Validating That A CRT Volunteer Is A CRT Volunteer.

[jenlyn]

 

 

 

FURTHER EDIT:

 

I'd also question a blanket statement like "you don't moor in lock flights", because obviously this has to be tempered by the lengths of the pounds and also volatility of water levels.

 

Elsewhere on the GU, as examples, both Buckby and Stoke Bruerne flights have visitor moorings designated within the flights themselves, but obviously these are in the longest pound in each, not in the much shorter ones where relatively small losses of water can cause big changes of level. I happily moor in either of these, but I'd think twice about mooring in the much shorter pound above Nelson lock, because I know levels can quickly fall in that flight.

Exactly.

[alan_fincher]

I even struggle with the thought of mooring in the "long pound" at Stoke Bruene if there is no room at the top I will go all the way down.

 

its just common sense

 

ETA same at Buckby, even in the last pound below top lock

 

Which also actually has permanent offside moorings in it!..................................

[GUMPY]

 

Which also actually has permanent offside moorings in it!..................................

One from memory "Comfortably Numb"

[jenlyn]

I even struggle with the thought of mooring in the "long pound" at Stoke Bruene if there is no room at the top I will go all the way down.

 

its just common sense

 

ETA same at Buckby, even in the last pound below top lock

Also at Maffers wont stop in the flight even above bottom lock

Its just the way its always been.

Good, all the more room for us.

[GUMPY]

 

Good, all the more room for us.

Yes but if we are going in the same direction I will be an hour in front of you in the morning

[adam1uk]

I even struggle with the thought of mooring in the "long pound" at Stoke Bruene if there is no room at the top I will go all the way down.

its just common sense

ETA same at Buckby, even in the last pound below top lock

 

What's your problem with them? Both those long pounds have back pumping into them, so there's not likely to be a water level problem.

[jenlyn]

Yes but if we are going in the same direction I will be an hour in front of you in the morning

Even better. Make sure you shut the gates.

[GUMPY]

What's your problem with them? Both those long pounds have back pumping into them, so there's not likely to be a water level problem.

I have seen the long pound at Stoke Bruene empty overnight that's enough to stop me mooring there.

 

ETA its quite interesting just how much flow you can get through the tunnel with all the paddles open on the top two locks at SB. The boat that left us going north almost ground to a halt as it entered the tunnel.

 

Even better. Make sure you shut the gates.

Would you get past Cosgrove from SB in a day? Edited July 17, 2015 by Loddon

[jenlyn]

I have seen the long pound at Stoke Bruene empty overnight that's enough to stop me mooring there.

 

 

Would you get past Cosgrove from SB in a day?

I've done fenny to stoke bruerne in a day, but what's that have to do with mooring in lock pounds?

[GUMPY]

I've done fenny to stoke bruerne in a day, but what's that have to do with mooring in lock pounds?

its to do with how many gates I might have left for you to shut if you were following me south. Edited July 17, 2015 by Loddon

[jenlyn]

its to do with how many gates I might have left for you to shut if you were following me south.

I'd get the bike out and catch you up show you how to shut them. I'm a helpful person.

[Guest]

I suspect the types we're likely to get are far, far worse than ex military types (who, on the whole are ok). We're going to get pretend ex military types. An entirely different breed altogether.

Tell me about it. I used to work with two such individuals. When they had conversations about "the military" you could smell the bullshit a mile away. Methinks they played too many computer games.

[Blazeaway]

If I have broken an unwritten rule then I do sincerely apologise but there in lies the problem how on earth is anyone supposed to know these unwritten 'common sense' rules, in my case it seemed it was ok for me to move on and be replaced by another which seemed to be rather spurious.

[David Schweizer]

If I have broken an unwritten rule then I do sincerely apologise but there in lies the problem how on earth is anyone supposed to know these unwritten 'common sense' rules, in my case it seemed it was ok for me to move on and be replaced by another which seemed to be rather spurious.

 

I agree, it is difficult to know that there are "rules" if they are not publicised. Interestingly, until quite recently there were (somewhat flimsy) notices posted in the bottom pound asking boats not to moor in it, but since the dismissal of the part time lock keeper they have disapeared.

[jenlyn]

You there! Yes you with the boat! Get off our canal, we don't want you!

 

[MtB]

Excellent value for money.

 

I'll stay for six weeks, how do I pay?

Actually, given one gets 14 days free, each month costs a max of £425. This works out at about £5,000 a year for a permanent oxford city centre mooring. This really ISN'T bad value for money!

 

 

(Edit to correct typo.)

Edited July 18, 2015 by Mike the Boilerman

[Higgs]

Huh. Each day in a private marina costs me £3.10 to CRT. Maybe I should send the mooring fee bill to CRT.

[Dave Clinton]

Excellent value for money.

 

I'll stay for six weeks, how do I pay?

 

Actually, given one gets 14 days free, each month costs a max of £425. This works out at about £5,000 a year for a permanent oxford city centre mooring. This really ISN'T bad value for money!

 

 

(Edit to correct typo.)

It would be wonderful if someone actually called CRT's bluff on this. Perhaps the young man looking for an Oxford residential mooring for his studies?

[Higgs]

It would be wonderful if someone actually called CRT's bluff on this. Perhaps the young man looking for an Oxford residential mooring for his studies?

 

 

I suppose, in answer to that, CRT could bring in a rising scale of overstay charging.

[MtB]

It would be wonderful if someone actually called CRT's bluff on this. Perhaps the young man looking for an Oxford residential mooring for his studies?

 

 

Yes it would be interesting wouldn't it.

 

CRT would probably put a patrol notice on the boat alleging overstaying, then start enforcement. Eventually the licence would be rescinded/expire, then the boater could apply for a Judicial Review using the sign as evidence that he was entitled to moor there as long as he likes.

 

After all, the sign says we can mooring for 14 days free, then £25 a day for each day in excess of the 14 days.

 

Only possible fly in the ointment is the sign in the photo do not have a CRT logo on it...

[Higgs]

 

 

Yes it would be interesting wouldn't it.

 

CRT would probably put a patrol notice on the boat alleging overstaying, then start enforcement. Eventually the licence would be rescinded/expire, then the boater could apply for a Judicial Review using the sign as evidence that he was entitled to moor there as long as he likes.

 

After all, the sign says we can mooring for 14 days free, then £25 a day for each day in excess of the 14 days.

 

Only possible fly in the ointment is the sign in the photo do not have a CRT logo on it...

 

 

Wouldn't think that necessary. Don't think a logo is essential. If it was, CRT would apply one, if that was a legal point of order.

Edited July 18, 2015 by Higgs

[Dave Clinton]

 

 

Yes it would be interesting wouldn't it.

 

CRT would probably put a patrol notice on the boat alleging overstaying, then start enforcement. Eventually the licence would be rescinded/expire, then the boater could apply for a Judicial Review using the sign as evidence that he was entitled to moor there as long as he likes.

 

After all, the sign says we can mooring for 14 days free, then £25 a day for each day in excess of the 14 days.

 

Only possible fly in the ointment is the sign in the photo do not have a CRT logo on it...

 

It would be necessary to move once every month to qualify for the 14 free days but that could be a (certified ;-) one hour journey for water and back.

 

I can't see how they could possible object given the clear offer on the sign.

And they couldn't remove the licence for not meeting the CC criteria because this would now be a "place where the boat can be reasonably left'

Edited July 18, 2015 by Dave Clinton

[MtB]

 

It would be necessary to move once every month to qualify for the 14 free days but that could be a (certified ;-) one hour journey for water and back.

 

I'm not sure even that would necessary. The sigh says each month, so each new month results in a new 14 day free period, followed by £25 a day thereafter. Until the 1st of the next month. No mention of having to move once a month on the signs.

 

 

 

 

And they couldn't remove the licence for not meeting the CC criteria because this would now be a "place where the boat can be reasonably left'

 

A very elegant argument!

[Higgs]

 

It would be necessary to move once every month to qualify for the 14 free days but that could be a (certified ;-) one hour journey for water and back.

 

I can't see how they could possible object given the clear offer on the sign.

And they couldn't remove the licence for not meeting the CC criteria because this would now be a "place where the boat can be reasonably left'

 

 

As the charge is a 'charge' and not a 'penalty', CRT have set the liability. Charges paid would meet those obligations fully, I'd assume.

[MtB]

 

 

As the charge is a 'charge' and not a 'penalty', CRT have set the liability. Charges paid would meet those obligations fully, I'd assume.

 

 

 

Never assume anything...