What can be done about residential leisure moorer?

[BlueStringPudding]

Surely the only important question would be if the are using the mooring as a primary residence, not the boat. Boats aren't subject to planning permission, moorings are.

 

So why is my mooring's Council Tax assessment for a 1 bedroom, 1 bathroom property? I don't doubt that other boaters forms are filled in the same. Seems irrevelant if what you say is how moorings are assessed for council tax purposes. (Incidentally my form was filled in by the council tax lady visiting my boat, not my interpretation). Perhaps it's currently a grey area.

[Paul C]

If the boater on the leisure mooring doesn't stay there 365 days of the year are they really breaking any rules?

My understanding of planning law is that anything more than 28 consecutive days is in breach.

[BlueStringPudding]

I've got a boat licence, I pay council tax. I couldn't care less whether other people pay or not. I'd never grass anyone for licence evasion, never snitch to the council. Good luck to em I say. The more they upset the provisional IWA types, the better.

 

 

Abso-bloomin'-lutely

 

[nicknorman]

I've got a boat licence, I pay council tax. I couldn't care less whether other people pay or not. I'd never grass anyone for licence evasion, never snitch to the council. Good luck to em I say. The more they upset the provisional IWA types, the better.

Presumably then you couldn't care less that the likes of Starbucks, Google, Amazon, Boots etc manage(d) to avoid paying tax in the UK, that the MPs fiddled their expenses etc. because it doesn't affect you directly. I never realised you were such an apologist for corruption and gravy-train-ism.

[mark99]

 

 

Abso-bloomin'-lutely

 

 

 

Lets say hypothetically they ran a genny out of hours and abused you verbally. What's your response then?

[Delta9]

My understanding of planning law is that anything more than 28 consecutive days is in breach.

That is different to my understanding of planning law, so one of us is wrong.

 

So why is my mooring's Council Tax assessment for a 1 bedroom, 1 bathroom property?

I don't know, try asking the council.

Presumably then you couldn't care less that the likes of Starbucks, Google, Amazon, Boots etc manage(d) to avoid paying tax in the UK, that the MPs fiddled their expenses etc. because it doesn't affect you directly. I never realised you were such an apologist for corruption and gravy-train-ism.

Personally I support any and all evasion of taxes.

[valrene9600]

These situations are for each individual to decide his or her action. Do what you feel is right as to how you want to live your life.

If you feel strongly about someone getting more than you for less outlay you can report it or join them, your choice. I'm sure you don't need a forums help to make your decision. Unless of course you are for whatevever reason unable to make a decision in which case I apologise and hope the good folk here can help you.

[BlueStringPudding]

 

Lets say hypothetically they ran a genny out of hours and abused you verbally. What's your response then?

 

 

I'd report the gennie running to CRT (and did a few months ago with a boater who sneaked into my neighbours mooring behind me, and ran his engine till 11.30 pm even though at 9.30pm I'd asked him if he would please turn it off as I wasn't well and needed to sleep).

 

I'd report his verbal abuse to either CRT or the police, depending on severity of his/her behaviour.

 

I'd have no need to report him staying for free on the mooring because it genuinely does not have any negative impact on my life whatsoever. And surely that's the crux of the thing - only challenge the act that is having a direct and tangible negative impact. Anything else is gear grinding or "he's got something for free and I haven't"-ism.

Edited October 7, 2015 by BlueStringPudding

[Sabcat]

Presumably then you couldn't care less that the likes of Starbucks, Google, Amazon, Boots etc manage(d) to avoid paying tax in the UK, that the MPs fiddled their expenses etc. because it doesn't affect you directly. I never realised you were such an apologist for corruption and gravy-train-ism.

 

That's entirely the point, isn't it? The reason I pay council tax and get my licence is because I can, avoiding paying would add a layer of complication to my life and an element of looking over my shoulder I can well do without out.

 

To draw the comparisons you have there shows a staggering lack of understanding of what's going on. One set are abusing positions of power and privilege the others have no power at all, they're literally eking out an existence in the spaces in between.

[BlueStringPudding]

I don't know, try asking the council.

 

 

It was a rhetorical question, flagging that there is at least one case of the number of rooms in a boat being taken into consideration for Council Tax assessment, not just the mooring.

[nicknorman]

That's entirely the point, isn't it? The reason I pay council tax and get my licence is because I can, avoiding paying would add a layer of complication to my life and an element of looking over my shoulder I can well do without out.

 

To draw the comparisons you have there shows a staggering lack of understanding of what's going on. One set are abusing positions of power and privilege the others have no power at all, they're literally eking out an existence in the spaces in between.

So to your mind it is merely a matter of scale and wealth. But what if it were a millionaire boater with 3 Ferraris and a house in Chelsea, who decided to retire to the waterways but took the view that he didn't get rich by doing stupid things like paying for a licence if he could get away with it.

 

You are making a presumption that folk who avoid council tax and licences are those who "can't pay" but in reality some, and possibly many, will be those who "won't pay".

[John V]

 

 

I'd report the running to CRT (and did a few months ago with a boater who sneaked into my neighbours mooring behind me, and ran his engine till 11.30 pm even though at 9.30pm I'd asked him if he would please turn it off as I wasn't well and needed to sleep).

 

I'd report his verbal abuse to either CRT or the police, depending on severity of his/her behaviour.

 

I'd have no need to report him staying for free on the mooring because it genuinely does not have any negative impact on my life whatsoever. And surely that's the crux of the thing - only challenge the act that is having a direct and tangible negative impact. Anything else is gear grinding or "he's got something for free and I haven't"-ism.

 

But surely that was the whole point of the thread you started out by mocking, the character in the other thread Was having a direct and tangible negative impact

 

As regards a boat being classed as the lowest band rates, I was told that it was because of the lower standards of amenities.

(for example I have no rubbish collection, council lighting, maintained road access etc etc)

[nicknorman]

Personally I support any and all evasion of taxes.

Let's hope you never need to use the health service then.

[tidal]

I've got a boat licence, I pay council tax. I couldn't care less whether other people pay or not. I'd never grass anyone for licence evasion, never snitch to the council. Good luck to em I say. The more they upset the provisional IWA types, the better.

 

Damned right!

For the first time ever on here I have clicked on the green button

 

Generator/engine noise tends not to bother me but if it did I'd have a quiet chat (and if that didn't work a louder one)

[Dave_P]

 

 

 

Is this strictly true, either? I thought it had previously been established that no planning laws are being broken simply if people are living aboard on "leisure" mooring, and that it is not until any particular local authority decide that they do want to apply a "residential" status that any issues of legality kick in?

 

 

Living aboard on a residential mooring may be in breach of planning law if the local planning authority determines that an application for change of use is required and the occupier or owner fail to submit an application (or if they do submit an application and it's refused). The council may then serve a notice to the landowner, requiring them to stop the continuing use and return the site to it's previous use.

 

Obviously, this would be virtually unenforceable and leads to a legal mess if enforcement were attempted. So, as far as i know, it's never been tried.

 

For example: I have a leisure mooring. I live on my boat most of the time, I cruise for a few months a year across numerous local authority areas. I also stay with my partner on a regular basis in another local authority area. I therefore do not meet the critieria to be classed as a permanent resident in any one local authority area and am not eligable to pay council tax.

 

I could apply for a change of use to residential for my mooring, but what would be the point?

 

If I received communication from the council regarding the planning use class of my mooring, I would engage with them and come to a mutually agreed outcome. Am I breaking any laws or rules? No. Am I keeping my head down? Well, since I have my name, boat name and mooring location on this forum, I would say that I'm not! Do I care? No.

[Naughty Cal]

If the boater on the leisure mooring doesn't stay there 365 days of the year are they really breaking any rules?

I guess it depends on the sites terms and conditions.

 

At our marina it specifies you can stay onboard on the leisure moorings for 11 months of the year. So you need to be away from the berth for 30 days. Not difficult to achieve.

 

There is 1 official liveaboard mooring in the marina for which they pay a higher premium and obviously council tax. Not sure I would bother myself!

[NB Lola]

I would be inclined to report on the basis that I am, in part, paying for their refusal to, where required to do so, pay council tax. Evaders mean we pay more. The more who evade the more we pay to compensate lost revenue.

[Delta9]

 

It was a rhetorical question, flagging that there is at least one case of the number of rooms in a boat being taken into consideration for Council Tax assessment, not just the mooring.

The boat may well be taken into consideration, but is the mooring that attracts the council tax, not the boat.

Let's hope you never need to use the health service then.

I've spent most of my life living without a 'free' health service, I'm quite used to it.

[tidal]

I would be inclined to report on the basis that I am, in part, paying for their refusal to, where required to do so, pay council tax. Evaders mean we pay more. The more who evade the more we pay to compensate lost revenue.

 

In the world of bricks and mortar that is probably true but usually this is not the case where moorings are concerned.

[Paul C]

The boat may well be taken into consideration, but is the mooring that attracts the council tax, not the boat.

I've spent most of my life living without a 'free' health service, I'm quite used to it.

 

Not always - there are some situations where the boat and mooring are assessed; but in most situations, it is the mooring alone which is assessed. See http://manuals.voa.gov.uk/corporate/publications/Manuals/CouncilTaxManual/council_tax_man_pn/t-ct-man-pn7-appd.html

[Dave_P]

The boat may well be taken into consideration, but is the mooring that attracts the council tax, not the boat.

I've spent most of my life living without a 'free' health service, I'm quite used to it.

How about education, street lighting (or streets at all), law enforcement, etc.etc.

[alan_fincher]

I think the double standards between griping about people mooring for free and not griping about people breaching the terms of a leisure mooring is to do with numbers. I suspect there's a higher percentage of leisure mooring renters breaking that rule, and so there's a "we're all in this together, shush" mentality; and relatively few people living aboard and paying for full residential rights, council tax etc on their mooring.

 

I realise you may not only be talking about CRT directly managed moorings, but I would suggest that they represent a large percentage of the cases where people may be living aboard without the mooring having a full residential status recognised by a planning authority.

 

If you look at this probably most frequent example, I am unclear by what you mean by "breaching the terms of a leisure mooring" or "leisure mooring renters breaking that rule". The standard mooring agreement in use by CRT makes absolutely no mention of "leisure" or "residential", and lays down no conditions whatsoever about living aboard or otherwise. When I have taken a CRT permanent mooring, those are the terms and conditions I have signed up to, and nothing in them suggests I would be doing wrong by living full time on my boat. (And, for completeness, my moorings have never had additional local conditions attached that vary the BW/CRT standard conditions in any way).

 

So, although I have never lived on a boat at a CRT mooring, can you please spell out exactly what "terms" or "rules" I might be breaking if I chose to do so?

 

I would go so far as to suggest that if you check, no such "terms" or "rules" actually exist for the majority of CRT directly managed moorings, at least. Perhaps why they don't treat people doing this of having done anything wrong? Perhaps no "blind eye" needs to be turned?

[DeanS]

Blue...you're stirring a hornets nest

we all know those leisure moorings, aren't used by liveaboards....

[jenlyn]

Presumably then you couldn't care less that the likes of Starbucks, Google, Amazon, Boots etc manage(d) to avoid paying tax in the UK, that the MPs fiddled their expenses etc. because it doesn't affect you directly. I never realised you were such an apologist for corruption and gravy-train-ism.

None of that is really relevant to the thread, the comparison, or attempt of is ridiculous.

Though I can see why you are putting it across.

[Guest]

I agree.

 

And it's up to CRT to enforce breaches of their rules too. And yet so many boaters rant on here, and complain to CRT about their fellow boater when they see them apparently mooring for free. But the same moral standing isn't applied to informing CRT of people residing on their leisure mooring or giving the local authority a heads up about it either. That's the point I'm interested in hearing other boaters' opinions about.

When we had a CRT LTM there was absolute zero rules or stipulation about living aboard. A few people did on our moorings too, but they were certainly not breaching anything regarding CRT.

 

As for Council Tax well I am not sure how that would work in practice regarding payment if the mooring doesn't have an address which can be banded.

 

They may be in some sort of 'limbo' regarding the council but unless there is a specific planning restriction that says no body can reside there I can't see what LA rules they are breaking either.