Should marina moorers need licences?

[StephenA]

Keep up dog. They are forced into requiring me to have a licence by CRT, there is no point in fighting them as they would have to kick me out. There is no choice but to give in to CRT's unfair demands, they have a monopoly. Marinas that don't require licences are few and far between and all of the ones within commuting distance of my job are full.

 

So you have a boat moored in a marina on a canal (I've no idea if they offer residential moorings or not - if not then that could well be a breach of their T&Cs). The primary business of a marina is to provide moorings for boats who use the canal they are connected to, and to provide ancillary services such as fuel supply, chandlery etc and often throw a bar in as well. You have decided to use a boat as a floating home with no intention of ever using the canal. Is it unreasonable for CRT to expect that boats in a marina connected to CRT waters are actually going to go out onto the canal and aren't just floating cottages?

[Higgs]

It is also (almost explicitly) part of CaRT's enforcement strategy. Given that they have insufficient resources to be everywhere all the time, the contractual obligation which the marina operators enter into in exchange for the right to connect to the canal system as a business benefit, is an additional means of ensuring the boats are licensed. They are unconcerned by the needs of people who, apart from this matter, would not be customers.

If the number of boats who moor in marinas with an extant NAA is minimal, then it is likely that CaRT (and any judicial review) would conclude that the current arrangement has a net benefit compared with removing it.

 

 

Poor attitude.

 

So you have a boat moored in a marina on a canal (I've no idea if they offer residential moorings or not - if not then that could well be a breach of their T&Cs). The primary business of a marina is to provide moorings for boats who use the canal they are connected to, and to provide ancillary services such as fuel supply, chandlery etc and often throw a bar in as well. You have decided to use a boat as a floating home with no intention of ever using the canal. Is it unreasonable for CRT to expect that boats in a marina connected to CRT waters are actually going to go out onto the canal and aren't just floating cottages?

 

 

There's the rub. Is this supposed to be a civilised and democratic country, or not. ? Or, are you happy with fascist dictators.

[Hawkmoth]

Those who say that unlicensed boats may venture out occasionally are quite right. We once moored in a marina where a licence was your choice and several unlicensed boats regularly went out for weekends. If the license requirement was quashed then there would be more license evasion.

Bob

[b0atman]

I wonder what these none licenced boaters would say if the canal outside the marina lost all water and they sat on the bottom of the marina ?

[Higgs]

I wonder what these none licenced boaters would say if the canal outside the marina lost all water and they sat on the bottom of the marina ?

 

 

No canal, no connection fee. No canal, definitely no prospect of making a case for a licence fee. Shooting in the foot type tactic.

[Paul Evans]

There's the rub. Is this supposed to be a civilised and democratic country, or not. ? Or, are you happy with fascist dictators.

Just lost your argument as far as I'm concerned. When you have to liken CRT to Hitler, Mussolini and Franco, you really are scraping the bottom of the barrel.

[Guest]

I wonder what these none licenced boaters would say if the canal outside the marina lost all water and they sat on the bottom of the marina ?

 

http://www.canalworld.net/forums/index.php?showtopic=82164&p=1748427

 

It wouldn't make a difference seemingly because some marinas have their own supply (conveniently ignoring the fact that lots do not)

[Higgs]

Just lost your argument as far as I'm concerned. When you have to liken CRT to Hitler, Mussolini and Franco, you really are scraping the bottom of the barrel.

 

 

I also mentioned civilised and democracy. Er, sorry, democratic.

Edited January 30, 2016 by Higgs

[jenlyn]

 

So you have a boat moored in a marina on a canal (I've no idea if they offer residential moorings or not - if not then that could well be a breach of their T&Cs). The primary business of a marina is to provide moorings for boats who use the canal they are connected to, and to provide ancillary services such as fuel supply, chandlery etc and often throw a bar in as well. You have decided to use a boat as a floating home with no intention of ever using the canal. Is it unreasonable for CRT to expect that boats in a marina connected to CRT waters are actually going to go out onto the canal and aren't just floating cottages?

So, is there a law against that?

[Higgs]

Those who say that unlicensed boats may venture out occasionally are quite right. We once moored in a marina where a licence was your choice and several unlicensed boats regularly went out for weekends. If the license requirement was quashed then there would be more license evasion.

Bob

 

 

Do you feel guilty that these people chanced a trip out on the canal?

Edited January 30, 2016 by Higgs

[b0atman]

generally the marinas with own water supply are not NAA even so with a breach then the levels will drop and boats will be on the bottom so CRT will sort the problem with no money from the want everything for nothing brigade .

[Guest]

generally the marinas with own water supply are not NAA even so with a breach then the levels will drop and boats will be on the bottom so CRT will sort the problem with no money from the want everything for nothing brigade .

 

You missed the answer too.

 

They would expect stop planks across the entrance and then expect the supply to re-float their boats.

[jenlyn]

generally the marinas with own water supply are not NAA even so with a breach then the levels will drop and boats will be on the bottom so CRT will sort the problem with no money from the want everything for nothing brigade .

I think you just want everyone to subsidise your boating.

[b0atman]

I think you just want everyone to subsidise your boating.

No I want there to be an inland waterways for future generations .

[magpie patrick]

So, is there a law against that?

 

No there isn't, but the way a marina is marketed is that it allows one to have a "place where the vessel may legally be kept" whilst also being able to use it on the canal system. Most boats DO leave the marina at some point, most of those who do not (and I own two boats that didn't leave their respective marina's in 2015 nor in their last licence period) aspire to do so. Very, very few people have no aspiration to leave the marina.

 

I did work on a marina proposal related to a residential development where the developer expected almost none of the boats would ever leave (it was connecting to a tidal creek) but he also knew that they would all aspire to do so - a land locked piece of water wouldn't sell.

 

I personally can see the appeal (for me) of not licensing my boats in the winter - if it save 50% of the fee then I'd stay put, the trouble is if everyone did this then six month licences would cost what annual licences currently cost.

[Steilsteven]

I think CRT are closely watching the case with the ea regarding licencing requirements in marinas, and if the ea ultimately lose, I suspect some of the canal marinas will start to questioning crt's stance.

Whatever the outcome of the appeal, it is unlikely to have any bearing on marinas connected to CaRT waters due to different legislation.

 

Keith

[jenlyn]

 

No there isn't, but the way a marina is marketed is that it allows one to have a "place where the vessel may legally be kept" whilst also being able to use it on the canal system. Most boats DO leave the marina at some point, most of those who do not (and I own two boats that didn't leave their respective marina's in 2015 nor in their last licence period) aspire to do so. Very, very few people have no aspiration to leave the marina.

 

I did work on a marina proposal related to a residential development where the developer expected almost none of the boats would ever leave (it was connecting to a tidal creek) but he also knew that they would all aspire to do so - a land locked piece of water wouldn't sell.

 

I personally can see the appeal (for me) of not licensing my boats in the winter - if it save 50% of the fee then I'd stay put, the trouble is if everyone did this then six month licences would cost what annual licences currently cost.

Your last paragraph for me, suggests the need for a complete overhaul of CRT's management team and it's financial structuring.

The trust in my view is out of control, and has no real grasp on its finances.

John Dodwell told me BT took ten years to break away from its "civil servant" culture when I asked why the Trust was a tad "sloppy". (not much of an answer).

 

It's almost as if the trust lives each day for all its worth, with no real direction or goals.

Each year, staff numbers rise, but mainly "in the office". They even have a "vole manager now", yes really, lol.

[Hawkmoth]

 

 

Do you feel guilty that these people chanced a trip out on the canal?

I don't know where you get the idea that I feel guilty, so don't put a spin on what I say. I was only pointing out that it does happen, probably more than people will admit, and it does cost the licence payer in higher fees or lost revenue to The Trust.

Bob

[jenlyn]

Whatever the outcome of the appeal, it is unlikely to have any bearing on marinas connected to CaRT waters due to different legislation.

 

Keith

There is no legislation stating marinas on the canal should only allow licenced boats within.

[Sabcat]

 

I personally can see the appeal (for me) of not licensing my boats in the winter - if it save 50% of the fee then I'd stay put, the trouble is if everyone did this then six month licences would cost what annual licences currently cost.

 

You see the appeal of only purchasing that which you use? What a radical concept!

Your last paragraph for me, suggests the need for a complete overhaul of CRT's management team and it's financial structuring.

The trust in my view is out of control, and has no real grasp on its finances.

John Dodwell told me BT took ten years to break away from its "civil servant" culture when I asked why the Trust was a tad "sloppy". (not much of an answer).

 

It's almost as if the trust lives each day for all its worth, with no real direction or goals.

Each year, staff numbers rise, but mainly "in the office". They even have a "vole manager now", yes really, lol.

 

Indeed. What is happening to overall boat numbers?

[Higgs]

I don't know where you get the idea that I feel guilty, so don't put a spin on what I say. I was only pointing out that it does happen, probably more than people will admit, and it does cost the licence payer in higher fees or lost revenue to The Trust.

Bob

 

Equally, I wouldn't feel any personal guilt for another's actions. I'm just a customer, I can't change human nature. Your 'what if' scenario maybe a cause to be circumspect about suggesting a change to the NAA, but it doesn't mean that there couldn't be solutions. I do already follow the T&C's of the marina, but there are several conditions, if crossed could lead to eviction.

Edited January 30, 2016 by Higgs

[Hawkmoth]

 

Equally, I wouldn't feel any personal guilt for another's actions. I'm just a customer, I can't change human nature. Your 'what if' scenario maybe a cause to be circumspect about suggesting a change to the NAA, but it doesn't mean that there couldn't be solutions. I do already follow the T&C's of the marina, but there are several conditions, if crossed could lead to eviction.

It's not a "what if" scenario, The cheating happens, and business says that the money must come from somewhere.

Bob

[Higgs]

It's not a "what if" scenario, The cheating happens, and business says that the money must come from somewhere.

Bob

 

 

It's one of the world's woes. Businesses cheat, too.

[jenlyn]

 

You see the appeal of only purchasing that which you use? What a radical concept!

 

Indeed. What is happening to overall boat numbers?

It will be interesting to find out how boat numbers have stood up when they do the count this year.

In the last couple of years, numbers have gone down, though Richard Parry and the trust have coughed and spluttered their excuses-reasons for the downward trend.

It's not a "what if" scenario, The cheating happens, and business says that the money must come from somewhere.

Bob

Strange then that Richard Parry stated last year, "he was happy to have a 4% licence evasion rate".

[Hawkmoth]

 

 

It's one of the world's woes. Businesses cheat, too.

I agree, but it doesn't make it right. I do wish that they treated cheating big businesses as heard as they seem to the little ones.

Bob