Right to overstay when reasonable

[Leo No2]

I agree entirely, other than that you have to be careful where you break your legs. Don't break them in the middle of nowhere, that's pointless. You can get away with overstaying there anyway!

 

If you break a leg on a visitor's mooring, then you have the advantage of nearly shops and pubs, plus the odd chippie or McD handy and easy road access.

 

To those who have REALLY broken their legs, I sincerely apologise for the levitation applied above. I have yet to break one, and I'm not looking forward to it at ALL.

It's not your leg you need to worry about - it's when you break your hip (as I have done) and so far it is 55 days and I am quite sure I couldn't boat at the moment (or safely get on a boat) nor could I hazard a guess when it will be safe - that's a repaired broken hip not a replacement one; very different prognosis between the two!

[Loafer]

It's not your leg you need to worry about - it's when you break your hip (as I have done) and so far it is 55 days and I am quite sure I couldn't boat at the moment (or safely get on a boat) nor could I hazard a guess when it will be safe - that's a repaired broken hip not a replacement one; very different prognosis between the two!

 

Ah sorry Leo, my post was a bit tongue-in-cheek and aimed at the 'mickey takers'. I am in support of the genuine cases.

[Tecka]

No, it was made vague purposefuly. I like that. It would be good if some people realised how good it actually is. It could get worse, and already has in some ways with CRT putting out the rubbish you posted earlier.

 

(no offence intended to you)

[Guest]

OK ta. Never had either, yet...

If you enquire you will find your GP will have a 'menu' of charges for a whole range of things including passport ID verification, letters to insurance companies, employers etc etc. Our practice displays it in the surgery and on their web site.

 

If its not within their GP contract with the NHS to provide medical services they will inevitably charge you for it. Some of it doesn't come cheap either.

[Mike Todd]

No, it was made vague purposefuly. I like that. It would be good if some people realised how good it actually is. It could get worse, and already has in some ways with CRT putting out the rubbish you posted earlier.

 

(no offence intended to you)

Not rubbish - could be helpful. Since a major factor in the legitimacy of a >14 day stay is whether CRT would find it reasonable then a description of things that a priori they would accept as reasonable is helpful. The issue arise when the boater and CRT disagree about the grounds being reasonable and, just occasionally, this will end up in the enforcement process which, ultimately, requires a court to decide. Anything which allows the boater to to make decisions knowing that they are unlikely to result in enforcement is surely a good thing. Of course, issuing such a list just not prevent either party from adopting a different interpretation in individual cases.

[Southern Star]

If you enquire you will find your GP will have a 'menu' of charges for a whole range of things including passport ID verification, letters to insurance companies, employers etc etc. Our practice displays it in the surgery and on their web site.

 

If its not within their GP contract with the NHS to provide medical services they will inevitably charge you for it. Some of it doesn't come cheap either.

Yea I have to pay for my HGV medical every five years, costs £100 and takes about 20 minutes.

[Loafer]

If you enquire you will find your GP will have a 'menu' of charges for a whole range of things including passport ID verification, letters to insurance companies, employers etc etc. Our practice displays it in the surgery and on their web site.

 

If its not within their GP contract with the NHS to provide medical services they will inevitably charge you for it. Some of it doesn't come cheap either.

 

Ta for that, MJG.

[David Mack]

In my opinion stopping for 6 weeks because you broke both your legs would be reasonable.

Agreed.

 

The board get no say in whether or not the circumstances are reasonable.

Where do you get that from? The whole legal concept of "reasonable" has been established in terms of the view of the hypothetical reasonable man - "the man on the Clapham omnibus". Both the boater and CRT have to apply this test in a particular case. If the boater can make his case to CRT that the circumstances are reasonable, then he will be allowed to stay - so he does indeed have to "satisfy the Board".

 

If the board dispute the reasonableness of the boaters circumstances then they would have to take the boater to court where a Judge could make that decision.

But they won't do that. They will simply commence their enforcement process as has been described in umpteen threads on this site. Although there is nothing to stop the boater taking CRT to court where a Judge could make that decision.

[MtB]

 

But they won't do that. They will simply commence their enforcement process as has been described in umpteen threads on this site. Although there is nothing to stop the boater taking CRT to court where a Judge could make that decision.

 

 

Oh yes there is. The OP is whinging about paying his GP ten quid for a doctor's note. How much does it cost to initiate a judicial review? Several thousand quid I suspect, which the OP may also think unreasonable.

 

 

(Spelling edit)

Edited January 3, 2016 by Mike the Boilerman

[Delta9]

. If the boater can make his case to CRT that the circumstances are reasonable, then he will be allowed to stay - so he does indeed have to "satisfy the Board".

 

 

The boater is under no obligation to make any case that his stay is reasonable to CRT. CRT are in no position to "allow" the boater to stay. The boater is legally allowed to stay if reasonable in the circumstances. Please point me to a law that says CRT have the right to judge whether or not the circumstances are reasonable.

 

 

But they won't do that. They will simply commence their enforcement process as has been described in umpteen threads on this site.

Indeed, but they would be doing so illegally under the false pretence that they are entitled to do so. A lot of boaters seem to accept CRT making up their own laws which is why they get away with so much.

[Loafer]

So what does one DO then? Just ring 'em up, tell 'em you have a bad back and just stay there?

[furnessvale]

The boater is under no obligation to make any case that his stay is reasonable to CRT. CRT are in no position to "allow" the boater to stay. The boater is legally allowed to stay if reasonable in the circumstances. Please point me to a law that says CRT have the right to judge whether or not the circumstances are reasonable.

 

 

In which case, in the absence of information to the contrary, all that CRT can do is initiate enforcement action.

 

It would then be up to a court to decide what was reasonable.

 

George ex nb Alton retired

 

Edit to add, however I am sure that in awarding costs if nothing else, the court would have regard to how CRT were forced to take the actions they did.

Edited January 3, 2016 by furnessvale

[Delta9]

So what does one DO then? Just ring 'em up, tell 'em you have a bad back and just stay there?

You just stay there until it is reasonable to move again. Of course that will lead to action by CRT, but you will be in the right and they will be in the wrong.

 

or

 

You roll over and provide them with doctors letters etc.. at your own expense and CRT get to make up the law as they go along.

In which case, in the absence of information to the contrary, all that CRT can do is initiate enforcement action.

 

Indeed, or they could accept that they are in no position to do so

Edited January 3, 2016 by Delta9

[Tony Dunkley]

So what does one DO then? Just ring 'em up, tell 'em you have a bad back and just stay there?

 

Personally, I wouldn't even bother with the phone call.

If I had a good reason for staying put in one place for longer than 14 days, then I would do so without reference to C&RT, and leave it to them to turn it into a problem if they so wished.

[NigelMoore]

How much does it cost to initiate a judicial review?

 

£140.

 

https://www.justice.gov.uk/downloads/courts/administrative-court/aco-fees-22-apr-2014.doc

 

And if the boater was sufficiently indigent to find a tenner a difficult sum [and was therefore in receipt of relevant benefits] they would be eligible for fee-remission; it would cost them nothing but stationary and time.

[GoodGurl]

 

Personally, I wouldn't even bother with the phone call.

If I had a good reason for staying put in one place for longer than 14 days, then I would do so without reference to C&RT, and leave it to them to turn it into a problem if they so wished.

which would bring you under enforcement, this is probably why so many boaters get into trouble useing this method

[furnessvale]

Indeed, or they could accept that they are in no position to do so

On the contrary, they are in a position to do so.

 

They will have all the evidence they need to prove a prime face case of overstaying.

 

The burden of proof (onus probandi) then transfers to the defendant to disprove the prosecution case, which presumably would be by producing reasonable grounds for overstaying, which had not been offered before that point.

 

At this stage the court may well accept the defence and dismiss the case, but as I inferred in the rest of my posting, the court may well take a dim view of the defendants actions and, as a minimum, refuse to award costs.

 

George ex nb Alton retired

[MtB]

 

£140.

 

https://www.justice.gov.uk/downloads/courts/administrative-court/aco-fees-22-apr-2014.doc

 

And if the boater was sufficiently indigent to find a tenner a difficult sum [and was therefore in receipt of relevant benefits] they would be eligible for fee-remission; it would cost them nothing but stationary and time.

 

 

That's good news then.

 

How long does it take to get one's JR heard?

 

Would it be reasonable to stay in the same place waiting for the hearing date to arrive?

[Delta9]

which would bring you under enforcement, this is probably why so many boaters get into trouble useing this method

What would be your alternative suggestion? Do you give them what they want even if they have no legal right to demand it of you? How far do you let them go before you start saying no to their illegal demands?

[GoodGurl]

What would be your alternative suggestion? Do you give them what they want even if they have no legal right to demand it of you? How far do you let them go before you start saying no to their illegal demands?

if you dont ring and ask how do you know they will refuse?

[Tony Dunkley]

which would bring you under enforcement, this is probably why so many boaters get into trouble useing this method

 

You really need to consider the question of what this "enforcement " is supposed to be enforcing. Are you able to be any more specific than the EO's who initiate it ?

[Delta9]

if you dont ring and ask how do you know they will refuse?

I don't need to ring and ask, they have no legal right to refuse.

 

As I said, how far do you let them go before you start saying no? Best to nip it in the bud before they get carried away (if they haven't already).

[GoodGurl]

 

You really need to consider the question of what this "enforcement " is supposed to be enforcing. Are you able to be any more specific than the EO's who initiate it ?

all i am saying is i had a problem moving due to illness, i rang CRT explained the problem and got a permit to moor, this was 10 months ago and i still get a permit FOC every 2 months, if i hadn't have rang and asked i would be in the s'#*t

[Tony Dunkley]

On the contrary, they are in a position to do so.

 

They will have all the evidence they need to prove a prime face case of overstaying.

.

 

George ex nb Alton retired

 

I'm not sure why you think that, because they've never yet done this, or for that matter, even attempted to do so.

[NigelMoore]

How long does it take to get one's JR heard?

 

Would it be reasonable to stay in the same place waiting for the hearing date to arrive?

 

Months, depending on the extant list of cases and available court time.

 

I do not believe it would be reasonable to stay in the same place while waiting for the hearing date; the argument for the reasonableness of the stay would originally have been quite separate from awaiting a court date - you don't need to hang around for that.