Should CRT stop transferring licences.

[Smelly]

It will take an act of parliament by thé look of thé 95 act as a "relevant consent" is issued "in respect of à vessel" rather than to an individual.

 

There night be some wiggle room in thé 71 act but i can't be arsed with thé pdf on my phone.

Edited October 8, 2014 by Smelly

[matty40s]

It will take an act of parliament by thé look of thé 95 act as a "relevant consent" is issued "in respect of à vessel" rather than to an individual.

 

There night be some wiggle room in thé 71 act but i can't be arsed with thé pdf on my phone.

I agree Smelly, but chnge of ownership of vessel should be under immediate CRT scrutiny, if not licence validity.

[Delta9]

What about boats that are sold out of the water or those in marinas that don't require a licence ?

[Tuscan]

Seems a simple practical idea - I'm all for it.

[alan_fincher]

It will take an act of parliament by thé look of thé 95 act as a "relevant consent" is issued "in respect of à vessel" rather than to an individual.

 

There night be some wiggle room in thé 71 act but i can't be arsed with thé pdf on my phone.

 

Why on earth am i getting an acute accent on the "e" of every time you use the word "the". Auto-correct acting in French, possibly?

[Smelly]

I agree Smelly, but chnge of ownership of vessel should be under immediate CRT scrutiny, if not licence validity.

I agree, presumably the new owner would become the "applicant" but the licence is for a fixed period whoever the owner might become. I do think that this would require legislation to bring about. A workable solution currently is the increased enforcement spot light that they're trialling with new owners.

 

Perhaps, if the predicted coalition government comes about next time round the user groups could lobby for an amendment of the 95 and 71 acts to make a licence a personal creature, it would be easy to sneak in during theinevitable quiet parliamentary time at the end of the next term.

Why on earth am i getting an acute accent on the "e" of every time you use the word "the". Auto-correct acting in French, possibly?

yep. I've just sussed how to fixe it too

[David Mack]

Mattys suggestions chime with ideas which had been forming in my mind.

 

I think all that is needed is a change to the Terms and Conditions to the effect that the licence is only valid for the person to whom it was issued and is not transferable. This information to be printed in large letters on the paper licence (if it continues to exist) as an added warning to buyers if the licence remains with the boat. The seller can claim back the value of the unexpired portion of the licence by returning the paper licence with a copy of the sale memorandum or other suitable evidence of transfer of ownership. (The CRT website to give a simple example sale memorandum for use in private sales). If the seller doesn't claim back the unexpired portion of the licence that's his loss (and CRT's gain). Does not require any involvement from a broker, Apolloduck etc.

 

All buyers must apply for a new

Licence within one month of purchase or risk action for being unlicenced, the licence then being backdated to the date of acquisition. Those with a home mooring to provide evidence of that mooring e.g. copy of a mooring contract or a CRT reference number in the case of a CRT mooring. First time applicants for a licence declaring no home mooring will be required to attend their local CRT office for an interview in order that they can explain how they will comply with the CC guidelines. If they cannot "satisfy the Board" they will be required to take a home mooring or face enforcement action. These requirements would be waived where the applicant has held a no-home-mooring licence within the last two years (to cover the case of a CCer who changes boat).

 

By catching all new boaters at the start rather than several months in this should help to ensure that boaters (home moorers and CCers) know what their obligations are and reduce the numbers trying to wing it. CRT could facilitate the process by having a prominent page on the Boating section of their website on "How to Buy or Sell a Boat" and providing sample documents such as Sale Memorandum, Confirmation of Home Mooring form etc. CRT to work with boatyards, brokers, mooring providers etc. to encourage them to support buyers and sellers through the process.

 

No doubt there will be howls of protest in some quarters, but I don't think any of this is particularly difficult, it is doable within the current legal framework, and can be introduced even if some amongst the industry players out there are not fully involved.

 

So why not do it?

[Guest]

matty40s, on 08 Oct 2014 - 10:55 PM, said:

.

The boat is unlicenced, once it exits their marina entrance.

 

Actually that raises an interesting issue that I hadn't really considered, are you saying a boat does not have to be licenced if it is on brokerage? If so I wasn't aware of that, and what happens if the broker brokers from the canal side rather than a marina, does that make a difference?

[Alf Roberts]

 

No doubt there will be howls of protest in some quarters, but I don't think any of this is particularly difficult, it is doable within the current legal framework, and can be introduced even if some amongst the industry players out there are not fully involved.

 

So why not do it?

Two pages of blather and ignoring one small but important fact.

 

It's the boat that has the license not the person. That's the law.

 

Sorry.

[matty40s]

Two pages of blather and ignoring one small but important fact.

It's the boat that has the license not the person. That's the law.

Sorry.

Morning Chris.

[Alf Roberts]

Morning Chris.

Morning Gwendoline.

 

Sorry to piss on your parade.

[starman]

 

Actually that raises an interesting issue that I hadn't really considered, are you saying a boat does not have to be licenced if it is on brokerage? If so I wasn't aware of that, and what happens if the broker brokers from the canal side rather than a marina, does that make a difference?

AFAIK unless the marina is on a private arm or basin a boat in the water needs a licence and also when in a boatyard awaiting work or having work done.

[matty40s]

Actually that raises an interesting issue that I hadn't really considered, are you saying a boat does not have to be licenced if it is on brokerage? If so I wasn't aware of that, and what happens if the broker brokers from the canal side rather than a marina, does that make a difference?

That example was specific to Whitton where no licence is needed. Brokerages utilise trade plate licences where licencing is required.

Alf! States that the boat has the licence, I didn't state otherwise in my OP, my point is that the licence should be terminated and then renewed by new owner at point of sale to give CRT a better level of awareness and control.

[Alf Roberts]

You are suggesting CRT should bend the law to suit a desired outcome?

[Guest]

Morning Chris.

Really?

 

Interesting if true.

[Alan de Enfield]

A question -

So as a private seller, I've had my boat up for sale for sale for some months, at last a buyer comes along, with a bag of cash and wants my boat.

 

I now say that he has got to start filling forms in, explaining why he wants it and what he plans to do with it, and that he agrees to licence it within one month - he refuses, saying it is non of my business (with which I agree) and if I want him to do that I can forget the sale there are plenty more boats out there.

 

What do I do ?

 

1) Lose the sale ?

2) Don't bother with the forms ?

 

It is not the sellers responsibility to determine the buyer's planned use of the boat.

[Sabcat]

 

Actually that raises an interesting issue that I hadn't really considered, are you saying a boat does not have to be licenced if it is on brokerage? If so I wasn't aware of that, and what happens if the broker brokers from the canal side rather than a marina, does that make a difference?

 

Brokers, builders, mechanics etc. can already get trade plates, I'm don't know if they have to be bought for each boat or whether they can simply blanket cover boats they're responsible for. I'm pretty sure the details will be on CaRT's site.

[mayalld]

 

Brokers, builders, mechanics etc. can already get trade plates, I'm don't know if they have to be bought for each boat or whether they can simply blanket cover boats they're responsible for. I'm pretty sure the details will be on CaRT's site.

 

Trade plates are moveable.

 

Provided the trader has 6 trade plates, they can have 6 boats afloat.

[b0atman]

If I buy a car then I have to sort out a licence, so what is the problem ?

You very rarely get someone walk up and buy a boat with immediate take over.

The onus is on buyer to sort licence maybe all the seller has to do is pass an application form to purchaser .

An excellent idea matt

[john6767]

A question -

So as a private seller, I've had my boat up for sale for sale for some months, at last a buyer comes along, with a bag of cash and wants my boat.

 

I now say that he has got to start filling forms in, explaining why he wants it and what he plans to do with it, and that he agrees to licence it within one month - he refuses, saying it is non of my business (with which I agree) and if I want him to do that I can forget the sale there are plenty more boats out there.

 

What do I do ?

 

1) Lose the sale ?

2) Don't bother with the forms ?

 

It is not the sellers responsibility to determine the buyer's planned use of the boat.

 

I don't see that as a seller what the prospective owner is going to do with the boat is any of your business, but it is most certainly CRT's business. Whatever process you have for transfer of ownership would apply to all boats irrespective of where they were bought from, so I don't think the point of them going elsewhere is relevant.

 

What I take from Matty's suggestion is that there needs to be a more robust transfer of ownership mechanism, that is really the key point here isn't it? Potentially that could include that the boat licence was not transferable, but I don't see that being integral to having a good transfer of ownership process, although of course that is now the case for cars, so maybe it is a good model. As part of the transfer of ownership process the new purchaser needs to satisfy CRT that their proposed usage of the boat is acceptable, that is what is not always happening here, where they just take the boat away using the current licence, and at some point in the future they may of may not notify CRT that they have bought the boat.

 

Of course the seller should be notifying CRT that the have sold the boat anyway, and looking at the form for that it seems to have all the relevant info such as the new owners details and if the licence was transferred. So is the main thing missing that CRT are not following that change of ownership up with the new owner?

[mayalld]

I look forward to posts from Nigel Moore, Tony Dunkerly, Sir Nibble, CarlT and other knowledgeable people, and everyone else , Dave Mayall, don't bore us too much.

 

go on then, shoot me down.

 

I shall TRY not to bore you!

 

There are, I suppose, four questions to answer;

 

1) Does this achieve something in terms of compliance?

2) Are there unintended consequences for boaters?

3) Would it impact one way or another on CRT income?

4) Can it be achieved within the current legislative framework?

 

I will consider each in isolation.

 

1) I would tend to agree that this must be good for compliance, as any new boater is immediately in contact with CRT.

2) Clearly there is the potential double licencing issue (in the transfer month, both owners of a boat sold privately will licence it), and it will mean that a new boater will have increased expenses because they will need to relicence rather than buying half a years licence from the seller.

3) Clearly, CRT will get some extra income from double licencing, but they will lose income where boats go onto brokerage and as they can't sell the licence on, they will sit on trade plates, which means less income.

4) Business licences are already sold in this way, and have not been challenged. Clearly the law gives no right to revoke a licence due to a change of ownership, but I would suggest that the law is silent as to whether a licence "in respect of the vessel" can or cannot be personal to the owner. It is arguable.

 

If a licence is issued "to John Smith in respect of the vessel Kingfisher" then should John Smith cease to be the owner, the licence isn't "revoked", it simply ceases to have any effect.

 

On balance, I think that this may well be the way to go.

[Sabcat]

Some kind of guidance about maintenance of boats and the costs involved being given to potential new owners would be useful. To my mind, going from the places maps that were published, it wouldn't be too hard to be compliant with the letter of the law (I've no idea what the spirit is, I think that's just something people say to be able to sling labels at people they don't like, you're compliant or you're not, could be wrong of course but hey ho) but that's only half the story of living in a metal box that floats in a ditch. If you haven't got a decent combination of skills and cash then boating, especially living aboard could be a miserable experience regardless of compliance with any rules. It's not the cheap escape from the housing crisis some think it is.

[mark99]

It's not the cheap escape from the housing crisis some think it is.

 

On that I agree with you. It can be a poverty trap.

[David Mack]

A question -

So as a private seller, I've had my boat up for sale for sale for some months, at last a buyer comes along, with a bag of cash and wants my boat.

 

I now say that he has got to start filling forms in, explaining why he wants it and what he plans to do with it, and that he agrees to licence it within one month - he refuses, saying it is non of my business (with which I agree) and if I want him to do that I can forget the sale there are plenty more boats out there.

 

What do I do ?

 

1) Lose the sale ?

2) Don't bother with the forms ?

 

It is not the sellers responsibility to determine the buyer's planned use of the boat.

 

No. In my book you just take the money from him. You keep the paper licence and send it off for a refund (or let CRT keep the money). Better if you can get him to sign some sort of change-of-owner form, as that will give you evidence that any subsequent problems with the boat are not down to you. Much the same as when you sell a car.

 

After that, the rest is between the buyer and CRT. He will have to do that whether he buys your boat or anybody else's, so it makes no difference to him.

[David Mack]

Two pages of blather and ignoring one small but important fact.

 

It's the boat that has the license not the person. That's the law.

 

Sorry.

 

But there's nothing I can see in Section 17 of the 1995 Act that determines the duration of a licence. I can't see what's wrong with changing the T&Cs to say that the period covered by the licence will end at the sooner of:

 

the end of the period paid for; and

the date on which the applicant sells the boat,

 

with the proviso that in the latter case a refund of the balance of the period paid for can be claimed back.

 

Clearly the law gives no right to revoke a licence due to a change of ownership, but I would suggest that the law is silent as to whether a licence "in respect of the vessel" can or cannot be personal to the owner. It is arguable.

 

If a licence is issued "to John Smith in respect of the vessel Kingfisher" then should John Smith cease to be the owner, the licence isn't "revoked", it simply ceases to have any effect.

 

Agreed.

Edited October 9, 2014 by David Mack