Selling boat to your mum!

[cotswoldsman]

 

Sorry I didn't mean to offence anyone, I was just thinking remote=cheap and somehow I thought that north is cheap. So no one is actually doing it?

Hey its a nice day I am in London today the sun is shinning how about doing some cruising instead of working out how you can do no cruising

[yellow_miguel]

Implying the north is a god forsaken place is not going to endear me to you. Another slight mith is that moorings up north are cheap. Why don't you just do some cruising if you are looking for ways to get round the law please do not expect me to help you

You could have done 5 miles for the time you have spent on here

 

Good point, the weather is decent I might as well set off to cover some distance.

[mayalld]

How about getting a mooring in some godforsaken place (really cheap one, up north for example) and carrying on cruising? Would that work?

 

So, just to be clear on this;

 

What you want is advice on ways in which you can organise things so that you can move rather less than the fairly minimal amount that CRT want you to move.

 

You think that a Winter mooring should mean that you have to move less because you have less time to move - not so. You are expected to move regularly and within a sufficient range. The range that they want is not so large as to make covering it several time in a 7 month period remotely difficult. The requirements are not onerous, so why should they cut you even more slack?

 

You want to play a game of changing owners all the time so that you can flaunt the rules whilst frustrating enforcement attempts.

 

You want to look at a ghost mooring so that you can bridge hop.

 

Complying with the rules isn't particularly difficult, but it does require some effort on your part. Other people make the effort to comply. If everybody took it upon themselves to find ways to not comply, the canals would be an even bigger mess than they already are. If others make the effort, why do you imagine that such people will wish to help you evade the rules.

 

You say you moved about quite a bit. Just how much is quite a bit?

[alan_fincher]

How about getting a mooring in some godforsaken place (really cheap one, up north for example) and carrying on cruising? Would that work?

 

 

Wind up.

 

Yes, I'm now thinking I have fallen hook line and sinker, and treated the original query as genuine.

 

If the OP is about to suggest he is entirely genuine, I suggest he first reads through the threads about new T&Cs for those who do have a declared home mooring, (or alternatively those about "ghost moorings"), and it ought to adequately explain to him that CRT are going over the top to make it pointless to pay for a mooring at a remote location that you never use.

 

Sadly though this does now scream of "wind up".......

[matty40s]

 

So, just to be clear on this;

 

.

 

You say you moved about quite a bit. Just how much is quite a bit?

Turned over in bed all the time and sometimes slept in the front cabin.

[mayalld]

 

 

 

Yes, I'm now thinking I have fallen hook line and sinker, and treated the original query as genuine.

 

If the OP is about to suggest he is entirely genuine, I suggest he first reads through the threads about new T&Cs for those who do have a declared home mooring, (or alternatively those about "ghost moorings"), and it ought to adequately explain to him that CRT are going over the top to make it pointless to pay for a mooring at a remote location that you never use.

 

Sadly though this does now scream of "wind up".......

 

Whilst that thought was very much present in my mind, I am conscious that in the past I (amongst others) have been accused of being too ready to suggest that a new poster is trolling us.

 

So, in the spirit of thinking the best of our new poster, I have decided to accept that he or she is genuine for the time being.

[alan_fincher]

 

Whilst that thought was very much present in my mind, I am conscious that in the past I (amongst others) have been accused of being too ready to suggest that a new poster is trolling us.

 

So, in the spirit of thinking the best of our new poster, I have decided to accept that he or she is genuine for the time being.

 

And which is why I have suggested further reading up on the topic they can do, if it is a serious question......

[cotswoldsman]

Turned over in bed all the time and sometimes slept in the front cabin.

Now I have reverse layout are you now going to having an anti front cabin thing now?

[Paul C]

There's a couple of problems with selling the boat to your mum - 1) if its simply to cicrumvent the licence conditions, then its fraudulent, 2) your mum, not you, might end up with a criminal record (since it is a crime.....low level offence though). Its not the most brilliant way to circumvent the rules, all things considered. There are better ways to comply:

 

1) the simplest, is to move more, and more often - thousands of boaters do this and have no issues at all.

2) take a home mooring

3) give up boating and find more suitable accommodation (you're into boating for the accommodation, not actual moving around on a boat, right?)

4) give up whatever ties you to London and move home/job elsewhere where housing costs are much more reasonable etc

 

For option 2, you'd need to satisfy the board WRT the mooring - ie if its far away and never used, it will be considered a "ghost mooring" and even though there is a legal loophole here, CRT are aware of it and will act as if they are applying the law, if they withhold a licence - you'd then need to pay not insignificant legal costs to challenge it.

[Naughty Cal]

There's a couple of problems with selling the boat to your mum - 1) if its simply to cicrumvent the licence conditions, then its fraudulent, 2) your mum, not you, might end up with a criminal record (since it is a crime.....low level offence though). Its not the most brilliant way to circumvent the rules, all things considered. There are better ways to comply:

 

1) the simplest, is to move more, and more often - thousands of boaters do this and have no issues at all.

2) take a home mooring

3) give up boating and find more suitable accommodation (you're into boating for the accommodation, not actual moving around on a boat, right?)

4) give up whatever ties you to London and move home/job elsewhere where housing costs are much more reasonable etc

 

For option 2, you'd need to satisfy the board WRT the mooring - ie if its far away and never used, it will be considered a "ghost mooring" and even though there is a legal loophole here, CRT are aware of it and will act as if they are applying the law, if they withhold a licence - you'd then need to pay not insignificant legal costs to challenge it.

If the OP does take a mooring elsewhere in the country, under the new terms and conditions they would be expected to cruise as if CCing away from the mooring anyway. So no real benefit to doing so.

 

The simple answer to the OP's "problem" is option 1. It shouldn't really be that difficult.

[RLWP]

I'm a great fan of option 4

 

Richard

[Athy]

your mum, not you, might end up with a criminal record (since it is a crime.....low level offence though).

Are you sure about this? I would think that it's not a criminal offence. At worst it might be a civil offence, and perhaps not even that, as the offence is against the rules of an organisation, not against the laws of the land.

 

Nonetheless, my recommendation would be that Miguel gets himself a mooring, then he will not need to move at all unless he wants to.

[cotswoldsman]

There's a couple of problems with selling the boat to your mum - 1) if its simply to cicrumvent the licence conditions, then its fraudulent, 2) your mum, not you, might end up with a criminal record (since it is a crime.....low level offence though). Its not the most brilliant way to circumvent the rules, all things considered. There are better ways to comply:

 

1) the simplest, is to move more, and more often - thousands of boaters do this and have no issues at all.

2) take a home mooring

3) give up boating and find more suitable accommodation (you're into boating for the accommodation, not actual moving around on a boat, right?)

4) give up whatever ties you to London and move home/job elsewhere where housing costs are much more reasonable etc

 

For option 2, you'd need to satisfy the board WRT the mooring - ie if its far away and never used, it will be considered a "ghost mooring" and even though there is a legal loophole here, CRT are aware of it and will act as if they are applying the law, if they withhold a licence - you'd then need to pay not insignificant legal costs to challenge it.

You do spout some nonsense

[Lady Muck]

And those moorings in London that don't cost a small fortune are where?

 

To the OP.

 

Yes if you sell the boat to someone else they don't inherit your movement record. The clock is sent back to 0 again. BUT

New boaters are followed very closely now, from the moment they receive the passive agressive welcome letter, so if your movement isn't enough, you could be in the sin bin again in just three months.

Winter moorings only put on hold any enforcement, they don't lift you out of it. You aren't given any extra leeway for buying one, this is fantasy, soon as you come off a winter mooring you are treated same as any other ccer.

So, before you do anything drastic such as selling the boat to your mother. Ask for your movement records from CRT, see if they match up with where you have been.

Move every 14 days at least, don't overstay, don't hang around most of the time in one area as they now seem to enforce on this, if you spend 11 months of the year in Hackney, even if you move every 14 days, that doesn't seem to be permtted anymore.

You need a bare mimimum range of 20 miles over the period of your license - thats roughly Kensal Rise to Stonebridge. If you can't manage this then it does seem to be a case of winning one of those non existant moorings ( a mate of mine just won one near me after just five years of failed auction bids). Good luck!

Hope this makes sense.

[Dave_P]

Definitely a wind-up

[Lady Muck]

I don't care if it is, there are plenty of real life newbies in same predicament asking the same questions. Seeing as a third of license renewals are bring restricted in London, I think people have a right to know. And seeing CRT aren't even following their own procedure a lot of the time.

I'm out cruising right now and I'm astounded how many Mr and Mrs Cruise-the-system shiny boaters are being mistakenly enforced in this way.

 

Oh and finally, a friend was section 8 for never being seen at his mooring at the other side of London, this was a year ago at least, so, if you get a mooring and aren't seen near or on it, then you are treated as cc.

Edited April 22, 2015 by Lady Muck

[Athy]

You do spout some nonsense

But you don't, John, so which parts of Paul's post do you reckon are nonsense? I reckon he's on dodgy ground with the statements in his opening paragraph but the rest looks sensible enough.

[nicknorman]

I'm out cruising right now and I'm astounded how many Mr and Mrs Cruise-the-system shiny boaters are being mistakenly enforced in this way.

Setting aside your politically incorrect presumption of heterosexuality for a moment, I delighted to see you think shiny boats should be exempt from enforcement action.

[Lady Muck]

Ok then Mr and Mr and Mrs And Mrs - happy now?

[mayalld]

Are you sure about this? I would think that it's not a criminal offence. At worst it might be a civil offence, and perhaps not even that, as the offence is against the rules of an organisation, not against the laws of the land.

 

 

This is an interesting area of the law.

 

At the moment, it appears that the OP is claimed by CRT to be in breach of its rules. That is, as you say, not a criminal matter.

 

HOWEVER, the moment that the OP "sells" the boat to his or her mother, this ceases to be exclusively about CRT rules, and potentially becomes an offence under Section 1 Fraud Act 2006

 

 

 

1 Fraud

 

(1) A person is guilty of fraud if he is in breach of any of the sections listed in subsection (2) (which provide for different ways of committing the offence).

 

(2) The sections are—

 

a. section 2 (fraud by false representation),

 

b. section 3 (fraud by failing to disclose information), and

 

c. section 4 (fraud by abuse of position).

 

(3) A person who is guilty of fraud is liable—

 

a. on summary conviction, to imprisonment for a term not exceeding 12 months or to a fine not exceeding the statutory maximum (or to both);

 

b. on conviction on indictment, to imprisonment for a term not exceeding 10 years or to a fine (or to both).

 

 

2 Fraud by false representation

(1) A person is in breach of this section if he—

a. dishonestly makes a false representation, and

b. intends, by making the representation—

i. to make a gain for himself or another, or

ii. to cause loss to another or to expose another to a risk of loss.

(2) A representation is false if—

a. it is untrue or misleading, and

b. the person making it knows that it is, or might be, untrue or misleading.

(3) “Representation” means any representation as to fact or law, including a representation as to the state of mind of—

a. the person making the representation, or

b. any other person.

(4 )A representation may be express or implied.

(5) For the purposes of this section a representation may be regarded as made if it (or anything implying it) is submitted in any form to any system or device designed to receive, convey or respond to communications (with or without human intervention).

 

 

5 "Gain" and "Loss"

(1) The references to gain and loss in sections 2 to 4 are to be read in accordance with this section.

(2) “Gain” and “loss”—

a. extend only to gain or loss in money or other property;

b. include any such gain or loss whether temporary or permanent;

and “property” means any property whether real or personal (including things in action and other intangible property).

(3) “Gain” includes a gain by keeping what one has, as well as a gain by getting what one does not have.

(4) “Loss” includes a loss by not getting what one might get, as well as a loss by parting with what one has.

 

So, the key question is;

 

If the OP "sells" the boat to his or her mum (almost certainly for a notional sum, and whilst continuing to occupy the boat exactly as now), and tells CRT this, with a view only to preventing them taking certain actions that will be to his detriment, has he made a false representation under the terms of the Act.

[gaggle]

Anyone really believe he has truly come on for anything other than a wind up , he has his boat name ISIS in his info.

[mayalld]

Anyone really believe he has truly come on for anything other than a wind up , he has his boat name ISIS in his info.

 

Whilst that could be a wind up, Isis is NOT an uncommon name for a boat.

[Lady Muck]

Anyone really believe he has truly come on for anything other than a wind up , he has his boat name ISIS in his info.

It may not be, I've been asked the same questions offline, before. Anyway, it doesn't matter, it's an interesting discussion to have.

[alan_fincher]

Anyone really believe he has truly come on for anything other than a wind up , he has his boat name ISIS in his info.

 

And the boat listing of inland boats on CanalPlanAC indicates it to be one of the most common boat names - there are approaching fifty boats called Isis.

 

IIRC one of our most esteemed members owned a boat called exactly this.

[Dave_P]

 

Oh and finally, a friend was section 8 for never being seen at his mooring at the other side of London, this was a year ago at least, so, if you get a mooring and aren't seen near or on it, then you are treated as cc.

Presumably this happened after they refused to issue a license? Are you suggesting that this refusal was purely down to not being seen at his mooring? If so, it was refused without any lawful authority. I hope your friend is making an appeal?