Canal and River Trust changes in Licence Terms and conditions

[Alan de Enfield]

jenlyn, on 31 Jan 2015 - 11:23 AM, said:

Yes, indeed it is. However, if a minority majority would stop taking the pee in the first place, by hovering in small areas and basically challenging the somewhat fluffy legislation, we would not be where we are.

Those who choose very small cruising patterns to justify their own needs will now have to look at changing that pattern, and I suspect all associations are in favour of that.

So I wouldn't get to excited about someone saving your bacon, I'm afraid that's down to you and your choice.

I sometimes think you, along with a few others misinterpret what associations are actually for.

 

If C&RTs headline figures are correct then some 66% of CCers travel less than 20km (12 miles) per year, that means less than 2000 actually travel over 20km (12 miles) per year.

 

A new regime of enforcement is to be introduced and it wil be fully funded :-

 

DY described a provisional revised enforcement regime for CC-ers. It was agreed that the proposals would be kept confidential until they had been discussed with the Trust’s Board and a final proposal produced, if agreed

Points clarified were:

• the current information relating to boaters without a home mooring are:

 

• MT asked if CRT had the will and capability to carry out any change to the enforcement regime. RP and DY confirmed that they had subject to the Trust’s board approval.

 

All attendees were broadly in agreement with these proposals.

Edited January 31, 2015 by Alan de Enfield

[bassplayer]

No, not at all. The trust are very selective when issuing notes. Choosing carefully what they wish people to hear, or see.

I can fully understand your comment though, given you were not in attendance, and can therefore only make assumptions.

Still, the main thing is of course, some make an effort to attend such things, and actively get involved, rather than sit at a keyboard and generally sound off.

Out of curiosity is there any representation from the NBTA at these meetings? I agree it's up to us to get actively involved BTW.

[jenlyn]

Out of curiosity is there any representation from the NBTA at these meetings? I agree it's up to us to get actively involved BTW.

No, not at the moment.

Also, I did on the morning of the meeting recieve apologies from Jim Owen from rboa who could not attend.He had sent it to my other phone though, which I did not have on me.

Edited January 31, 2015 by jenlyn

[Henhouse]

Yes, indeed it is. However, if a minority would stop taking the pee in the first place, by hovering in small areas and basically challenging the somewhat fluffy legislation, we would not be where we are.

Those who choose very small cruising patterns to justify their own needs will now have to look at changing that pattern, and I suspect all associations are in favour of that.

 

 

Very well put.

 

I would add that it is this minority that have b*gg*r*d it up for those who adhered to the rules, and brought about the need for action.

 

 

 

 

edit to correct bad punctuation

Edited January 31, 2015 by Henhouse

[Alan de Enfield]

 

Very well put.

 

I would add that it is this minority that have b*gg*r*d it up for those who adhered to the rules, and brought about the need for action.

 

 

 

 

edit to correct bad punctuation

 

If we accept that travelling less than 12 miles per year is "extracting the urine" then C&RTs figure show, in fact, it is the majority (2/3rds) b*gg*e*r*ng it up for the minority (1/3rd) and not the other way around.

[Timleech]

If we accept that travelling less than 12 miles per year is "extracting the urine" then C&RTs figure show, in fact, it is the majority (2/3rds) b*gg*e*r*ng it up for the minority (1/3rd) and not the other way around.

Majority of 'CCers', maybe, but not majority of licence holders and it looks as though these changes may affect all of us.

 

Tim

[jenlyn]

Majority of 'CCers', maybe

Not correct.

Cc'ers tend to move, where as some licence holders tend not to.

[Timleech]

Not correct.

Cc'ers tend to move, where as some licence holders tend not to.

I deliberately put the term in parenthesis, for that reason.

 

Tim

Edited January 31, 2015 by Timleech

[madcat]

I'm disappointed that NBTA weren't at the meeting , all points of view need a proper airing not just a selected few. A charity should operate to the highest ethical standards and need to be held to account.

 

It's well known that I have a home mooring on private water and currently live in a house but I have great concern about boaters whose only home is their boat. I do not wish to see the canals become a playground for the rich and the diversity that gives them their charm swept away.

 

I look to the canals for a peaceful slow holiday and excessive mooring restrictions and heavy handed enforcement will ruin that for me . It's not in my name that these policies are undertaken and I'm up for resisting the worst and most pointless of the new "rules" .

It's such a small number of people whose cruising pattern is less than perfect and it would be far better to work with them to solve the issues and only resort to legal action as a very last resort.

 

I think CRT need to take a step back and disassociate themselves from the envy and spite merchants and then work with all groups to find a solution. Generally most people will happily obey simple fair rules.

 

I'm not happy to be subject to a recording system that's not fit for purpose and seems very open to abuse.

 

We need more visitor moorings not more rules.

[jenlyn]

I'm disappointed that NBTA weren't at the meeting , all points of view need a proper airing not just a selected few. A charity should operate to the highest ethical standards and need to be held to account.

It's well known that I have a home mooring on private water and currently live in a house but I have great concern about boaters whose only home is their boat. I do not wish to see the canals become a playground for the rich and the diversity that gives them their charm swept away.

I look to the canals for a peaceful slow holiday and excessive mooring restrictions and heavy handed enforcement will ruin that for me . It's not in my name that these policies are undertaken and I'm up for resisting the worst and most pointless of the new "rules" .

It's such a small number of people whose cruising pattern is less than perfect and it would be far better to work with them to solve the issues and only resort to legal action as a very last resort.

I think CRT need to take a step back and disassociate themselves from the envy and spite merchants and then work with all groups to find a solution. Generally most people will happily obey simple fair rules.

I'm not happy to be subject to a recording system that's not fit for purpose and seems very open to abuse.

We need more visitor moorings not more rules.

Too late. CRT never go back.

[Alan de Enfield]

Majority of 'CCers', maybe, but not majority of licence holders and it looks as though these changes may affect all of us.

 

Tim

 

At this stage C&RT are talking about a :-

 

".....revised enforcement regime for CC-ers."

[jenlyn]

I deliberately put the term in parenthesis, for that reason.Tim

You didn't convince me :-)

[kris88]

 

At this stage C&RT are talking about a :-

 

".....revised enforcement regime for CC-ers."

I think this kind of thinking ( it doesn't effect me I don't have to worry) is dangerous. Unless the majority of boaters wake up and realise this lifestyle we all enjoy is underthreat. Living on the water and enjoying the freedoms we do, will become history.

Regards kris

[mrsmelly]

Excuse my ignorance here, if indeed it is.

 

Hasn't the 14-day rule always applied, to any narrowboat, except to one that is on it's own mooring at the time?

Hi

 

Yes 14 days has applied for a long time. I still fail to see what the problems are. A bone fide ccer travels the system from town to town, canal to canal etc I have always thought that was what is meant in the many years I have continuously cruised. When I dont cc for any period of time as now for instance then I get a home mooring, its the way it is, I was told this in 1989 on my first boat as a liveaboard and thats what I do. I fail to see any problems with CART and I never had any problems with BW or before them BWB. Boating has never been a cheap option to housing it costs money to comply with the very few easy to understand rules.

Why have I never had any form of notice or section 8 stuck to my boat? I simply pay for a mooring when working or travel the SYSTEM not 400yds between two bridges.

Please stop all the scaremongering folks, it has gone on for years though and always for no reason.

There are many on this forum who have lived aboard longer than me but the perceived problems mostly appear to be voiced by newbies with ten years or less boating experience.

 

Tim

[Jerra]

Hi

 

Yes 14 days has applied for a long time. I still fail to see what the problems are. A bone fide ccer travels the system from town to town, canal to canal etc I have always thought that was what is meant in the many years I have continuously cruised. When I dont cc for any period of time as now for instance then I get a home mooring, its the way it is, I was told this in 1989 on my first boat as a liveaboard and thats what I do. I fail to see any problems with CART and I never had any problems with BW or before them BWB. Boating has never been a cheap option to housing it costs money to comply with the very few easy to understand rules.

Why have I never had any form of notice or section 8 stuck to my boat? I simply pay for a mooring when working or travel the SYSTEM not 400yds between two bridges.

Please stop all the scaremongering folks, it has gone on for years though and always for no reason.

There are many on this forum who have lived aboard longer than me but the perceived problems mostly appear to be voiced by newbies with ten years or less boating experience.

 

Tim

I am glad you posted that. I have read the document twice and I am still trying to find the parts everyone finds so threatening.

[alan_fincher]

Was NABO's rep Mark Tizard the only one to speak (with valid points that made it into the minutes), the other reps just sitting there and occasionally nodding (and the RBOA reps sitting at home instead)?

As has been said, in my experience, what does, and does not end up in CRT meeting notes, (they steadfastly refuse to call them "minutes" in many cases), can be highly selective.

 

I'm not involved in these meetings, but in others I am involved in, it can be an almighty struggle to get a meeting note to actually reflect the input by someone who has opposed an idea. In some cases, after several attempts at getting them changed, meeting notes still fail to record accurately what I objected to or why. (I realise some would say that at this point you should withdraw from such meetings, but in my view if you do that, it just further opens the prospect of things getting passed as "a good idea", with nobody trying to put an alternate view).

 

A further complication that it seems has recently affected these "joint association" meetings with CRT is that there is clearly not agreement between the representatives of the associations involved. This has resulted in NABO, (for example) covering the main meeting notes with its own further statements about its position on some of the issues. It seems that if you have IWA, AWCC, NABO, (sometimes!) RBOA and ACC in the same meeting there oftern will not be consensus. It is not hard to imagine how much harder it would be to reach joint agreements if NBTA were also involved!

[mrsmelly]

I am glad you posted that. I have read the document twice and I am still trying to find the parts everyone finds so threatening.

Hi

 

Yes thanks. But I am awaiting the incoming from those that try to find loopholes as a way to not paying. It is the same with everything, those that dont tax their cars etc but expect everyone else to. I see many people over the years who come to my way of life as a liveaboard for one reason only in that they mistakenly think its a cheap housing option which it most certainly aint.

 

Tim

[Sabcat]

It would seem to me that CRT need to be knocked back into their box.

 

Anyone with a home mooring who bridge hops - perfectly legally according to the 1995 act - is likely to end up on the wrong end of enforcement at some point if these T&Cs are acted on. Getting some cash or pledges of cash together through an interested organisation for their defence would seem to be a good idea. I'll stump £200 to it.

[alan_fincher]

No, not at all. The trust are very selective when issuing notes. Choosing carefully what they wish people to hear, or see.

I can fully understand your comment though, given you were not in attendance, and can therefore only make assumptions.

Still, the main thing is of course, some make an effort to attend such things, and actively get involved, rather than sit at a keyboard and generally sound off.

However one thing that has now occurred, of course, is that such issues are once again largely discussed in meetings led by "the associations".

 

I can of course see why CRT prefers this, as on the face of it those they are dealing with then represent a "constituency", so if CRT agree something in this way, they get a comfort feel that a sizable number of boat owners are being spoken for.

 

But must of the associations are specialist to an individual small subset, (residential boaters or CC-ers), or not really specifically a "boating" organisation (IWA). Realistically the average non residential "leisure boater" with a home mooring, (the vast majority of us, of course), has only the option of one "general boater" focussed organisation, (NABO).

 

I know you are unhappy about "independent" people representing boaters rights, for example through NAG or boating sub-groups.

 

So if you are going to suggest that people get of their backsides, and engage CRT, rather than just posting on the Internet, how would you suggest that anybody who doesn't feel they naturally fit into any of the associations goes about having such involvement?

[Timleech]

You didn't convince me :-)

Convince you of what?

 

 

Tim

[madcat]

So what is so bad about trying to live simply and keep costs down , having all the latest power hungry gadgets and paying the cost of running them doesn't make you a better person. Living on a boat is harder work than living in a house , you don't last long unless you enjoy it .

As a liveaboard in the 80 s I had a simple but happy existence . No electricity or gas just Parrafin lamps and Primus stoves and a battery wireless as my little luxury . I was fitter and happier than I am now .

[mrsmelly]

.

 

So if you are going to suggest that people get of their backsides, and engage CRT, rather than just posting on the Internet, how would you suggest that anybody who doesn't feel they naturally fit into any of the associations goes about having such involvement?

 

I agree with this. I dont join clubs, I have never felt the need or have the inclination. NABO RBOA etc etc etc the list id flippin endless.

 

Tim

[frangar]

Hi

 

Yes 14 days has applied for a long time. I still fail to see what the problems are. A bone fide ccer travels the system from town to town, canal to canal etc I have always thought that was what is meant in the many years I have continuously cruised. When I dont cc for any period of time as now for instance then I get a home mooring, its the way it is, I was told this in 1989 on my first boat as a liveaboard and thats what I do. I fail to see any problems with CART and I never had any problems with BW or before them BWB. Boating has never been a cheap option to housing it costs money to comply with the very few easy to understand rules.

Why have I never had any form of notice or section 8 stuck to my boat? I simply pay for a mooring when working or travel the SYSTEM not 400yds between two bridges.

Please stop all the scaremongering folks, it has gone on for years though and always for no reason.

There are many on this forum who have lived aboard longer than me but the perceived problems mostly appear to be voiced by newbies with ten years or less boating experience.

 

Tim

Good god.....at this rate of agreement I'm going to have a to start an argument just for the sake of it....I must be getting poorly....

 

Cheers

 

Gareth

[mrsmelly]

So what is so bad about trying to live simply and keep costs down , having all the latest power hungry gadgets and paying the cost of running them doesn't make you a better person. Living on a boat is harder work than living in a house , you don't last long unless you enjoy it .

As a liveaboard in the 80 s I had a simple but happy existence . No electricity or gas just Parrafin lamps and Primus stoves and a battery wireless as my little luxury . I was fitter and happier than I am now .

 

HI

 

I was fitter in the 80s than I am now but I think thats because in the 80s I was a child in my thirties lol. I completely agree that modern boats including my latest purchase have two much wizadry and other crap on them which is why I will be removing the fancy gadget that switches itself on/off etc when plugged in to land line. All 12volt boats make much more sense but then most of us myself included are now soft and fat and use some gadgets, sad I must confess.

 

Tim

[Alf Roberts]

Hi

 

Yes 14 days has applied for a long time. I still fail to see what the problems are. A bone fide ccer travels the system from town to town, canal to canal etc I have always thought that was what is meant in the many years I have continuously cruised. When I dont cc for any period of time as now for instance then I get a home mooring, its the way it is, I was told this in 1989 on my first boat as a liveaboard and thats what I do. I fail to see any problems with CART and I never had any problems with BW or before them BWB. Boating has never been a cheap option to housing it costs money to comply with the very few easy to understand rules.

Why have I never had any form of notice or section 8 stuck to my boat? I simply pay for a mooring when working or travel the SYSTEM not 400yds between two bridges.

Please stop all the scaremongering folks, it has gone on for years though and always for no reason.

There are many on this forum who have lived aboard longer than me but the perceived problems mostly appear to be voiced by newbies with ten years or less boating experience.

 

Tim

so your thesis is only the well off should be allowed to use the canal system?

 

well that's ok....for you....mind you're going to need very deep pockets when your licence fee has to cover 4,000 court cases.