new mooring t&c's

[Paul C]

Maybe they just want moorers who are good at keeping their heads down and not being detected as residential?

[MtB]

 

I don't think they'd cancel it after 28 days, after all 1) you have a year's agreement 2) they don't care if the boat is there or not, so long as they get the money.

 

I'd say its entirely due to local authorities putting pressure on CRT, due to previous sloppiness regarding the dubious status of moorings.

 

 

I feel you're missing the point, ever so slightly...

 

If a boater is taking the pish by blatantly bridge hopping in London 300 miles from their £500 a year home mooring in the grim north, CRT could use this term as an excuse to cancel their moorings agreement. A one year agreement is bound to be subject to adherence to the attached T&Cs. If the T&Cs could be ignored then there would be no point in having them.

[Paul C]

 

 

I feel you're missing the point, ever so slightly...

 

If a boater is taking the pish by blatantly bridge hopping in London 300 miles from their £500 a year home mooring in the grim north, CRT could use this term as an excuse to cancel their moorings agreement. A one year agreement is bound to be subject to adherence to the attached T&Cs. If the T&Cs could be ignored then there would be no point in having them.

 

Nobody looking for a ghost mooring buys a CRT one anyway, they're all overpriced for that, there's much cheaper moorings out there for that purpose. After all, it doesn't matter where it is or what its like?

[David Mack]

 

If so, it's put the wind up me. We will do the BCN Challenge, get Tawny blacked at Glascote, go to Braunston, then Alvecote, then my youngest son has a holiday. That might be more than 28 days but starting in May. Do I need to declare that?

 

Especially as Hatton permit moorings are not full, and they are regularly used by other boats anyway as some of the signs went missing years ago

 

Richard

 

So presumably you should just send an email to CRT along the lines of "I will be leaving my mooring during this week, and will return some time later in the summer".

 

We are not on a CRT mooring, so it doesn't affect us directly, but it is usual for Fulbourne to leave the home mooring just after Easter and work its way round the system (not stopping in one place for more than 14(ish) days), and returning to the home mooring months later. Some years we haven't actually got back to base until January. And whilst there may be a few fixed points in the itinerary - rallies we are attending and the like, often the boating is done in a fairly ad-hoc manner, and we wouldn't be able to tell you where the boat will be in a couple of weeks time.

 

I can't see anything in our boating that should fall foul of CRT's wishes, but it it does look like this sort of boating - somewhere between a home moorer making shortish local trips from the home mooring and a CCer moving all year over a wider distance - is going to be more difficult for those on a CRT/BWML mooring.

[Lady Muck]

 

Nobody looking for a ghost mooring buys a CRT one anyway, they're all overpriced for that, there's much cheaper moorings out there for that purpose. After all, it doesn't matter where it is or what its like?

Well you'd think that, but it's sometimes not lack of money but lack of supply of available moorings where the boater wants to be that might make them take a ghost mooring elsewhere. That combined with threat of a section 8.

Edited May 22, 2016 by Lady Muck

[cereal tiller]

Maybe they just want moorers who are good at keeping their heads down and not being detected as residential?

Agreed,it has always been a case of keeping a low profile when living aboard.

 

This recent raft of live aboards insist upon standing up to be counted thereby spoiling things for those who 'play the game'

 

Should a Boat be used primarily as a Residence with little or no intent of movement then a suitable mooring should be arranged prior to purchasing said Boat.

 

CT

[cuthound]

Ah OK. Housing Benefit for a leisure mooring paid by the LA? Therefore (logically) the mooring should be converted (if feasible) to fully serviced residential allowing CRT to pull in much needed revenue from their assets (the canal bank). As the LA has demonstrated willingness to pay Housing Benefit then anyone who can not afford the market rate for a residential mooring can be helped out by housing Benefit in order to retain a now much more expensive mooring.

Everyone's a winner ?

Except for those who have to pass mile after mile of moored boats on tickover (unless the moorings are offline).

 

Edited for smelling.

Edited May 23, 2016 by cuthound

[magnetman]

Oh yes those.

 

I know what - New canals could be built with the extra money taken from the new residential moorings - sort of like bypasses around the more villagey parts of the system so people could go fast if they needed to and not have to see the residential vessels

 

(I know the overall plan is exactly the opposite of that BTW)

Edited May 23, 2016 by magnetman

[PaulG]

It seems you can't live aboard at all in Saul Marina:

http://www.gloucestercitizen.co.uk/Complaints-prompt-clampdown-boaters-overstaying/story-29299775-detail/story.html

[magnetman]

There does seem to be a gradual erosion of rights when it comes to living on a mooring even if it is residential. The goalposts have been moved quite a lot over the last few years.

 

I didn't have a mooring i intended to stay on for the long term when under BW - just paid my license and got on with it but it seems to me CRT are 'tinkering' much more and there must be an expected medium term outcome from this tinkering (10 year plan?)

Edited May 23, 2016 by magnetman

[MtB]

The problem with banning or controlling 'living aboard' is that it is a continuum rather than a black or white fact.

 

When it suits me for example, I say I live on my boat. If that isn't what the person or organisation wants to hear, I give my house address. Most people can come up with a street address to nominate if pressed, in which case they just 'spend a lot of time on their boat', rather than living on it.

[BruceinSanity]

Does anyone know what, if anything, RBOA are doing about this?

 

Or is that a stupid question?

[Lady Muck]

Does anyone know what, if anything, RBOA are doing about this?

 

Or is that a stupid question?

I'd be interested to know, also nabo, I've not raised it with nbta yet.

[RLWP]

Does anyone know what, if anything, RBOA are doing about this?

 

Or is that a stupid question?

 

If it is a stupid question, you are not the only one asking it. I was wondering the same thing

 

Richard

[Alan de Enfield]

Do 'we' actually know if there have been any changes in the T&Cs ?

 

Has anyone put the two (old & new) side-by-side and compared them ?

 

Is it a case that someone has now read the T&Cs and hadn't previously realised what the T&Cs said ?

[Chewbacka]

I don't have the old terms to hand, but CRT did send me a summary of the key changes - assuming there aren't any big changes that they 'forgot' to mention.

Also I should make clear that "waterside mooring" who have just issued the update T&Cs that are being discussed here is not the same as BWML.

 

The difference between BWML and "Waterside moorings" is explained by CRT as "The BWML business model is based on managing predominantly off-line marinas which provide over 50 berths. Whilst the Canal & River Trust mooring offer does include some marinas (with fewer than 50 berths per marina), the majority are ‘on-line’ linear moorings."

 

It makes for interesting reading - https://www.watersidemooring.com/home/faq#GenInfo

 

One thing I just learned is that CRT offer 3 grades of canal side moorings, these being - Premium, Standard and Basic, from the description I am on basic, still costs plenty though.

 

1)

[Fat Boat]

so looking at the link above it states

 

"Typically these sites will be where there is either formal planning consent for residential use or where residential use is historically established so that planning permission is no longer required for the change of use."

 

Does anyone know how long historically established is?

[Alan de Enfield]

I don't have the old terms to hand, but CRT did send me a summary of the key changes - assuming there aren't any big changes that they 'forgot' to mention.

 

 

And the key changes are ?

[WJM]

Nobody has yet mention this: I have a CaRT Leisure mooring in a CaRT marina. A small number of the moorings are specifically Residential - you can spot them because they have a more powerful electricity supply and they have a phone line. Now... about a year ago the electricity bollards were replaced with a new computerised system. You pay for your electricity online and... wait for it - CaRT can now see your consumption patterns at a glance. It could make it very difficult to live on a leisure mooring!

Edited May 23, 2016 by WJM

[ditchcrawler]

Does anyone know what, if anything, RBOA are doing about this?

 

Or is that a stupid question?

I wonder how many people effected are members of the RBOA?

[WJM]

The problem with banning or controlling 'living aboard' is that it is a continuum rather than a black or white fact.

 

When it suits me for example, I say I live on my boat. If that isn't what the person or organisation wants to hear, I give my house address. Most people can come up with a street address to nominate if pressed, in which case they just 'spend a lot of time on their boat', rather than living on it.

This would become a problem if CaRT start asking for proof of Council Tax payment at your 'residence'.

[Chewbacka]

In answer to Alan's question "And the key changes are ?" -

The changes in the document basically cover the following - their document is 6 pages long, so this is my brief summary

 

1) now called Waterside Mooring

2) You can only buy it now or bid on the auction if you accept the T&Cs

3) Cancellation rights and termination of mooring agreement by us

4) You can not move onto a mooring until CRT say so, and if you do the 'overstay charge' applicable

5) that CRT can enter your boat and move it if you are in breach of the mooring T&Cs mainly related to being on them when not paying.

6) no business purposes on the mooring without consent

7) can not transfer mooring upon death, but a spouse/civil partner can apply to use it for the remains of the period

8) agree to the 'overstay charges' if you are on the mooring when you should not - basically before the mooring term starts or after it ends, including if terminated early. Charges will be on the website and posted at the mooring site.

9) Complaints and disputes process.

Edited May 23, 2016 by Chewbacka

[ditchcrawler]

This would become a problem if CaRT start asking for proof of Council Tax payment at your 'residence'.

Would that mean that my son wouldn't be able to have a mooring

[Alan de Enfield]

In answer to Alan's question "And the key changes are ?" -

The changes in the document basically cover the following - their document is 6 pages long, so this is my brief summary

 

1) now called Waterside Mooring

2) You can only buy it now or bid on the auction if you accept the T&Cs same as getting a boat licence

3) Cancellation rights and termination of mooring agreement by us same as getting a boat licence

4) You can not move onto a mooring until CRT say so, and if you do the 'overstay charge' applicable fair enough - you cannot move into a house until its yours

5) that CRT can enter your boat and move it if you are in breach of the mooring T&Cs mainly related to being on them when not paying. Ok - Balliffs can enter your property if you have not paid your bills

6) no business purposes on the mooring without consent I don't think that is new, but anyway - not unreasonable

7) can not transfer mooring upon death, but a spouse/civil partner can apply to use it for the remains of the period. If I die the family will have more to worry about that transferring the mooring.

8) agree to the 'overstay charges' if you are on the mooring when you should not - basically before the mooring term starts or after it ends, including if terminated early. Charges will be on the website and posted at the mooring site. Fair enough

9) Complaints and disputes process.

 

I really cannot see the problem - where is all the 'new changes' about Council tax, eviction of liveaboards etc etc ?

 

Where is the 'new change' stating that you cannot use the mooring as your primary residence - was it really there all the time ?

 

Maybe a bit of scaremongering going on methinks.

[NigelMoore]

so looking at the link above it states

 

"Typically these sites will be where there is either formal planning consent for residential use or where residential use is historically established so that planning permission is no longer required for the change of use."

 

Does anyone know how long historically established is?

 

10 years uninterrupted use.