Are boaters interests really being represented anymore?

[bassplayer]

Apparently the recent T&C changes were steam rolled through without giving the existing boater representative bodies time to digest them.

 

Does this mean CRT aren't interested in listening to their customers?

[Lady Muck]

In my experience, they listen, they hold workshops, listen to suggestions and ideas and then do something else entirely.

[Paul C]

Were they ever?

[cotswoldsman]

From what I know they do listen as Parry did with his open meetings and then just carry on doing as they wish. Having said that I do think the Associations do make them re look at things and tone them down. As I have said before I think CRT see boaters as a nuisance and in an ideal world for CRT we would all just go away

[bassplayer]

Well this will finally show whether organisations like NABO, IWA, ACC, AWCC, NBTA and RBOA have any clout.

[cotswoldsman]

Well this will finally show whether organisations like NABO, IWA, ACC, AWCC, NBTA and RBOA have any clout.

What will?

[bassplayer]

The fact that CRT has already been able to make such sweeping changes despite lots of representation shows how ineffective it is. What happens now depends on how much clout these organisations have got. I accept it doesn't help when representatives don't turn up and as individuals we can still lobby Parry.

[cotswoldsman]

The fact that CRT has already been able to make such sweeping changes despite lots of representation shows how ineffective it is. What happens now depends on how much clout these organisations have got. I accept it doesn't help when representatives don't turn up and as individuals we can still lobby Parry.

Surely it is up to the Associations to ask there members what they want them to do? For all we know the members might be quite happy with the changes. Just saying.

[rgreg]

I have attended many meetings with CRT and been involved in the scheme to take staff out on boats. I do believe we boaters have been listened to in my experience and there have been signs of some action based on this, though on occasions the opposite has been the case. One of the problems I see is having a unified approach from boaters and the in-fighting, the rebellious, non-conformist, "them and us" attitude often displayed doesn't help. As I have said before, CRT must despair at times with the resistance to even the most basic rules and changes and whatever they do has some protesters up in arms. Pleasing everybody is near impossible and every time a decision doesn't please some they will shout "we haven't been listened to".

[pete.i]

I think the Canal and River Trust would love to get rid of boaters. They just cannot at the moment because without us they would fold. I do honestly believe they think of us as a neccessary nuisance.

[bassplayer]

Surely it is up to the Associations to ask there members what they want them to do? For all we know the members might be quite happy with the changes. Just saying.

Well I suggest the Associations ask their members the following :

 

Are you happy about letting CRT make any decision they like without proper consultation with it's customers?

 

Are you happy CRT can decide you have broken the T&C's and enforce judgement on you (by not issuing a licence) without the evidence being heard in court?

 

Are you happy to sign away your personal details to anyone?

 

(Sorry to paraphrase my earlier post)

 

We are all affected by these changes!

 

I think it's significant that there was no representation from the NBTA wen the revised T&C's were issued. I wonder if they were invited?

[Athy]

I think the Canal and River Trust would love to get rid of boaters. They just cannot at the moment because without us they would fold. I do honestly believe they think of us as a neccessary nuisance.

Perhaps they should give Ryanair the contract to run the waterways. As a frequent flyer on that airline I got the impression that they saw customers as "The Enemy", a necessary evil. I'm sure that they would have liked to have been the air equivalent of All Souls' College. They do seem to have softened recently, I must admit. Last time I booked with them I could actually understand their web site.

[bigste]

I cannot for the life of me understand why they have 48 hour moorings during October to March. With the exception of a few that can be counted on one hand there is just no need for it. That is one rule that is not fit for purpose.

[alan_fincher]

I cannot for the life of me understand why they have 48 hour moorings during October to March. With the exception of a few that can be counted on one hand there is just no need for it. That is one rule that is not fit for purpose.

 

Are you aware that they have acknowledged this, and that the latest proposals on visitor moorings should allow stay times to be relaxed at mant sites over the winter period.

 

This is actually progress over pre CRT days when, with a few exceptions, there was no relaxation of stay times in the winter months.

[Alf Roberts]

 

so why isn't it happening?

[churchward]

What each person needs to do is read the new changes to the T&Cs and consider how they effect how they wish to use the canal system. If you then think you are being unfairly restricted you should write to CRT in the first instance and also any related organisation you are a member of who can represent your views.

 

It is worth reflecting that CRT are quite within their powers to manage the T&Cs as they see fit within the scope of UK law including the 1995 waterways act. After all companies like Microsoft or Apple or any bank etc. change T&Cs all the time and as long as they notify you of the changes in advance and stay within legal parameters then they can deem you have agreed to them if you continue to use their products or indeed buy a license.

 

Although I agree it would be best practice to consult their license payers/customers for their opinion they do not have to do this or indeed having consulted under no legal commitment to take any specific notice of the outcome. It would be a shame if they went to the trouble of consulting not to take anything on board but when you consider the widely different views expressed on here about any subject it may be hard for CRT to judge what the outcome should be from such disparate views.

 

I don't think the outcome of the proposed T&C changes will prove if the waterways organisations have any power or not. It will be just like any other lobby organisation some you win some you lose. CRT would get nothing done if they got pulled every which way by all the various organisations with an interest in the waterways.

 

Personally I am still reading and thinking about the changes before I react to them. At the moment I am not seeing a huge change that will have any significant effect on how I go boating but as I say I am still reading and digesting.

 

Are you aware that they have acknowledged this, and that the latest proposals on visitor moorings should allow stay times to be relaxed at mant sites over the winter period.

 

This is actually progress over pre CRT days when, with a few exceptions, there was no relaxation of stay times in the winter months.

Yes it will be good when they do. It has always seemed too restrictive when there are so few boats moving about in the winter needing these moorings.

 

An automatic relaxation to at least 7 days would be reasonable between December and February (ie winter months) for example.

[Alf Roberts]

What each person needs to do is read the new changes to the T&Cs and consider how they effect how they wish to use the canal system. If you then think you are being unfairly restricted you should write to CRT in the first instance and also any related organisation you are a member of who can represent your views.

 

It is worth reflecting that CRT are quite within their powers to manage the T&Cs as they see fit within the scope of UK law including the 1995 waterways act. After all companies like Microsoft or Apple or any bank etc. change T&Cs all the time and as long as they notify you of the changes in advance and stay within legal parameters then they can deem you have agreed to them if you continue to use their products or indeed buy a license.

 

Although I agree it would be best practice to consult their license payers/customers for their opinion they do not have to do this or indeed having consulted under no legal commitment to take any specific notice of the outcome. It would be a shame if they went to the trouble of consulting not to take anything on board but when you consider the widely different views expressed on here about any subject it may be hard for CRT to judge what the outcome should be from such disparate views.

 

I don't think the outcome of the proposed T&C changes will prove if the waterways organisations have any power or not. It will be just like any other lobby organisation some you win some you lose. CRT would get nothing done if they got pulled every which way by all the various organisations with an interest in the waterways.

 

Personally I am still reading and thinking about the changes before I react to them. At the moment I am not seeing a huge change that will have any significant effect on how I go boating but as I say I am still reading and digesting.

 

Yes it will be good when they do. It has always seemed too restrictive when there are so few boats moving about in the winter needing these moorings.

 

An automatic relaxation to at least 7 days would be reasonable between December and February (ie winter months) for example.

 

passing over that even if you are not directly affected, you should have some concern for those law-abiding boaters who will, CRT may be able to set terms and conditions, what they can't do is set conditions that are at odds with primary legislation.

[churchward]

passing over that even if you are not directly affected, you should have some concern for those law-abiding boaters who will, CRT may be able to set terms and conditions, what they can't do is set conditions that are at odds with primary legislation.

Indeed they can't be at odds with legisation which is why I said as long as they remain within legal parameters.

 

As for being concerned for others I can only do that when folk identify how any changes will effect them. It is usually inaccurate to try and second guess how the changes effect what other wish to do. So it is best if each person judges the changes against their own circumstances.

[pete.i]

Well, I for one, am seriously thinking of leaving the canals. I do have that option as I am only a leisure boater. Live aboards do not, easily, have the same options. To be honest I am finding it becoming increasingly difficult to abide by the various rules and regulations or even understanding some of them. My boat is up for sale at the moment and if I can get rid of it I will buy a nice little cruiser on a trailer that I can park up on my drive and only slip it when I want a trip down the water. It will save me a huge sum in mooring fees (not C&RTs fees I will admit.) My insurance will be cheaper as will all the other costs because I will have a smaller boat. I believe that even my licence will be cheaper as I can buy an occasional licence but I haven't looked at that yet. Or I could just say sod it and give the canals up for good.

[Alf Roberts]

no need for a licence at all. by the time they've given you 28 days to 'remedy the breach' you'll be gone.

[churchward]

Well, I for one, am seriously thinking of leaving the canals. I do have that option as I am only a leisure boater. Live aboards do not, easily, have the same options. To be honest I am finding it becoming increasingly difficult to abide by the various rules and regulations or even understanding some of them. My boat is up for sale at the moment and if I can get rid of it I will buy a nice little cruiser on a trailer that I can park up on my drive and only slip it when I want a trip down the water. It will save me a huge sum in mooring fees (not C&RTs fees I will admit.) My insurance will be cheaper as will all the other costs because I will have a smaller boat. I believe that even my licence will be cheaper as I can buy an occasional licence but I haven't looked at that yet. Or I could just say sod it and give the canals up for good.

Which rules and regs are you having an issue with and what restrictions are they placing on your use of the canal system?

[David Schweizer]

Well, I for one, am seriously thinking of leaving the canals. I do have that option as I am only a leisure boater. Live aboards do not, easily, have the same options. To be honest I am finding it becoming increasingly difficult to abide by the various rules and regulations or even understanding some of them. My boat is up for sale at the moment and if I can get rid of it I will buy a nice little cruiser on a trailer that I can park up on my drive and only slip it when I want a trip down the water. It will save me a huge sum in mooring fees (not C&RTs fees I will admit.) My insurance will be cheaper as will all the other costs because I will have a smaller boat. I believe that even my licence will be cheaper as I can buy an occasional licence but I haven't looked at that yet. Or I could just say sod it and give the canals up for good.

 

I would be interested to learn which (new) rules you find are becoming increasingly difficult to abide by. Like you I am a recreational cruiser and I have read the updated rules and regulations recently issued by CaRT. Perhaps I have missed something but, I find it hard to see very much that has changed within the latest regulations that will have any impact upon my cruising pattern. To me it seems to be little more than a tidying up of some interpretations which have already been issued, but were not sufficiently well detailed in the old regulations,

 

As for not taking any notice of the Associations, I suspect that some Associations, will feel that their lobbying has been recognised, whilst other may feel their views are not reflected in the "new" rules and regulations.

Edited February 1, 2015 by David Schweizer

[Tony Brooks]

 

I would be interested to learn which (new) rules you find are becoming increasingly difficult to abide by. Like you I am a recreational cruiser and I have read the updated rules and regulations recently issued by CaRT. Perhaps I have missed something but, I find it hard to see very much that has changed within the latest regulations that will have any impact upon my cruising pattern. To me it seems to be little more than a tidying up of some interpretations which have already been issued, but were not sufficiently well detailed in the old regulations,

 

Snip

 

That is until you come to the end of a CaRT navigation and have to wait for the connecting river to become safe for navigation. With the lack of Visitor Moorings in Oxford together with their very short time limits plus the fines they say they will impose one can only conclude that CaRT have some kind of death wish on behalf of their customers. I personally do not relish being swept over Kings weir or through Osney bridge because CaRT do not seem to have addressed the "safe haven" principle in their new regulations.

[David Schweizer]

 

That is until you come to the end of a CaRT navigation and have to wait for the connecting river to become safe for navigation. With the lack of Visitor Moorings in Oxford together with their very short time limits plus the fines they say they will impose one can only conclude that CaRT have some kind of death wish on behalf of their customers. I personally do not relish being swept over Kings weir or through Osney bridge because CaRT do not seem to have addressed the "safe haven" principle in their new regulations.

 

Was it in the old regulations? I suspect you are reading too much into it. From recollection the rules say something like - that a boat can moor in any one place for up to 14 days (or less if local notices indicate shorter periods), or for as long as is reasonably neccessary. If the river the boat wishes to travel on is closed because of flooding, it would be reasonably neccessary to stay for as long as was needed until the river was re-opened. Or am I being too trusting?

Edited February 1, 2015 by David Schweizer

[Alf Roberts]

...a bit, nowhere in any of CRT's literature or the foaming rants of the skirt followers is the phrase 'except as is reasonable in the circumstances ' mentioned.