Enforcement- consistency of

[Ricco1]

I've been made aware that quite recently more than a few boats in my area (upper Macc- Peak Forest) have received letters stating that their movements do not fall in line with the regulations. Some other boats, which in some cases have moved little or not at all, for months, have been spared these letters. You do wonder why... Having thought it through my best guess is that the boats in question have advised CRT of personal circumstances that prevent them moving. Engine problems perhaps, sickness, sick relatives are just guesses.

 

Does anyone know how CRT operate the above? Do they give a concession for a period or do those stating personal problems go off the radar indefinitely?

[b0atman]

That's whats wrong with the CRT enforcement not consistent and not publicised enough.

[furnessvale]

I've been made aware that quite recently more than a few boats in my area (upper Macc- Peak Forest) have received letters stating that their movements do not fall in line with the regulations. Some other boats, which in some cases have moved little or not at all, for months, have been spared these letters. You do wonder why... Having thought it through my best guess is that the boats in question have advised CRT of personal circumstances that prevent them moving. Engine problems perhaps, sickness, sick relatives are just guesses.

 

Does anyone know how CRT operate the above? Do they give a concession for a period or do those stating personal problems go off the radar indefinitely?

If you have a good story you can get 20+ years out of it.

 

I know one person not too far away who has managed it.

 

George ex nb Alton retired

[Ricco1]

If you have a good story you can get 20+ years out of it.

 

I know one person not too far away who has managed it.

 

George ex nb Alton retired

 

I rather thought that might be the case!

[onionbargee]

In my experience enforcement have purges, prosecute a few people without mercy, then dissapear for months or years.

[madcat]

Ricco1 I wouldn't worry about it, I'd rather they spent their funds on fixing broken things and dredging the system . Anybody who has a licence is making a contribution, all that's really needed is a few folk being moved on a bit .

Edited January 25, 2015 by madcat

[bigste]

Maybe they have a roving winter mooring.

[GoodGurl]

Maybe they have a roving winter mooring.

the 4 boats that have been dumped near me since october haven't (i have asked them) none have engine problems or ill/sick people on them either.. so yes consistency is the key.

[Alan de Enfield]

Lifted directly from Narrowboatworld -

 

Pity continuous cruiser boater Andy Wingfield who was unlucky enough to break his ankle whilst moored on the Nottingham Canal in the city, then had the bad luck to get collared by that enforcement officer.

"Move on!" Were his instructions. "I have a broken ankle, I'm on my own and can't climb the ladders in the locks, told Andy. "Move on!" Repeated he. And though Andy was getting used to people offering to shop for him and holding doors whilst he hobbled about, the enforcement officer would have none of it, and wanted him gone off his patch, never mind that he was unable to climb ladders or push gates, which Andy rightly claims are hard enough without being crippled.

Ahh, but what was that in narrowboatworld about the enforcement people being told to be more considerate to those boaters with injuries or illnesses...? Obviously more disinformation.

 

Mind you - when I had a broken ankle I was in plaster for 6 weeks. Mr Wingfield appears to have got away without getting 'plastered'.

[Paul C]

my best guess is ..............

 

That's part of the issue though, you simply don't know the reasons behind the apparent inconsistency in enforcement, or indeed even if there is such an inconsistency. And quite rightly too, given these relate to people's personal circumstances and there is a right of privacy.

[Alan Saunders]

I think we might consider how we, were we CRT enforcement officers (God forbid), might execute our duties. Some will enforce the letter of the law rules/guidance, others will have a more reasonable view and may even have the courage to knock on the roof and speak to a recalcitrant boater or call them on their mobile telephone.

 

There is an escalation process; a duplicated notice saying "Please move on or return to your mooring", after a few of these a letter threatening legal action (CC1 that effectively places the boat 'on probation'?) then further escalation.

 

A boat may get away with occasionally overstaying either because the enforcement department allowed a little leniency or because their location was not patrolled frequently. Generally, CRT enforcement give preferential treatment to those that advise them of a problem when it becomes apparent rather than making excuses after they have been caught out (like Mr Wingfield?). They will put a time limit on a disabling problem; e.g. I was given a month to repair my engine and I know of someone who had metal pins in their ankle allowed to occupy a VM for the period of their doctor's certificate.

 

A reasonable enforcement officer will take all of the circumstances into account but may be enthused to prosecute a repeat offender. Hopefully, they no longer 'move boats on' when navigation is dangerous or impossible.

 

Personally, I have no objection to boats mooring in out-of-the-way places so long as they do not obstruct the towpath or leave objectionable litter. I wish the CRT enforcement team would do more to enforce limitations on visitor moorings, water points and lock/bridge landings. BTW, a bit of dredging would enable me to reach some of these without a boarding plank.

 

OP, Ricco1, I too have been concerned that I am required to 'move on' whilst others who arrived before me seemed immune from 'enforcement' - that's the way policing works; some get caught, maybe prosecuted, and that encourages others to comply. Occasionally someone is unjustly convicted, in the past put to death, but it reinforces the power of the law; an example is made and their head will hang on Tyburn Gibbet to remind everyone to be more careful.

 

Alan

[Lady Muck]

If you've stopped getting tickets attached to your boat then it means you are further along the enforcement process. It's not possible to hang around in say, the same 800 metres of space indefinitely, certainly not round here, every boat that did so was section 8'd, CRT removed two, the others got moorings or moved further. None of these boats ever had tickets attached.

[scrumpylurcher]

There seems to be a move towards setting on more mooring wardens to supervise the visitor moorings. As per current CRT thinking, these are volunteers. It should mean visitor moorings are checked far more frequently and hopefully CRT will act on these reports. Those moored out in the countryside will be less affected, which IMHO is not such a bad thing.

As regards to boaters with health / personal/ mechanical type problems I think CRT normally are very good. It is only fair and reasonable that boaters should contact CRT and explain the situation, not wait until they are questioned.

[Emerald Fox]

As we speaketh CRT is sending 6 torpedo-ducks up the Macclesfield...

Edited January 25, 2015 by Emerald Fox

[floatsyourboat]

Perhaps while the waste of license payers money enforcement officers are up there they could send some water down to the lower peak so I can float off and move on!

What can they do anyway without taking months to get a court order, frankly if I was unable to move they would be the ones told to move on end of.

There are miles and miles of empty towpaths up in the north west so why all the drama or has someone spilt their gin up in Poynton again!

[furnessvale]

As we speaketh CRT is sending 6 torpedo-ducks up the Macclesfield...

Shallow draughted ducks I presume!

 

George ex nb Alton retired

[thunderbird]

Lifted directly from Narrowboatworld -

 

Pity continuous cruiser boater Andy Wingfield who was unlucky enough to break his ankle whilst moored on the Nottingham Canal in the city, then had the bad luck to get collared by that enforcement officer.

"Move on!" Were his instructions. "I have a broken ankle, I'm on my own and can't climb the ladders in the locks, told Andy. "Move on!" Repeated he. And though Andy was getting used to people offering to shop for him and holding doors whilst he hobbled about, the enforcement officer would have none of it, and wanted him gone off his patch, never mind that he was unable to climb ladders or push gates, which Andy rightly claims are hard enough without being crippled.

Ahh, but what was that in narrowboatworld about the enforcement people being told to be more considerate to those boaters with injuries or illnesses...? Obviously more disinformation.

 

Mind you - when I had a broken ankle I was in plaster for 6 weeks. Mr Wingfield appears to have got away without getting 'plastered'.

Strangely CaRT was required to have its arm rather firmly twisted in respect of a boater requiring a mooring with ambulance access - only complying when reminded it may be held culpable if the said boater couldn't be reached. When a dying man is forced to move then regardless of whether an injured boater is wearing a pot, or otherwise, he stands no chance when coming up against enforcement. So many on this forum are good at 'lifting' passages - how about 'lifting' the passage detailing the remit of the new Welfare Officer. It makes interesting reading, talks the talk - but will it walk the walk!!!

[MtB]

I've been made aware that quite recently more than a few boats in my area (upper Macc- Peak Forest) have received letters stating that their movements do not fall in line with the regulations. Some other boats, which in some cases have moved little or not at all, for months, have been spared these letters.

 

 

Could you expand on how you know which boats have not received letters please?

 

Many thanks.

 

MtB

[Ricco1]

 

 

Could you expand on how you know which boats have not received letters please?

 

Many thanks.

 

MtB

 

Through conversation, assuming of course that the owners are telling the truth.

[Galeomma]

When first moored in Uxbridge, I had a towpath winter mooring and my mate didn't. He got an e-mail from CRT saying he had overstayed and had to move on. I didn't which was to be expected as I had the winter mooring, but at no time was there anything put on my mates boat, it was all e-mail correspondance.

[Lady Muck]

 

 

Could you expand on how you know which boats have not received letters please?

 

Many thanks.

 

MtB

Exactly - there is this thing called data protection act. You are not gonna know, just by observing, what has happened.

I had no idea quite how much trouble two boaters I knew were in until it got to the point that their boats were section 8'd. They'd not said anything to me, but they'd both been moored in the same pound for an awful long time.

[Mrs Trackman]

What happens when a boat over stays & has lots of crt notices on it? There's been a boat on the 14 day moorings on the new main line in Birmingham every time I have been by there since last may.( Before anyone says I'm always there I am usually on foot, last time was yesterday). Someone even pulled it back and tied it to the bridge when the floating market was on in june. I assume it's been abandoned for a reason but it's still blocking one of very few 14 day moorings in the centre of Birmingham.

[Emerald Fox]

It's time for a cull - and a very big auction!

[mayalld]

I've been made aware that quite recently more than a few boats in my area (upper Macc- Peak Forest) have received letters stating that their movements do not fall in line with the regulations. Some other boats, which in some cases have moved little or not at all, for months, have been spared these letters. You do wonder why... Having thought it through my best guess is that the boats in question have advised CRT of personal circumstances that prevent them moving. Engine problems perhaps, sickness, sick relatives are just guesses.

 

Does anyone know how CRT operate the above? Do they give a concession for a period or do those stating personal problems go off the radar indefinitely?

 

Whilst I can see that those who find themselves on-radar, but can see those equally bad (or worse) not under enforcement, might be miffed, and equally that the law abiding might wish for a more fullsome approach to enforcement;

 

It is much like speeding....

 

If I get a ticket for 47 in a 40, can I object on the grounds that I saw somebody yesterday doing 6 in a 40 and he wasn't ticketted?

 

If those under enforcement are breaking the rules, then they are being dealt with as they should do. The fact that others are escaping doesn't alter their situation.

 

There is only so much that can be spent on enforcement, and unfortunately, targetted enforcement isn't going to work.

 

Let us assume that CRT can take enforcement action agains 200 boats each year. If their policy is only to go after the 200 most serious piss-takers, then that gives pretty much carte blanche to do as you please, as long as you stay out of the "really bad" zone.

 

If they go after 200 who break the rules, even if they aren't in the worst 200, the deterent effect is magnified.

[Tony Dunkley]

It's time for a cull - and a very big auction!

 

It certainly is . . . . a significant number of the Enforcement gang and the CEO would be a good start.