rules for "bridge hopping" with a home mooring

[Paul C]

How many boats can have the same home mooring? Could a marina with 10 moorings rent them cheaply as "low usage moorings" to 100 boats kind of like running a fractional reserve on the moorings assuming that no more than 10 boats will want to moor at any one time?

 

If it were 1, then it would be difficult for CRT to argue they weren't satisfied by the home mooring. If it were 100, then it would be easy for CRT to argue they weren't satisfied. There have been a few cases in recent times in the public domain, where a boater has an arrangement with a moorings manager/marina operator: they pay a proportion of money to "reserve" the mooring space. They pay a further amount when they actually occupy the mooring; and the nature of agreement strongly suggests they'll be at the mooring for substantially less than the full 365 days in a year. (In both cases, the boater licensing under "home mooring" not "CCing" declaration).

[cuthound]

How many boats can have the same home mooring? Could a marina with 10 moorings rent them cheaply as "low usage moorings" to 100 boats kind of like running a fractional reserve on the moorings assuming that no more than 10 boats will want to moor at any one time?

Certainly happens with most boatyards that look after shared ownership boats, because from March until the end of October, any particular boat will only be there one day per fortnight to turn around. In 22 years of shared ownership we only once had a dedicated berth, and that was at ABC Gayton.

[MtB]

Developing the argument, I have been wondering if I could legitimately share my mooring for Aldebaran with Reginald too, seeing as one boat or the other is always out bridge hopping or CCing.

[Paul C]

Certainly happens with most boatyards that look after shared ownership boats, because from March until the end of October, any particular boat will only be there one day per fortnight to turn around. In 22 years of shared ownership we only once had a dedicated berth, and that was at ABC Gayton.

 

What happens in winter though? What I am asking, is what happens when all the share boats are "in" rather than out, which could conceivably occur at some point in the year.

 

What happens to their mooring position in summer, is it re-rented out to another boat(er) or kept free once allowing for an amount of "shuffling around" which might occur for logistical reasons, eg to move boats near to services such as diesel/pump out/shoreline availability/water etc.

[cuthound]

Developing the argument, I have been wondering if I could legitimately share my mooring for Aldebaran with Reginald too, seeing as one boat or the other is always out bridge hopping or CCing.

I would pose the question to CRT, hypothetically at first

 

Edited to put back a deleted square bracket

Edited March 14, 2015 by cuthound

[leeco]

I have a home mooring, but at certain times of year, the commute to work can be up to an hour for a 10 mile journey. One thing I could do is shuttle between Beeston and the visitor moorings in the middle of Nottingham, and walk / cycle to work.

 

If I were to do this - spend 14 days at each place, and shuttle back and forth, am I likely to get "done" by CRT? Or does the fact I have a home mooring mean I can go wherever I want, stay within the relevant time limits, and be OK?

 

Would probably only shuttle for Oct-Dec and Feb-Apr, as the rest of the year the traffic isn't as bad as the University students aren't about.

 

Of course, it would be better if my home mooring was closer to work, but I've waited nearly 3 years for 70ft mooring to come up at Beeston, and it hasn't yet!

 

Previously I'd thought I'd be restrained by the same rules as CC'ers, but reading a few threads recently about this, it seems those with a home mooring might not have the same requirement to be "on a journey" and be allowed to bridge-hop?

I was told as long as you go back to your mooring every now and again then it's fine.

[FidoDido]

ta Leeco - would certainly do that - prob only spend 6-8 weeks at a time away from home mooring, and probably more time at home mooring than away over the whole year.

[leeco]

ta Leeco - would certainly do that - prob only spend 6-8 weeks at a time away from home mooring, and probably more time at home mooring than away over the whole year.

I never get bothered and I'm hardly at my mooring.

 

I did a few years ago but I was just at one place all year and never went to my mooring but a guy from CRT told me to return to my mooring at least 4 times in a year and then do what you like.

[Alan de Enfield]

I never get bothered and I'm hardly at my mooring.

 

I did a few years ago but I was just at one place all year and never went to my mooring but a guy from CRT told me to return to my mooring at least 4 times in a year and then do what you like.

 

That would be before the introduction of the new T&Cs.

[leeco]

 

That would be before the introduction of the new T&Cs.

Not new T&C

 

I think I have seen the thread on here about them.

 

I'll go have a look.

[Dave_P]

Not new T&C

 

I think I have seen the thread on here about them.

 

I'll go have a look.

Sorry Leeco, but what you've just done is participated in a classic game of chinese whispers which travels up and down the towpath all the time. "A guy from CRT told me...blah, blah, blah". This is why so many boaters have no idea of their rights. Even before the new T&Cs, there's never been a legal requirement to return to a mooring. The requirement has always been that it needs to be possible to return if you want i.e. the mooring is real and accessible.

 

As to MtBs queries about the conflict between the T&Cs and the 1995 act, as far as i can see, they simply can't refuse to a license for not complying. The may be looking for other forms of redress as we speak, since things seem to be tightening up generally but I can't imagine what they could be.

 

The rebel in me is telling me that I should leave my mooring and plonk myself permanently on a bit of towpath to make a point, but the pragmatist in me can see the danger in that. The danger is that if we all stop complying with the T&Cs to make a point, CRT may seek to get some new legislation enacted to strengthen their powers. Who knows what powers they could end up with

[luctor et emergo]

If legal opinion turns out that the new T&C is enforcible, then I may as well give up the home mooring and Cc anyway. In which case it will be an own goal for CRT eh?!

One can not CC on a single canal...

[Bod]

Sorry Leeco, but what you've just done is participated in a classic game of chinese whispers which travels up and down the towpath all the time. "A guy from CRT told me...blah, blah, blah". This is why so many boaters have no idea of their rights. Even before the new T&Cs, there's never been a legal requirement to return to a mooring. The requirement has always been that it needs to be possible to return if you want i.e. the mooring is real and accessible.

 

As to MtBs queries about the conflict between the T&Cs and the 1995 act, as far as i can see, they simply can't refuse to a license for not complying. The may be looking for other forms of redress as we speak, since things seem to be tightening up generally but I can't imagine what they could be.

 

The rebel in me is telling me that I should leave my mooring and plonk myself permanently on a bit of towpath to make a point, but the pragmatist in me can see the danger in that. The danger is that if we all stop complying with the T&Cs to make a point, CRT may seek to get some new legislation enacted to strengthen their powers. Who knows what powers they could end up with

Someone once said "Rules are for the obayance of fools and the guidance of wise men"

As for your last two sentence's, I agree "better the devil you know"

 

Bod

ps is "obayance" spelt correctly?

[Alan de Enfield]

One can not CC on a single canal...

 

You could have a good try on the 150km long T&M

Or Even the L&L at 204km

Someone once said "Rules are for the obayance of fools and the guidance of wise men"

As for your last two sentence's, I agree "better the devil you know"

 

Bod

ps is "obayance" spelt correctly?

 

Close, but starts with an A and has an E (Abeyance)

Edited March 16, 2015 by Alan de Enfield

[MtB]

One can not CC on a single canal...

 

Home moorers do not have to CC...

[luctor et emergo]

You indicated that you might go CC if CRT enforce the 'no bridge hopping with a mooring'. Can we take that you will travel further than Anhyo?

 

;-)

 

Home moorers do not have to CC...

It appears that they do, when not on their home mooring.

[Loafer]

 

You could have a good try on the 150km long T&M

Or Even the L&L at 204km

 

Close, but starts with an A and has an E (Abeyance)

 

Obedience of fools.

[Tam & Di]

ps is "obayance" spelt correctly?

 

As Alan says, the nearest word is abeyance. However this means to put something in suspense/to postpone something. The quote you are looking for is "Rules are for the obedience of fools and the guidance of wise men"

 

 

edit - beaten by loafer ;-)

Edited March 16, 2015 by Tam & Di

[MtB]

You indicated that you might go CC if CRT enforce the 'no bridge hopping with a mooring'. Can we take that you will travel further than Anhyo?

 

;-)

 

It appears that they do, when not on their home mooring.

 

I'll be impressed if you can cite a law that says so!

[luctor et emergo]

 

I'll be impressed if you can cite a law that says so!

There's no law that says that you must travel a minimum distance either.

[Tony Dunkley]

 

I'll be impressed if you can cite a law that says so!

 

You still haven't got it , have you ? C&RT make up their own " laws" as and when it suits them to . . . don't worry though, I'm sure they're working on a way of demonstrating that to you fairly soon.

Edited March 16, 2015 by Tony Dunkley

[Delta9]

If you need to question the rules you must be taking the piss. People that genuinely cruise while away from their home moorings will have no problems.

 

[Alan de Enfield]

If you need to question the rules you must be taking the piss. People that genuinely cruise while away from their home moorings will have no problems.

 

 

I'd be interested in your take on 'taking the piss' when anyone questions the validity of the statement that C&RT will charge you for boat removal, when a Judge has already ruled against C&RT on that very subject.

 

Posted by Nigel Moore on another thread :

 

Are you not thinking of Taylor v BWB, BM013306, 2001?

 

If so, towing the boat away was not “held to be norty”; on the contrary the judge endorsed BW’s entitlement to do so. What he denied was their right to charge for it. [Which doubtless accounts for their disinclination to ever again take this straightforward route to dealing with overstayers.]

 

As to Mr Taylor’s case for Breach of Contract, the judge found in his favour and awarded a couple of hundred pounds in damages.

 

So if C&RT try to take action for breach of contract (not complying with their T&Cs) just cite this case.

Edited March 16, 2015 by Alan de Enfield

[matty40s]

One can not CC on a single canal...

When did you make that one up.

Doing 10 miles a month in one direction and turning round in Birmingham would give you almost 3 years cruising if you did the Aylesbury.

[Delta9]

 

I'd be interested in your take on 'taking the piss' when anyone questions the validity of the statement that C&RT will charge you for boat removal, when a Judge has already ruled against C&RT on that very subject.

I wasn't being serious....