CRT double dipping licence fees

[Guest]

Yet more common sense and logic.

[Delta9]

I suspect, but only because it makes sense, that you and Allan are in the correct territory. We have moved from a situation in which the boat was licensed to it being a sort-of contract between CaRT and the boater. The T&Cs are a factor as also are the conditions surrounding refusal of a licence. It would have been unfortunate if a genuine sale of a boat meant that the new owner was landed with consequences of the previous owner's non-compliance. I am sure that such a situation would have brought its own shower of complaints about how unfair the system is! It may also have been difficult to establish what action CaRT could take in such circumstances. It is certainly not possible to take action against a boat only to it (eg to move it) The boat itself does not have a liability.

 

Also there was at one time a suggestion that enforcement was being avoided by a succession of broadly fake transactions that appeared to pass ownership from one person to another. Making the licence non-transferable ensures that the new owner has to make certain positive declarations which could then be invoked in a legal case if found to be false. This is a mechanism widely used. (eg lying on a job application can be used to justify summary dismissal if that is what an employer wishes to do)

 

I am sure that Nigel M will have a view, but I wonder also whether the debate about the fundamental nature of the boat licence (and the conditions under which it may be granted or refused) have precipitated this. eg is it merely a licence that carries no benefit other than that the boat may be allowed to be kept on a canal under certain circumstances, or is it a contract for services provided?

 

Further, a condition of a licence is having insurance and this is something which is issued to the boater not the boat. One of the things that the new licensee has to confirm is that he/she has a valid insurance policy, which itself will have to be a new one. For comparison's sake, I wonder how many insurance policies have a generous refund clause?

Nobody is complaining about the licence being non transferable...

Yet more common sense and logic.

But again completely irrelevant

[Guest]

But again completely irrelevant

 

Only if you wish to complain about something that is perfectly solvable if you first borrow and then engage the forum brain cell.

[Delta9]

 

Only if you wish to complain about something that is perfectly solvable if you first borrow and then engage the forum brain cell.

Naughty Call ran away with the community brain cell.

 

I Know it is solvable, I suggested a solution in post #58.

Edited February 8, 2016 by Delta9

[Arthur Marshall]

Nobody is complaining about the licence being non transferable...

But again completely irrelevant

A reasonable argued and thought through answer. Obviously therefore irrelevant to the discussion...

[Guest]

Naughty Call ran away with the community brain cell.

 

I Know it is solvable, I suggested a solution in post #58.

 

It was called back from it's holidays on the Trent. You missed the memo obviously.

 

So we have a solution .... fab.

[Delta9]

A reasonable argued and thought through answer. Obviously therefore irrelevant to the discussion...

How many more times do I need to point out that the discussion wasn't about the licence being non transferable...

 

 

So we have a solution .... fab.

Indeed. Feel free to close this tab now if you so wish

[Guest]

Indeed. Feel free to close this tab now if you so wish

 

What? and miss the next utterly 'enthralling' episode......

[alan_fincher]

How many more times do I need to point out that the discussion wasn't about the licence being non transferable...

 

Surely the fact that they have made the licence non transferable, is very pertinent to what your thread is complaining about.

 

Assuming it is neither possible nor practical for all changes of boat ownership to occur at midnight on the final day of a calendar month, how would you wish CRT to handle this, given they have withdrawn the option of selling an outstanding licence as part of the package when you sell a boat?

 

Do you want the old owner to be pro rata refunded for a part month, and the new one to also pay pro rata for the rest of the month they buy in? This might tax CRT more than they seem able to deal with!

You will probably also declare as irrelevant, but a similar situation exists when a CRT mooring contract bought at auction is due to end mid month, but you then have to transfer to a standard agreement that can only commence on the first of the month. CRT actually seem incapable of getting the arithmetic for this right, but all I can say is that on both occasions I have been in that situation, their poor arithmetic has been my gain and their loss.

[dogless]

If a CWF member writes in a forest and there's no one there to hear it will it still say

C&RT are rubbish.

Rog

 

Sorry couldn't resist.

Edited February 8, 2016 by dogless

[Delta9]

 

Surely the fact that they have made the licence non transferable, is very pertinent to what your thread is complaining about.

 

Assuming it is neither possible nor practical for all changes of boat ownership to occur at midnight on the final day of a calendar month, how would you wish CRT to handle this, given they have withdrawn the option of selling an outstanding licence as part of the package when you sell a boat?

 

Do you want the old owner to be pro rata refunded for a part month, and the new one to also pay pro rata for the rest of the month they buy in? This might tax CRT more than they seem able to deal with!

You will probably also declare as irrelevant, but a similar situation exists when a CRT mooring contract bought at auction is due to end mid month, but you then have to transfer to a standard agreement that can only commence on the first of the month. CRT actually seem incapable of getting the arithmetic for this right, but all I can say is that on both occasions I have been in that situation, their poor arithmetic has been my gain and their loss.

Read the thread before posting, we are going round in circles. It's perfectly possible for the licence to be non transferable and them not have to charge two people for the same month.

[alan_fincher]

Read the thread before posting, we are going round in circles. It's perfectly possible for the licence to be non transferable and them not have to charge two people for the same month.

 

Well we are at only 111 posts, and I can't recall seeing where it was explained how it could easily be done.

 

Perhaps you would have been better off stating the above in your very first post, and actually explaining how?

[Delta9]

 

Well we are at only 111 posts, and I can't recall seeing where it was explained how it could easily be done.

 

Perhaps you would have been better off stating the above in your very first post, and actually explaining how?

Posts 33 & 58

[waterworks]

I really used to enjoy this forum. When I bought my first boat 4 years ago I found it a great source of helpful, useful information and have met many new friends through it's pages. I'm experienced enough to be able to put something useful back into the forum and help less experienced boaters while still learning from the positive posts of the "old hands". Over the past few months there seems to be an increase in moaning, CRT bashing posts and amateur lawyers trying to find loop holes to avoid abiding by the guidelines that the majority of boaters are content to abide by. Perhaps the admin could add a new section called Whinging and Moaning which I can then ignore.

 

In the meantime I'll continue to enjoy the more positive content of this excellent forum and to enjoy the wonderful freedom that life as a Continuous Cruiser offers. My list of blocked members grows daily.

I tried the ignore method, but that only left about 3 members, you have to realise this forum is like panning for gold, and just skip over the posters that just sit on here all day hoping to start an argument.

[alan_fincher]

Posts 33 & 58

 

So "make a licence start on the day you purchase it, not the start of the month in which you purchase it", but also fully pro rata refunds when selling a boat.?

 

Whist obviously possible in theory, I would imagine a very big change for a system currently based on licences always starting on the 1st of a month. (And not to mention the usual Gold licence complications of only starting in January!).

 

Have you tried suggesting it to them?

 

 

[Delta9]

 

So "make a licence start on the day you purchase it, not the start of the month in which you purchase it", but also fully pro rata refunds when selling a boat.?

 

Whist obviously possible in theory, I would imagine a very big change for a system currently based on licences always starting on the 1st of a month. (And not to mention the usual Gold licence complications of only starting in January!).

 

Have you tried suggesting it to them?

 

 

It's a simple change to make but after attempting to use the CRT website to purchase a licence I came to the conclusion that even simple changes are beyond their capabilities.

[Jerra]

It's a simple change to make but after attempting to use the CRT website to purchase a licence I came to the conclusion that even simple changes are beyond their capabilities.

It may be a simple change to make but it will probably cause more admin problems than CRT see as sensible.

 

Instead of somebody processing a batch of licences over a short period round the month end they will have to be checking and dealing with them every working day. What about weekends?

[Delta9]

It may be a simple change to make but it will probably cause more admin problems than CRT see as sensible.

 

Instead of somebody processing a batch of licences over a short period round the month end they will have to be checking and dealing with them every working day. What about weekends?

Computers exist

[Paul G2]

Naughty Call ran away with the community brain cell.

 

 

Well that certainly explains a lot....

 

 

So "make a licence start on the day you purchase it, not the start of the month in which you purchase it", but also fully pro rata refunds when selling a boat.?

 

Whist obviously possible in theory, I would imagine a very big change for a system currently based on licences always starting on the 1st of a month. (And not to mention the usual Gold licence complications of only starting in January!).

 

Have you tried suggesting it to them?

 

 

 

CRT don't need to change the renewal date from the first of the month, They can pro-rate the first month and then have the renewal date on the 1st.

 

Alternatively, CRT could be completely passive and allow the seller's license to cancel on the 30th/31st with the buyer's license to begin on the 1st. The Buyer and seller can then pro-rate the license for the sale/transfer month between themselves.

[alan_fincher]

CRT don't need to change the renewal date from the first of the month, They can pro-rate the first month and then have the renewal date on the 1st.

Yes, but I was recapping on what Delta 9 was suggesting.

 

I had already suggested your alternative, which I suspect would be the easier for them to cope with, if they were actually prepared to, (and which I doubt they will be!)

[rustydiver]

We completed on out boat about the 20th oct applied for our licance a few days later and it came back dated from 1st Nov.

And we got a prompt payment discount.

 

So I didn't have to pay for time when it was not mine like a car.

Edited February 8, 2016 by rustydiver

[dor]

 

So "make a licence start on the day you purchase it, not the start of the month in which you purchase it", but also fully pro rata refunds when selling a boat.?

 

Whist obviously possible in theory, I would imagine a very big change for a system currently based on licences always starting on the 1st of a month. (And not to mention the usual Gold licence complications of only starting in January!).

 

Have you tried suggesting it to them?

 

 

 

Well they could do it, but then they would also need to make an admin charge, like most car insurance companies do when you want to change something mid-term. They could make the admin charge, say, well how about equivalent to one month's license fee.

[ditchcrawler]

When you buy a boat just don't bother to licence it. They wont know who you are so can't do anything about it until they seize it and that takes months, you could have sold it on again by then, you could even sell it to yourself because no one knows who's it is.

[Paul C]

When you buy a boat just don't bother to licence it. They wont know who you are so can't do anything about it until they seize it and that takes months, you could have sold it on again by then, you could even sell it to yourself because no one knows who's it is.

 

....Unless/until you need to moor it in an NAA marina.

 

Why not just licence a newly-purchased boat from the start of the next month, if purchased mid-month though? While technically not right, CRT aren't out of pocket because the current month's licence would have been paid by the previous owner.

 

Also....I'm surprised nobody has mentioned it......often there is no overlap in licence periods because a boat might be on brokerage where it doesn't require a licence, so the previous owner's licence has lapsed, possibly long ago. There's still the (small) issue that a new owner might buy mid-month, but is technically required to pay licence from the start of that month. Here, setting the handover date to the 1st instead of mid month would be sensible to avoid paying a full month for a part-month period.

When you buy a boat just don't bother to licence it. They wont know who you are so can't do anything about it until they seize it and that takes months, you could have sold it on again by then, you could even sell it to yourself because no one knows who's it is.

 

Also the previous owner is required to provide details of the new owner, I think?

[BlueStringPudding]

If a boat is being sold at a marina type brokerage presumably it doesn't need a CRT license while there? In which case there's likely to be a sometimes significant gap between the end of the old license and the start of the new one. CRT License team don't get any additional revenue in that case. Only if boats are bought and sold while on the cut itself.