Naughty Cal Posted February 17, 2015 Report Share Posted February 17, 2015 So you think they WILL log boats that are on their HM ? I do hope so. I agree that they shouldn't be alienating a very large section of Leisure Boaters by making up the rules as they go! Cheers Bill They already do. They are at our marina two or three times a year logging boats and checking licences. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
David Mack Posted February 17, 2015 Report Share Posted February 17, 2015 The new T&Cs state (for boats WITH a home mooring) 3.1 You must cruise on the Waterways whilst you are away from the Home Mooring (save for any period when you leave the Waterways or when the Boat is lawfully moored at another mooring site. With the 'plain English' explanation being : If you are away from your home mooring you can only stay in one place for up to 14 days (or less ......) You need to understand the intent behind the statements and not just put on the 'best' interpretation. It is not what YOU think that matters, it is what the words say and the interpretation that a court (with C&RTs guidance) can put on them Surely you are covered by the words in red above in both the T&Cs and plain English. It is only while away from your home mooring that you are limited to 14 days in one place. So you can leave your home mooring, potter up and down the local waters, staying within the same 'place' if you wish, and returning to the HM the same day or up to 14 days later and that's fine. Having returned to the HM, you are no longer "away from the Home Mooring" and so the 14 day clock is reset. You can therefore repeat this pattern of boating ad infinitum if you wish, and it matters not if at any point you are in the same 'place' as you were 14 days previously. If CRT don't log you on your HM, then they may claim you are in breach, but if they are going to produce sighting evidence to a court showing that you always been in the same 'place' reasonably close to your HM, they are also going to have to produce some evidence that you weren't at any point actually on the HM, if they are to convince the court that you haven't complied with the T&Cs. Although some on here decry it, if you keep a log of your movements, and in particular recording the dates on which you left and returned to the HM, then as long as your movements are compliant with the new T&Cs, I can't see CRT pursuing the matter. 2 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
jenlyn Posted February 17, 2015 Report Share Posted February 17, 2015 So you think they WILL log boats that are on their HM ? I do hope so. I agree that they shouldn't be alienating a very large section of Leisure Boaters by making up the rules as they go! Cheers Bill No, they won't log boats on home moorings. They will use the dpa right you gave them, to check if you are telling the truth, by contacting the owner of the mooring. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
mango Posted February 17, 2015 Report Share Posted February 17, 2015 I am concerned that mango is promoting complacency through the inability to see what CRT are putting out. My view is as important as yours. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
kris88 Posted February 17, 2015 Report Share Posted February 17, 2015 I am concerned that some of our continuous cruisers are trying to stir up fear, uncertainty and doubt amongst those with a home mooring, in the hope of increasing opposition to CRT taking action to resolve existing problems with mooring on our waterways. This continued ostrich like behaviour of, it only effects cc'ers I'm alright. Forgets to take into consideration all boaters will be paying for increased enforcement. To the detriment of maintenance. Also the simple fact that what CRT are attempting is illegal. Regards kris Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
mayalld Posted February 17, 2015 Report Share Posted February 17, 2015 This continued ostrich like behaviour of, it only effects cc'ers I'm alright. Forgets to take into consideration all boaters will be paying for increased enforcement. To the detriment of maintenance. Also the simple fact that what CRT are attempting is illegal. Actually, it isn't illegal Unlike the position for CCers, the range of sanctions that CRT have for non-compliance with T&Cs are more limited, but the right to impose terms and conditions is enshrined in law. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
jenlyn Posted February 17, 2015 Report Share Posted February 17, 2015 My view is as important as yours. Yes. 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
kris88 Posted February 17, 2015 Report Share Posted February 17, 2015 (edited) So what about the fact that your going to be paying for increased enforcement, to the detriment of maintenance. Putting aside the legal argument for a while. The expression sledge hammer to crack a nut comes to mind. Regards kris Edited February 17, 2015 by kris88 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
mango Posted February 17, 2015 Report Share Posted February 17, 2015 This continued ostrich like behaviour of, it only effects cc'ers I'm alright. Forgets to take into consideration all boaters will be paying for increased enforcement. To the detriment of maintenance. Also the simple fact that what CRT are attempting is illegal. Regards kris I would like to see new legislation that helps CRT to fast track removal of those boaters who don't give a damn about rules that are in place for the benefit of the majority. I don't want to see money wasted on enforcement. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Naughty Cal Posted February 17, 2015 Report Share Posted February 17, 2015 So what about the fact that your going to be paying for increased enforcement, to the detriment of maintenance. Putting aside the legal argument for a while. The expression sledge hammer to crack a nut comes to mind. Regards kris You may only perceive the problem to be "a nut" at the moment. But left unchecked how big a problem will it become? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
kris88 Posted February 17, 2015 Report Share Posted February 17, 2015 They already have enough powers to do what you would like but choose not to use them. The fact remains that your self and every other boater is going to be paying for increased enforcement. Regards kris Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
jenlyn Posted February 17, 2015 Report Share Posted February 17, 2015 So what about the fact that your going to be paying for increased enforcement, to the detriment of maintenance. Putting aside the legal argument for a while. The expression sledge hammer to crack a nut comes to mind. Regards kris Longterm agenda could be, less boat usage, less need for maintenance. Favoured areas for boats to use when away from home mooring, maintain, those places not being used, less maintenance. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
mayalld Posted February 17, 2015 Report Share Posted February 17, 2015 They already have enough powers to do what you would like but choose not to use them. The fact remains that your self and every other boater is going to be paying for increased enforcement. Regards kris Surely, imposing terms and conditions and dealing with infractions of those T&Cs is using the powers just as you suggest. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
kris88 Posted February 17, 2015 Report Share Posted February 17, 2015 (edited) Longterm agenda could be, less boat usage, less need for maintenance. Favoured areas for boats to use when away from home mooring, maintain, those places not being used, less maintenance. Your probably right but I hope not, as it doesn't bode we'll for long term survival of the network Regards kris Surely, imposing terms and conditions and dealing with infractions of those T&Cs is using the powers just as you suggest. Before I answer your questions what about answering mine asked first, answering a question with a question is a politicians trick Regards kris Edited February 17, 2015 by kris88 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Laurie Booth Posted February 17, 2015 Report Share Posted February 17, 2015 Well if that is non-compliant you'll be in company with an awful lot of other boaters who regularly chug a few miles up the cut from their home mooring to a favourite location, and return the following day. I do this all the time. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
costalot Posted February 17, 2015 Report Share Posted February 17, 2015 Keep up at the back - They are now doing just this. The non-compliant boaters who are becoming expensive to 'maintain' (enforcement etc.) are now not having their licences renewed and being told to remove themselves from C&RT waters. Edit to add evidence : From C&RT website : Since January, 792 new continuous cruisers have received welcome letters, and we have been providing them with regular feedback if we have been concerned about their movement patterns. 63 are now in the enforcement process with a further 83 contacted to say we are concerned. Of these, we’ve contacted 23 with regard to refusing to renew their licences. No, using the information you have provided they have converted 82% from category D to category C (792-[63+83]) just by sending them regular feedback. You need to provide a figure for the number CRT have refused to re-license in order to identify those who have been told to "piss off" Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
mayalld Posted February 17, 2015 Report Share Posted February 17, 2015 Before I answer your questions what about answering mine asked first, answering a question with a question is a politicians trick I wasn't asking you a question. I was making a statement. HTH Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
kris88 Posted February 17, 2015 Report Share Posted February 17, 2015 Sorry my mistake it definitely came across as a question to me. Regards kris Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Alf Roberts Posted February 17, 2015 Report Share Posted February 17, 2015 Actually, it isn't illegal Unlike the position for CCers, the range of sanctions that CRT have for non-compliance with T&Cs are more limited, but the right to impose terms and conditions is enshrined in law. including terms and conditions that contradict primary legislation? really ? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
mayalld Posted February 17, 2015 Report Share Posted February 17, 2015 Thank you for the warning re. the impending demise of my business after surviving for the last 46 years. I've never found the need to categorize my customers into anything other than the ones I'm happy to do business with again, and the ones that get told to piss off . And there is the point. You, in running your business have a pretty much unfettered freedom to decide whether you want somebody as a customer. Your decision will clearly include the question of whether their business is worth having, particularly as to whether they will mess you about and you will end up working for nothing. CRT don't have that unfettered freedom. They have to do business with people who they will spend more on chasing for money and enforcing against than they will ever get from that person. Is it so very wrong that they say "If I were a private business, I would tell you where to get off. I owe you no favours, so if you persist in being a drain on resources, I will use every angle open to me to rid myself of your custom" Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
mayalld Posted February 17, 2015 Report Share Posted February 17, 2015 including terms and conditions that contradict primary legislation? really ? Do the T&Cs contradict primary legislation? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Tony Dunkley Posted February 17, 2015 Report Share Posted February 17, 2015 Actually, it isn't illegal Unlike the position for CCers, the range of sanctions that CRT have for non-compliance with T&Cs are more limited, but the right to impose terms and conditions is enshrined in law. Something that actually is 'enshrined' in law is the fact that if you've got a home mooring the boat doesn't have to be used 'bona fide for navigation' at any time, but the new T & C's are an attempt to circumvent that. C&RT equate 'cruise' with 'used bona fide for navigation', and therefore the new T & C's requirement to 'cruise' when away from the home mooring is an attempt to place a use 'bona fide for navigation' obligation on boats with a home mooring that is not required by the 1995 Act, that requirement being specifically limited to boats without a (home) mooring. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
mango Posted February 17, 2015 Report Share Posted February 17, 2015 Longterm agenda could be, less boat usage, less need for maintenance. Favoured areas for boats to use when away from home mooring, maintain, those places not being used, less maintenance. On the other hand we could do more to attract more boaters who are more interested in boating rather than mooring and arguing with CRT. 4 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
mayalld Posted February 17, 2015 Report Share Posted February 17, 2015 Something that actually is 'enshrined' in law is the fact that if you've got a home mooring the boat doesn't have to be used 'bona fide for navigation' at any time, but the new T & C's are an attempt to circumvent that. C&RT equate 'cruise' with 'used bona fide for navigation', and therefore the new T & C's requirement to 'cruise' when away from the home mooring is an attempt to place a use 'bona fide for navigation' obligation on boats with a home mooring that is not required by the 1995 Act, that requirement being specifically limited to boats without a (home) mooring. The 1995 Act places a specific Bona fide navigation requirement on what are colloquially called "CCers". It makes provision that a failure to abide by that requirement is a legitimate reason to revoke a licence. It places no such requirement on other boaters. From this, we can conclude that CRT cannot use the 1995 Act to revoke the licence for a boater with a HM. Other legislation (Transport Act 1962) permits them to make terms and conditions. It doesn't make provision for licences to be revoked, but it does make provision for charges to be levied (and recovered through the courts) Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Tony Dunkley Posted February 17, 2015 Report Share Posted February 17, 2015 The 1995 Act places a specific Bona fide navigation requirement on what are colloquially called "CCers". It makes provision that a failure to abide by that requirement is a legitimate reason to revoke a licence. It places no such requirement on other boaters. From this, we can conclude that CRT cannot use the 1995 Act to revoke the licence for a boater with a HM. Other legislation (Transport Act 1962) permits them to make terms and conditions. It doesn't make provision for licences to be revoked, but it does make provision for charges to be levied (and recovered through the courts) Your conclusion is wrong, . . . . . . they have already used the 1995 Act in conjunction with some fanciful and ridiculous interpretation of the existing T & C's to revoke the Licence of a boat with a home mooring, to see if they could get away with it. The changes now being made to the T & C's in respect of boat use are a consequence of that. 2 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Featured Posts
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 accountSign in
Already have an account? Sign in here.
Sign In Now