CRT answer questions to new T&Cs

[Tony Dunkley]

 

 

I'm still wondering how CRT's apparent ability to refuse a licence to a boat which has been

 

"sighted for an extended period in a limited area moving between a few adjacent places without returning to your Home Mooring".

 

intersects with it's obligation under the 1995 Act to issue a licence to any boat with a BSS, insurance and a home mooring.

 

What steps might a boater take to force CRT to honour it's obligation under the 1995 act to issue a licence, faced with refusal?

 

That's been explained several times before on this Forum, so you should be able to find it if you look back through enough threads.

[MtB]

 

That's been explained several times before on this Forum, so you should be able to find it if you look back through enough threads.

 

No it hasn't.

 

Links please, if you disagree.

[thunderbird]

 

Or defining, even!

And from GG's link:

 

14 day rule applying to all boaters

The ’14 day rule’, whereby you cannot stay in one place for more than 14 days, has always applied to all boaters regardless of whether or not you have a Home Mooring.

 

Are CRT attempting to re-write history with this bit?

Only if all let them!

[jenlyn]

No it hasn't.

 

Links please, if you disagree.

^^^^^rolls eyes^^^^^

[Tony Dunkley]

My understanding is that the 14 day rule applied to cc'ers under 1995 act. Crt have insisted that all boaters abide by it but haven't enforced it because they can't. Am I wrong? Is there any legislation which allows CRT to refuse to issue a licence to a boater with a home mooring for contravening the 14 day rule?

 

No, there isn't, but that won't stop C&RT claiming that there is, or that they can revoke (refuse) a Licence for breaching their T & C's, if it suits them to at some time or other.

Edited March 15, 2015 by Tony Dunkley

[Hawthorn]

No I have not.

Let me give you a 'for instance' using the proposed 'place' maps that were leaked last year and are allegedly being re-issued in the very near future.

 

My Home Mooring is at Newark and I want to have a nice summer cruise to Boston and back which is a nice journey of 133 miles, and we plan to take about a month to do it.

 

Place No 1 is from my home mooring to Cromwell lock, where I stay for 2 days on the 48 hour mooring

 

Place No 2 is Cromwell Lock to Torksey Lock. On the way we stop at Dunham Bridge (13 miles from Cromwell) for a couple of days on the 48 hour mooring. another hour (4 miles) takes us to Torksey Lock where we need to wait for the tide

 

Place No 3 is The Fossdyke from Torksey to central Lincoln - we continue on from Torksey Lock to Saxilby (5 miles) where we decide to stay in this wonderful little village for a four days. We then have a slow cruise into the centre of LIncoln (6 miles) and stay on the visitors moorings for 2 days.

 

Place No4 is Lincoln to Boston. (The entire length of the River - 33 miles each way - is shown as just 1 place) We cruise from Lincoln to Bardney stay on the48 hour moorings, we then cruise from Bardney to Tattershall Bridge where the moorings are controlled by the Pub Landlord and we stay 7 days as we tour around Woodhall Spa. Tattershall Bridge to Antons Gowt and stay again for 48 hours, Antons Gowt to Boston visitors moorings and stay 48 hours.

 

We have taken 23 days on the outward trip but have now been in one place (Place No4 for 13 days and we have to turn around and go back)

 

Lets say we 'rush' back and do Boston to Lincoln in 4 days - we have now been in Place No4 for 17 days.- and 3 days back to Newark

 

Not only have we stayed more than 14 days in one place, we have only been in 4 places - we have failed to abide by C&RTs 'rules' :- "If you are sighted for an extended period in a limited area moving between a few adjacent places without returning to your Home Mooring, you will not be “cruising” and this may attract the attention of our enforcement team

 

We have travelled 10 times the 'indicated' acceptable for non-enforcement mileage for a CCer but are still open to enforcement - particularly as the EO for the area is the 'well-known' one.

 

A journey of 133 miles takes us thru' only 4 'places' - on the K&A, a distance of 12 miles encompasses 14 'places'. Think outside the narrow confines of a major conurbation canal and look at the implications for all boaters.

Your whole argument stands or falls on the idea that there is a 'places' map and that you know what it is.

[Tony Dunkley]

Your whole argument stands or falls on the idea that there is a 'places' map and that you know what it is.

 

There is such a map and C&RT had it on their website for a while. They were also e-mailing more detailed maps of specific areas on request.

The Map itself is one of the most ridiculous documents I've ever seen, with 'places' being shown on it that varied from a few hundred yards long in Nottingham up to 20 miles, or more, downriver to Gainsborough and along the Witham from Lincoln.

 

Here is an e-mail from C&RT with some large scale maps of the canal through Nottingham, which they have now taken down from the website along with the rest of the piffle.

Canal & River Trust <places@canalrivertrust.org.uk>

9/6/14

Hello,

Thanks for requesting some place maps which can be downloaded here..

Please bear in mind that your PDF is 0.5MB - it’ll be best to download them over a broadband connection. If you don’t have this at home check with your local library. Most offer this and, for a small fee, the opportunity to print off the maps if needed. In addition, paper copies of maps are available at your local waterway unit or we can post them out to if you call our customer service team on 0303 040 4040 or email customer.services@canalrivertrust.org.uk stating which places you’d like maps for.

If you haven’t already you find can out more information about places and what they mean to you as a boater on our website.

We’ll be taking feedback on the place maps between now and the end of December 2014 and, if appropriate, we will revise the maps in the light of the feedback to take effect in Spring 2015. To log your feedback, send an email toplaces@canalrivertrust.org.uk, being sure to include the name of the canal or river, and the relevant place names that you’re proposing changes to.

Best wishes,

Canal & River Trust

Edited March 15, 2015 by Tony Dunkley

[Smelly]

Well what can I say? All this toing and froing over the fact that CRT are trying to appear to be even handed; hassling moorers as well as those without a HM.

 

As somebody said above; there is no question of a licence being revoked from somebody with a HM; there is no statutory mechanism to do that. Thus there will be no judicial scrutiny of these new provisions unless one of the user groups brings Judicial Review which is currently very difficult to get off the ground as the bar for admissibility has been heightened; never mind the potential expense.

 

I sorely doubt anyone with a mooring will be affected by this unless it gets to the position of Mr Dunkley where they think they can have a pop. I do, however, believe that this is another clout to the wedge; long past it's thin end, in trying to compel those without a home mooring to take one or bagger orf. "look HHJ Fotherington-Smythe, we're being even handed with everyone!"

 

Tony; congratulations, I have little doubt you were the inspiration for this.

[MtB]

As somebody said above; there is no question of a licence being revoked from somebody with a HM; there is no statutory mechanism to do that.

 

So I suspect they will take the easy route, and wait until the licence expires then refuse to issue another.

 

Is there a statutory basis to force the issue of a licence to a boat with a home mooring, when they declined on the grounds that the boat has a record of ignoring the licence T&Cs?

 

 

 

 

(Spelling edit)

Edited March 15, 2015 by Mike the Boilerman

[Tony Dunkley]

 

So I suspect they will take the easy route, and wait until the licence expires then refuse to issue another.

 

Is there a statutory basis to force the issue of a licence to a boat with a home mooring, when they declined on the grounds that the boat has a record of ignoring the licence T&Cs?

 

 

 

 

(Spelling edit)

 

Yes, and I wish I had a quid for every time it's been quoted on here.

[Arthur Marshall]

 

Arthur - stop digging before it gets to deep to get out,

 

As i said, my error. Like a lot of people on here, I tend to make assumptions based on my own boating history. I'm not digging a hole for myself, just stating what I thought was correct. As has been pointed out, I wasn't. i don't find that a problem as I'm (possiby surprisingly on this forum) more interested in winding up with the truth of the matter than defending a position. It's actually how you learn things... I am now better infomred, which is nice.

[luctor et emergo]

 

So I suspect they will take the easy route, and wait until the licence expires then refuse to issue another.

 

Is there a statutory basis to force the issue of a licence to a boat with a home mooring, when they declined on the grounds that the boat has a record of ignoring the licence T&Cs?

 

 

 

 

(Spelling edit)

just comply with the rules..

 

 

simples.

 

 

edit. Whilst you are bridge hopping on the Oxford, you appear to be hogging two available moorings in other desirable locations, denying others of a mooring.

Edited March 15, 2015 by luctor et emergo

[MtB]

just comply with the rules..

 

 

I am complying with 'the rules', or can you demonstrate otherwise?

 

Do stop your uninformed sniping from the sidelines. It's beyond tedious.

[luctor et emergo]

 

I am complying with 'the rules', or can you demonstrate otherwise?

 

Do stop your uninformed sniping from the sidelines. It's beyond tedious.

I know you are. And in that you, and all other boaters, have my full support. I just find it curious that you seem to have become much more concerned about how CRT apply the rules, now that you may be deemed 'In breech off'..

 

 

Sitting on the save sidelines is always easy.

[Dave_P]

just comply with the rules..

 

 

simples.

 

 

edit. Whilst you are bridge hopping on the Oxford, you appear to be hogging two available moorings in other desirable locations, denying others of a mooring.

So we must comply with CRT, but CRT don't have to comply with parliament? They get to invent their own rules. Ones which are in direct conflict with the legislation.

 

It's not surprising people get somewhat peeved.

[thunderbird]

First it was the online moored failing to find favour together with any with a mooring seen to be less costly than those paying in a marina. Now it's the turn of those continuously cruising to be vilified. Reading the 'Dark Side' today if Keith Gudgin's attitude is shared by the majority of boaters, what a very unpleasant place our once friendly waterways have become!

So we must comply with CRT, but CRT don't have to comply with parliament? They get to invent their own rules. Ones which are in direct conflict with the legislation.

 

It's not surprising people get somewhat peeved.

[peterboat]

So we must comply with CRT, but CRT don't have to comply with parliament? They get to invent their own rules. Ones which are in direct conflict with the legislation.

 

It's not surprising people get somewhat peeved.

Hi Dave Greenie Sir, I have fallen foul of DVLA who were inventing rules VERA are the laws that govern DVLA and us and it took for me to fight all the way to the courtroom doors before they admitted they were wrong and pay me for the pleasure.

CRT have laws to obey as you have pointed out we have to operate within those laws If CRT wish the laws to change it is up to them and us to lobby parliment to sort it. Whilst I am the first to say boaters should comply otherwise chaos would ensue if we all didnt, its no good for anybody if someone gets up one morning with another set of rules that nobody but them know about due process is required

 

Peter

[Smelly]

So I suspect they will take the easy route, and wait until the licence expires then refuse to issue another. Is there a statutory basis to force the issue of a licence to a boat with a home mooring, when they declined on the grounds that the boat has a record of ignoring the licence T&Cs? (Spelling edit)

Yes, the issue of a licence is one for the statute; the relevant consent can only be refused if the requirements in S17 aren't met. The construction is "they will give you a licence unless..." the list of "unless" is exhaustive. The presumption is that a licence will be granted.

 

The Ts & Cs are window dressing; it's very unlikely that they are enforceable other than where there is statutory mechanism to do so, i.e. via S8 or 9 of the '83 act; abandonment or obstruction.

 

Edit... by way of an nb in the classic term; I will say Davidson while I remember the name of the case. The bloke who left his trading boat on the moorings in Brum. That had been sat on moorings for ages while the owner volunteered to pay the overstay charge. Eventually they towed it; that was held to be norty. I probably need to track that decision down again.

Edited March 16, 2015 by Smelly

[MtB]

Thanks Smelly. What course of action can a boater take faced with refusal by CRT to issue a licence despite the requirements of S17 being met?

 

This is a hypothetical question at this stage but I'd like to know what to do should this come to pass, as would a few others like me who pay for a (legitimate) home mooring specifically so we can legally bridge hop.

 

MtB

[Tony Dunkley]

Thanks Smelly. What course of action can a boater take faced with refusal by CRT to issue a licence despite the requirements of S17 being met?

 

This is a hypothetical question at this stage but I'd like to know what to do should this come to pass, as would a few others like me who pay for a (legitimate) home mooring specifically so we can legally bridge hop.

 

MtB

 

You need to do the same as I did, then they have no option but to issue a Licence.

[luctor et emergo]

I keenly await the indignant howls of derision, from the marina dwellers, when they are told that they can only get out on the cut at pre-arranged times...

 

 

hang on.. no return visitor moorings? Oh dear....

[BrumSaint]

 

 

A journey of 133 miles takes us thru' only 4 'places' - on the K&A, a distance of 12 miles encompasses 14 'places'. Think outside the narrow confines of a major conurbation canal and look at the implications for all boaters.

It just maybe that C&RT were trying to sort out this type of anomaly when the link to the places map was leaked and given that they were aware of these types of issues then withdrew it completely.

 

Given the grief that is directed at C&RT because of the unauthorised release of (what has turned out to be) an incomplete version of the map, some people might believe that it was deliberately leaked to try and undermine C&RT and anything they do to try and sort out the people who claim to CC, but in fact are not interested in 'bona fide navigating', but can't be bothered to pay for a mooring.

[carlt]

What's needed is a "National Association Of Boaters With A Home Mooring Who Like To Hang About in the Same Area But Move A Bit every Fourteen Days"

 

Their voices should be heard!

[luctor et emergo]

What's needed is a "National Association Of Boaters With A Home Mooring Who Like To Hang About in the Same Area But Move A Bit every Fourteen Days"

 

Their voices should be heard!

I thought that was the National Bargee Travellers Association ?

[jenlyn]

It just maybe that C&RT were trying to sort out this type of anomaly when the link to the places map was leaked and given that they were aware of these types of issues then withdrew it completely.

 

Given the grief that is directed at C&RT because of the unauthorised release of (what has turned out to be) an incomplete version of the map, some people might believe that it was deliberately leaked to try and undermine C&RT and anything they do to try and sort out the people who claim to CC, but in fact are not interested in 'bona fide navigating', but can't be bothered to pay for a mooring.

Can't beat a good conspiracy theory.