general terms and conditions.

[Wanderer Vagabond]

There could be different ways of deal in with overstays in various areas. We would need to contact Mrs Jarvis and ask what their procedure is.

You presume that . I wouldn't bet on it.

Isn't this just argument for the sake of argument? I have related first hand experience of what happened when I told CRT in Oxford that I was going to overstay so now we contact Ms Jarvis to ask her what the procedure is, Why? If it any help, when my alternator broke in Braunston I went to the CRT office there and told them I wasn't going anywhere until I could fix it I got much the same response,"Yup, that is fine, just let us know when you get it fixed". What am I supposed to do, go round the country as a sort of 'mystery shopper' to check up that I get a uniform response from everyone?

 

Of course for comparison perhaps I should just rock up somewhere, leave the boat for a month without telling anyone and then see what the response is

[Jerra]

Isn't this just argument for the sake of argument? I have related first hand experience of what happened when I told CRT in Oxford that I was going to overstay so now we contact Ms Jarvis to ask her what the procedure is, Why? If it any help, when my alternator broke in Braunston I went to the CRT office there and told them I wasn't going anywhere until I could fix it I got much the same response,"Yup, that is fine, just let us know when you get it fixed". What am I supposed to do, go round the country as a sort of 'mystery shopper' to check up that I get a uniform response from everyone?

 

Of course for comparison perhaps I should just rock up somewhere, leave the boat for a month without telling anyone and then see what the response is

I suspect your last paragraph is the key point. It will be impossible to prove but I am forming the opinion that those who play fair with CRT by "keeping them in the loop" don't get harassed. Those who wait until a an EO spots them and then starts to explain have problems.

 

Perhaps anybody who is reading the forum and notified CRT ASAP about their problems and then had a "stroppy" EO arguing the toss after they had notified the team leader would care to share their experiences.

[onionbargee]

I don't think we want to live under rules that mean the local EO is like some kind of mafia boss that you have to tip your hat to, the law was put there to prevent this happening and ensure fairness for everyone.

[mayalld]

I don't think we want to live under rules that mean the local EO is like some kind of mafia boss that you have to tip your hat to, the law was put there to prevent this happening and ensure fairness for everyone.

The law allows CRT to revoke a licence for non-compliance. It does NOT require CRT to seek any judgement from the courts as to whether there was a lack of compliance.

 

So, as arbiter of compliance (but always subject to appeal to a court) CRT will decide.

 

If a boater wishes to avail themselves of "reasonable in the circumstances" CRT will need to know what the circumstances are, and will need to take a view. CRT will apoint staff within the organization to make that decision.

 

This isn't the issue you make of it.

[Paul C]

The way I see it, someone needs to decide, and that person can't be the boater because we have countless examples of boaters not quite making that judgement correctly, which is a mild way of saying that loads of people basically take the piss. And its not worth the hassle and expense of having some kind of independent arbritrer, for example a judge or the court system. It would just be slow, expensive and unworkable. Although its there for escalations, should CRT decide it wishes to escalate a boater's non-compliance into action against them. CRT are the navigation authority so it naturally falls to them as one of their roles anyway. And since they're defined as "navigation authority" the language used of "authorising" an extended stay isn't really too much of a surprise or false anyway?

 

I bet the percentage of extended stays which don't get authorised is really quite low, meaning that its really not that big of an issue anyway and only affects a tiny handful of boaters anyway. I think we'd need to know the details to actually make a judgement whether CRT are being unreasonable in not authorising it; or whether the boater is taking the piss in overstaying.

 

Did you inform them of the possibility of an extended stay BEFORE the 14 days or so normal time period (or is this on a visitor mooring?) was up, or was it weeks or months down the line? It would have been perfectly reasonable to inform them within the time limit but withhold medical details if you didn't want to give those personal details. I suspect given its the EO involved, it was after a number of weeks overstay.....but I am sure you'd be happy to correct me here if it was before the normal time limit was up.

[magnetman]

Didn't CRT appoint a Welfare Officer at some point recently? Maybe this is another avenue to look at if illness of some sort is the reason for overstaying.

 

 

It is quite an interesting topic if for example a long term boat dweller of no fixed abode becomes disabled due to a long term illness or back injury or something and actually does have nowhere else to live. Obviously an enforcement orificer doesn't give a toss about the individual but somewhere along the line the system will give a toss. Or one would hope so

[onionbargee]

The way I see it, someone needs to decide, and that person can't be the boater because we have countless examples of boaters not quite making that judgement correctly, which is a mild way of saying that loads of people basically take the piss. And its not worth the hassle and expense of having some kind of independent arbritrer, for example a judge or the court system. It would just be slow, expensive and unworkable. Although its there for escalations, should CRT decide it wishes to escalate a boater's non-compliance into action against them. CRT are the navigation authority so it naturally falls to them as one of their roles anyway. And since they're defined as "navigation authority" the language used of "authorising" an extended stay isn't really too much of a surprise or false anyway?

 

I bet the percentage of extended stays which don't get authorised is really quite low, meaning that its really not that big of an issue anyway and only affects a tiny handful of boaters anyway. I think we'd need to know the details to actually make a judgement whether CRT are being unreasonable in not authorising it; or whether the boater is taking the piss in overstaying.

 

Did you inform them of the possibility of an extended stay BEFORE the 14 days or so normal time period (or is this on a visitor mooring?) was up, or was it weeks or months down the line? It would have been perfectly reasonable to inform them within the time limit but withhold medical details if you didn't want to give those personal details. I suspect given its the EO involved, it was after a number of weeks overstay.....but I am sure you'd be happy to correct me here if it was before the normal time limit was up.

What authority, or qualifications does an EO have to decide if an overstay is reasonable, whether for medical or breakdown reasons ? My local EO believed that if you breakdown you can hire an outboard to continue your journey, but would not accept that no such thing is practicle or even available. The next EO along believes Braunston tunnel is at Cosgrove. An EO may have no knowledge of boating at all, usually they don't, so how are they supposed to decide ?

 

 

 

Where did you get the last paragraph from, I haven't mentioned any overstay I have or haven't had ?

Didn't CRT appoint a Welfare Officer at some point recently? Maybe this is another avenue to look at if illness of some sort is the reason for overstaying.

 

 

It is quite an interesting topic if for example a long term boat dweller of no fixed abode becomes disabled due to a long term illness or back injury or something and actually does have nowhere else to live. Obviously an enforcement orificer doesn't give a toss about the individual but somewhere along the line the system will give a toss. Or one would hope so

I don't think the welfare officer has any authority within CRT, and certainly not to over rule an EO or get involved in enforcement cases. What he does do is a mystery to me.

[mayalld]

What authority, or qualifications does an EO have to decide if an overstay is reasonable, whether for medical or breakdown reasons ? My local EO believed that if you breakdown you can hire an outboard to continue your journey, but would not accept that no such thing is practicle or even available. The next EO along believes Braunston tunnel is at Cosgrove. An EO may have no knowledge of boating at all, usually they don't, so how are they supposed to decide ?

 

 

 

Where did you get the last paragraph from, I haven't mentioned any overstay I have or haven't had ?

So, you're argument is that CRT might have people who get it wrong.

 

No matter who you hand the decision to they might do that.

 

In essence, the level at which a decision is made must reflect the number of times that decision needs to be made, and whether there is time pressure on making that decision.

 

With many overstays that may or may not be reasonable, and a system that becomes unworkable if a boater stays 3 months waiting for a decision as to whether a 3 month overstay is OK, the decision needs to be taken by the staff on the ground.

 

You really need to get over this.

[Paul C]

What authority, or qualifications does an EO have to decide if an overstay is reasonable, whether for medical or breakdown reasons ? My local EO believed that if you breakdown you can hire an outboard to continue your journey, but would not accept that no such thing is practicle or even available. The next EO along believes Braunston tunnel is at Cosgrove. An EO may have no knowledge of boating at all, usually they don't, so how are they supposed to decide ?

 

 

 

What authority or qualifications does anyone have, to decide what's reasonable or not?

 

Putting it another way, what incentive does an Enforcement Officer have, or for that matter CRT, in deciding one way or another? They're not on a bonus after all, and any disputes leading to legal action inevitibly cost CRT more than they can normally recover, so there's no monetary incentive to conflict with boaters etc.

[magnetman]

Onionbargee

 

When you said "Braunston Tunnel" maybe the EO heard "the horse tunnel"

[onionbargee]

OK, your entitled to your opinions PaulC and Mayalid, if you want arbitrary decisions made by EO's on medical or other matters then that's fine. If you don't like the decision then you will have to suck it up, because if your overstay is not "authorised" by that EO you will be on the enforcement list.

 

I have a copy of a letter from a GP that was rejected by an EO, as soon as I find out how to get it from the scan to the forum I will post it.

[Paul C]

 

 

I haven't mentioned any overstay I have or haven't had ?

 

 

I have a copy of a letter from a GP that was rejected by an EO, as soon as I find out how to get it from the scan to the forum I will post it.

 

Can you clarify if this is your own overstay or not?

 

Also why is the EO involved, when other people have mentioned about getting an extended stay, they went to another area of CRT, not the EO of the local area.

[Jerra]

OK, your entitled to your opinions PaulC and Mayalid, if you want arbitrary decisions made by EO's on medical or other matters then that's fine. I

I am still puzzled. It appears that what happens when you inform CRT is they hand it on to the Enforcement Team where somebody in the office (in what appears to be the vast majority of cases) puts a note on your record and gets in touch to tell you that it is OK.

 

Where exactly does the local EO on the towpath get to decide the reasonableness if it has already been decided in an office? Unless of course the boater has neglected to inform CRT as requested then I am afraid it is their own fault.

[onionbargee]

 

 

Can you clarify if this is your own overstay or not?

 

Also why is the EO involved, when other people have mentioned about getting an extended stay, they went to another area of CRT, not the EO of the local area.

No its not me.

 

The EO deals with overstays in my region, no one else in CRT can give you permission to overstay, as I said different regions may be have different proceedures, if your overstay is "authorised" beyond 14 days you will get a visit from an EO who gives you a notice to display in your window, CRT procedure in this region is 14 days authorised by an EO, then another 14 has to be authorised by an EO supervisor. Its very likely that different regions work differently as a lot of the rules are made up as the go, and have no basis in law.

I am still puzzled. It appears that what happens when you inform CRT is they hand it on to the Enforcement Team where somebody in the office (in what appears to be the vast majority of cases) puts a note on your record and gets in touch to tell you that it is OK.

 

Where exactly does the local EO on the towpath get to decide the reasonableness if it has already been decided in an office? Unless of course the boater has neglected to inform CRT as requested then I am afraid it is their own fault.

Your in effect saying that every overstay for any reason is just ticked off. If you ask for an overstay for a dubious reason like lack of beer onboard someone is going to decide somewhere, and EO's make the notes on your sightings record.

[magnetman]

Onionbargee

 

A lack of beer would be definitely be reasonable.

 

If you have a camera phone you can take a picture of the letter and attach it to a post on the forum. I will try it with a picture of my surroundings and see if it works. I did not know until recently that one can directly attach photos to forum posts (in the full version of the site not the mobile version) its a handy tool

 

 

 

(It comes under "more reply options" I will now try it.

It worked

(If you are using a mobile phone there is a "full version" button at the bottom which changes the layout so that 'more reply options' is given as an option which opens up more options if you choose that option

 

I am interested to see the GP letter which was refused by CRT as a reasonable reason for overstaying

[Wanderer Vagabond]

No its not me.

 

The EO deals with overstays in my region, no one else in CRT can give you permission to overstay, as I said different regions may be have different proceedures, if your overstay is "authorised" beyond 14 days you will get a visit from an EO who gives you a notice to display in your window, CRT procedure in this region is 14 days authorised by an EO, then another 14 has to be authorised by an EO supervisor. Its very likely that different regions work differently as a lot of the rules are made up as the go, and have no basis in law.

 

Your in effect saying that every overstay for any reason is just ticked off. If you ask for an overstay for a dubious reason like lack of beer onboard someone is going to decide somewhere, and EO's make the notes on your sightings record.

This sounds like the area that you are in has a major problem with overstayers. Why else would there be any need to put a notice in your window? The only people that it should be of any concern to is the EO's and they have access to the digital note that has been but on your record so they don't need to see anything on your boat to 'remind' them that you have already advised them of the overstay. Of course other people may see the boat moored continuously at the same spot and complain to the EO if they are being asked to move when they can see another boat that has been moored at the same location for a couple of months, I can see that as a reason for a notice to display in your window, I can't really see any other reason.

 

I also wouldn't think that making any decision on the overstay is particularly difficult. The purpose of the overstay is to deal with a temporary condition(illness, mechanical breakdown). If your reason for overstaying is to take the kids to the local school, or get to work locally, that is not a temporary condition so CRT will oppose it. If it is to effect running repairs on the boat that is reasonable but if it is to fit out and rebuild your boat it isn't and would be opposed. If you have a temporary injury/illness that is reasonable, but if the reason is because you are no longer fit enough to be able to handle a boat then the recommendation would that you need to get a permanent mooring for your own safety. See, decision making is easy and I've had no training at all

[Jerra]

Your in effect saying that every overstay for any reason is just ticked off. If you ask for an overstay for a dubious reason like lack of beer onboard someone is going to decide somewhere, and EO's make the notes on your sightings record.

With all due respect you are being a trifle silly.

 

Obviously daft reasons like you quote wouldn't be because lack of beer would force movement to get more and so you wouldn't be using it as an excuse. :-)

 

However as I said yesterday I have been searching the forum for posts about overstaying and I haven't yet found one where given a genuine reason it hasn't been accepted with no quibble. They also all seem to have been dealt with at office level so which area is it that devolves things down from the office to the EO on the side of the cut rather than dealing with it in office?

 

I can understand that even when dealt with at office level an EO would visit to provide the notice to display and see how things were going and if possible see how long you expected the problem to last.

[Alan de Enfield]

No its not me.

 

 

 

“Just because you're paranoid doesn't mean they aren't after you.”

― Joseph Heller, Catch-22

[Paul C]

Whether the EO decides or not is a red herring, its still a CRT employee. If someone else (within CRT) decided in onionbargee's (friend's) case, then that person would come under criticism instead. And if it were someone else (independent of CRT), they'd also come under criticism. As said before, someone's got to decide, and it can't be simply the boater.

Edited May 30, 2016 by Paul C

[HaulierP]

With all due respect you are being a trifle silly.

 

Obviously daft reasons like you quote wouldn't be because lack of beer would force movement to get more and so you wouldn't be using it as an excuse. :-)

 

However as I said yesterday I have been searching the forum for posts about overstaying and I haven't yet found one where given a genuine reason it hasn't been accepted with no quibble. They also all seem to have been dealt with at office level so which area is it that devolves things down from the office to the EO on the side of the cut rather than dealing with it in office?

 

I can understand that even when dealt with at office level an EO would visit to provide the notice to display and see how things were going and if possible see how long you expected the problem to last.

On post 113 Onionbargee clearly states he can't provide any instances either

Edited May 30, 2016 by HaulierP

[onionbargee]

On post 113 Onionbargee clearly states he can't provide any instances either

I have said multiple times that it is a procedure wide open to abuse, not that it is being abused, you must admit that before it is abused is a better time to look at it then after it is. Tell me who you are going to appeal to or complain to if your perfectly legitimate overstay is refused ?

 

There is also another point here, that if your overstay is not "authorised" you are according to CRT liable to pay mooring fees, this is in the terms and conditions. Something that has never happened yet, but charging for overstaying on visitor moorings has crept in, after CRT said they had no plans to do it, and trying to claim a VM is a "facility" to get around the law.

On post 113 Onionbargee clearly states he can't provide any instances either

I have said multiple times that it is a procedure wide open to abuse, not that it is being abused, you must admit that before it is abused is a better time to look at it then after it is. Tell me who you are going to appeal to or complain to if your perfectly legitimate overstay is refused ?

 

There is also another point here, that if your overstay is not "authorised" you are according to CRT liable to pay mooring fees, this is in the terms and conditions. Something that has never happened yet, but charging for overstaying on visitor moorings has crept in, after CRT said they had no plans to do it, and trying to claim a VM is a "facility" to get around the law.

[HaulierP]

I agree with you 100%,I was merely pointing out to the poster who was looking for evidence of overstays being refused

that you were not saying that anyone had been refused.

[Paul C]

I'm not so sure its wide open to abuse. Well at least, not in terms of CRT declining reasonable requests - there is no motive or incentive to do so. I don't think you could make a case that they make any profit from charging for mooring if its unauthorised its just a way to try and part-recover the extra enforcement/admin costs they've incurred.

 

It IS open to abuse IF boaters themselves are able to determine what's reasonable. It needs to be someone other than the boater themselves. And whoever it is, seems to be fair game for criticism or the label of abusing the situation.

[HaulierP]

I'm not so sure its wide open to abuse. Well at least, not in terms of CRT declining reasonable requests - there is no motive or incentive to do so. I don't think you could make a case that they make any profit from charging for mooring if its unauthorised its just a way to try and part-recover the extra enforcement/admin costs they've incurred.

 

It IS open to abuse IF boaters themselves are able to determine what's reasonable. It needs to be someone other than the boater themselves. And whoever it is, seems to be fair game for criticism or the label of abusing the situation.

I would like to see some alternatives proposed to the current system,but I can't think of a better one to be honest.

When a letter from a Doctor is produced and the overstay refused,I would think that would be easily challenged by

another Doctors Letter stronger than the first and escalating the issue above the EO,s head.

Edited May 30, 2016 by HaulierP

[Paul C]

Without pre-judging the contents, it would depend on what the doctor's letter said. If the doctor is sympathetic and the boater isn't stupid, it should be pretty simple to ask the doctor to write a letter to the effect of:

 

"this person has health needs which means he is unable to move the boat for xx weeks"

 

and CRT would be pretty daft to go against the specific advice of a doctor.

 

However if it were sufficiently vague to be meaningless.............lets see the letter onionbargee.