it's own enquiries in order to satisfy itself.

 

MtB

Thanks

 

ETA: I'm not sure I interpret it the same way you do, the word "will" not "has" seems to make a difference. "the applicant for the relevant consent satisfies the Board that the vessel to which the application relates will be used bona fide for navigation

Edited by Delta9
Link to comment
Share on other sites
Alan de Enfield Veteran II

Alan de Enfield

Posted
Posted

I've seen that mentioned a few times, could you please link me to something that proves it? (I'm not questioning it I just want to see it for myself)

 

From C&RT T&Cs

 

Boater’s Responsibility

The law requires the boater to satisfy the Trust that the bona fide navigation requirement is and will be met.

It is not for the Trust to prove that the requirement has not been met. This is best done by keeping a cruising

log, though this is not a compulsory requirement. If however, the Trust has a clear impression that there has

been limited movement insufficient to meet the legal requirements, it can ask for more information to be

satisfied in accordance with the law. Failure or inability to provide that information may result in further action

being taken, but only after fair warning

 

7

.

Link to comment
Share on other sites
Alan de Enfield Veteran II

Alan de Enfield

Posted
Posted

So you are basically guilty until you prove (or satisfy those concerned) that you are innocent? That doesn't seem right.

 

Yes - that seems to be pretty much the way C&RT is operating.

 

If any questions are raised :

 

You need to satisfy them you are meeting the CC conditions (Boston)

You need to satisfy them that your home moring is 'real' (Tony Dunkerly)

You need to satisfy them you are not overstaying (Cotswoldman)

You need to satisfy them your mooring does not require the boat to be licenced (Nigel Moore)

 

In all cases - guilty until YOU prove your innocence

Link to comment
Share on other sites
MtB Veteran II

MtBDonate to Canal World

Posted
Posted (edited)

 

Yes - that seems to be pretty much the way C&RT is operating.

 

If any questions are raised :

 

You need to satisfy them you are meeting the CC conditions (Boston)

You need to satisfy them that your home moring is 'real' (Tony Dunkerly)

You need to satisfy them you are not overstaying (Cotswoldman)

You need to satisfy them your mooring does not require the boat to be licenced (Nigel Moore)

 

In all cases - guilty until YOU prove your innocence

 

 

No, not guilty as in the emotive sense of being found guilty in a court of law of committing a crime. Unless and until you satisfy the board etc etc you simply don't qualify to hold a boat licence.

 

In a similar way, you can't get a driving license unless you prove to the govt you've passed your driving test. No-one sees this as a 'guilty until proved innocent' issue do they?

 

MtB

Edited by Mike the Boilerman
Link to comment
Share on other sites
mark99 Veteran II

mark99

Posted
Posted (edited)

 

 

No, not guilty as in the emotive sense of being found guilty in a court of law of committing a crime. Unless and until you satisfy the board etc etc you simply don't qualify to hold a boat licence.

 

In a similar way, you can't get a driving license unless you prove to the govt you've passed your driving test. No-one sees this as a 'guilty until proved innocent' issue do they?

 

MtB

 

Indeed - paying to join and then moaning about the rules. Here-in is a small window into a deeply held attitude problem. "It's my right".

 

No it's not - you exchange money for a privilidge. If you don't like it don't join and keep ya money.

Edited by mark99
Link to comment
Share on other sites
Alan de Enfield Veteran II

Alan de Enfield

Posted
Posted

 

 

In a similar way, you can't get a driving license unless you prove to the govt you've passed your driving test. No-one sees this as a 'guilty until proved innocent' issue do they?

 

MtB

 

With a boat licence, it is granted to you (if you met the relevant criteria), and then 'taken away' if you have commited (in the eyes of C&RT) a 'crime', without any evidence being shown - it is your responsibilty to show evidence that you have not commited the crime.

 

Your driving licence is issued to you (if you meet the relevant criteria) You are accused of commiting a crime (speeding at 120mph) but your licence is not taken away from you until the 'authorities' have provided evidence that you commited the crime.

 

It is very hard to prove you have not done something

  • Greenie 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites
John V Veteran

John V

Posted
Posted

It would be interesting to know exactly what the actual number of overstayers is. I really can't see that it's as big a problem as it's made out to be.

To my mind a much bigger problem is the backlog of essential maintenance.

 

Regards kris

 

according to Cotswoldman's post (another thread?) C&RT reckoned about 2,000 a few years ago.......that number of mooring fees would pay for a heck of a lot of maintenance!

Link to comment
Share on other sites
Delta9 Experienced

Delta9

Posted
Posted

 

Indeed - paying to join and then moaning about the rules. Here-in is a small window into a deeply held attitude problem. "It's my right".

 

No it's not - you exchange money for a privilidge. If you don't like it don't join and keep ya money.

It's not that it is a right, I think people just want to be left alone to live their lives peacefully. If they are complying with the rules why should they have to keep proving that? It sounds like a stupid rule.

 

"if you don't like it don't join" is like "if you don't like it move", it is a logical fallacy used to dismiss the argument without explanation. Why should people not question the rules if they seem unfair?

 

according to Cotswoldman's post (another thread?) C&RT reckoned about 2,000 a few years ago.......that number of mooring fees would pay for a heck of a lot of maintenance!

If they spent what they already get less wastefully they wouldn't need more.

Link to comment
Share on other sites
John V Veteran

John V

Posted
Posted

It's not that it is a right, I think people just want to be left alone to live their lives peacefully. If they are complying with the rules why should they have to keep proving that? It sounds like a stupid rule.

 

"if you don't like it don't join" is like "if you don't like it move", it is a logical fallacy used to dismiss the argument without explanation. Why should people not question the rules if they seem unfair?

If they spent what they already get less wastefully they wouldn't need more.

 

Hmmmmm! you obviously don't run a business and have to deal with the VAT man

Link to comment
Share on other sites
cotswoldsman Veteran II

cotswoldsman

Posted
Posted

 

according to Cotswoldman's post (another thread?) C&RT reckoned about 2,000 a few years ago.......that number of mooring fees would pay for a heck of a lot of maintenance!

I did not say I agree with that figure but more importantly that was not for overstayers it was for boats that move less than 10 miles a year don't remember anyone saying they stayed more than 14 days and if memory serves me right it was a 10 mile area so they might well be moving 100 miles a year but not leaving that small are. Just for the sake of clarity even I with my sympathetic mind would tell a boat just travelling in that small area they need to get real
Link to comment
Share on other sites
Alan de Enfield Veteran II

Alan de Enfield

Posted
Posted (edited)
Delta9, on 06 Oct 2014 - 8:58 PM, said:Delta9, on 06 Oct 2014 - 8:58 PM, said:

 

"if you don't like it don't join" is like "if you don't like it move", it is a logical fallacy used to dismiss the argument without explanation. Why should people not question the rules if they seem unfair?

 

 

When you apply for, (or renew) your licence to sign to say "I have read and agree with the T&Cs" - if you dont agee with them dont sign to say you do, if you do sign to say you accept them - dont complain about them later.

 

Edit to add - I don't have a problem with C&RT's rules - only when they try and introduce new ones that I have not 'signed up to', make new interpretations of 'old' rules, or try and insert new laws into the previous Waterways Acts

Edited by Alan de Enfield
Link to comment
Share on other sites
Delta9 Experienced

Delta9

Posted
Posted

 

When you apply for, (or renew) your licence to sign to say "I have read and agree with the T&Cs" - if you dont agee with them dont sign to say you do, if you do sign to say you accept them - dont complain about them later.

I disagree, because CRT have a monopoly on the license.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!

Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.

Sign In Now
 Share
Go to topic listing

  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    • No registered users viewing this page.
×
×
  • Create New...

Important Information

We have placed cookies on your device to help make this website better. You can adjust your cookie settings, otherwise we'll assume you're okay to continue.