Hundreds of boats used as homes in London as numbers soar

[Athy]

i was hoping. But at least I found someone old enough to understand the reference.

My parents told me about him.

[hounddog]

I do remember someone doing the rounds in the late 50s or early 60s, particularly summer seasides. Was his name Chalky White?

[Iain_S]

I refer to http://kanda.boatingcommunity.org.uk/wordpress/wp-content/uploads/2011/10/KA-boaters-survey-interim-report.pdfas an instruction manual in how to carry our surveys better than CaRT

 

If you tell those surveyed that the survey is been done by boaters, then the responses might be more accurate, particularly the ones about workplace, education, etc.

[alan_fincher]

I refer to http://kanda.boatingcommunity.org.uk/wordpress/wp-content/uploads/2011/10/KA-boaters-survey-interim-report.pdfas an instruction manual in how to carry our surveys better than CaRT

 

Well there's a past name from the forum as one of the authors, (and I suspect quite a few more forum aliases!).

[Richard10002]

 

 

My 'comments' (or 'prejudice' as you seem to prefer to call it) were that any survey is only as good as the information provided, and when people are being asked questions, & that replying with the truth could potentially severely impact their lives , I suggest that they would give the answers that the questioner 'wishes to hear' & that will have minimum detriment to the boater.

If, as is planned, C&RT then provide facilities to meet the demand of those boaters who have declared 'live aboard' status, then the facilities will be insufficient to meet the 'true' demand.

 

I thought what you said was very clear, and very sensible. The thing is, having carried out a survey, CRT can now provide facilities which accord with the results, and deny any blame when there aren't enough.

 

Having said that, they might actually interpret them as you suggest, but couldn't possibly say as much due to the uproar when they are accused of interpreting boaters responses as lies, or economical with the truth.

[Laurence Hogg]

"50% cite financial reasons as motivation for living on a boat; but an overwhelming 82% are attracted by the waterway environment (boats, wildlife, tranquillity etc)."

 

 

....... Ummm, in the MIDDLE of London??? I think they are fibbing!

[Alan de Enfield]

"50% cite financial reasons as motivation for living on a boat; but an overwhelming 82% are attracted by the waterway environment (boats, wildlife, tranquillity etc)."

 

 

....... Ummm, in the MIDDLE of London??? I think they are fibbing!

 

Another boater with pre-conceived 'prejudices' against liveaboards

[Bewildered]

"50% cite financial reasons as motivation for living on a boat; but an overwhelming 82% are attracted by the waterway environment (boats, wildlife, tranquillity etc)."

 

 

....... Ummm, in the MIDDLE of London??? I think they are fibbing!

Oh I don't know, plenty of boats in London, plenty of wildlife (lots of drunks, junkies and yoofs to keep you entertained) and as for the tranquility I would think there is more cannabis readily available in London than outside of it; all depends on how you go about gaining your tranquility.

(Where's the emoji for a big fat spliff when you want one?)

[hounddog]

 

Another boater with pre-conceived 'prejudices' against liveaboards

or a pre-conceived idea of London.

 

( I thought you going to let me have the last word? )

[Alan de Enfield]

(Where's the emoji for a big fat spliff when you want one?)

[Hawkmoth]

Nice one Alan. Where do you get them?

BTW i reckon several on here are enjoying your one sided little spat with Cuthound. It is, though, a little unfair of him to come to a gun fight with a small knife.

Bob

[Jambo]

"769 boaters – 58% of the total respondents – describe their boat as their primary residence"

 

I would suggest that this is a VERY conservative figure of the reality of the situation.

If people are living on their boats 'under the radar' they are hardly likely to broadcast the fact in a survey by the 'Canal Administration Authorities', and would therefore either not bother replying to the survey, or, just telling the 'not quite true' version and claim to have a 'high usage' (or something similar).

 

The problem tends to manifest itself when C&RT put in facilities to meet the demands of X boats, but when 2X boats try to use them, there is a huge uproar about 'insufficient facilities to support the number of boats'.

 

Sorry I don't get this. Why would people living on boats as their primary residence need to fly under the radar? It's perfectly legit.

 

The ones that need to fly under the radar are the renters.

 

The more surprising stat to me is quite how many claimed to have boats as secondary / temporary accommodation. Although perhaps it's not so surprising as we frequently see quite a few apparently empty boats moored around us pretty much wherever we are on the London waterways.

[Mike Todd]

 

Sorry I don't get this. Why would people living on boats as their primary residence need to fly under the radar? It's perfectly legit.

 

The ones that need to fly under the radar are the renters.

 

The more surprising stat to me is quite how many claimed to have boats as secondary / temporary accommodation. Although perhaps it's not so surprising as we frequently see quite a few apparently empty boats moored around us pretty much wherever we are on the London waterways.

From my experience (having moored several winters just on the edge of 'London' and cruised in and through at least twice most years) quite a few of the liveaboards do not have a permanent mooring and believe what fellow boaters tell them that bridge hopping is OK and within the rules. We probably meet even more on the GU south of Wilton who are new to boat living and on their way down to London in the expectation that they can moor pretty much anywhere they like.

 

However, given the relatively small size of my sample, and I certainly meet many who are not as described, it would be invalid to draw any generalised conclusions. That said, anyone without a permanent mooring should be wary of announcing themselves as a London live aboard on a public forum!

[Jambo]

But I can't see how declaring that your boat is a primary residence in an anonymous survey would be an issue in that respect. Whether it's your home, you're renting under the radar or a leisure boater on the towpath it's all the same - an issue for enforcement and licencing.

 

I should also note that since C&RT has started issuing short term licences / not renewing for lack of movement, the overwhelming majority are now bumbling around the >20 mile range quite nicely and are therefore complying with the requirements. With a very small number of exceptions, the days of sitting tight or cruising back and forth between Kings Cross and Hackney are largely over.

[Captain Pegg]

But I can't see how declaring that your boat is a primary residence in an anonymous survey would be an issue in that respect. Whether it's your home, you're renting under the radar or a leisure boater on the towpath it's all the same - an issue for enforcement and licencing.

 

I should also note that since C&RT has started issuing short term licences / not renewing for lack of movement, the overwhelming majority are now bumbling around the >20 mile range quite nicely and are therefore complying with the requirements. With a very small number of exceptions, the days of sitting tight or cruising back and forth between Kings Cross and Hackney are largely over.

Does that improve the general situation for other boaters in central areas; say by spreading out the number of boats over a wider area at any one given time?

 

Serious question because while I would never advocate not having enforcement I do wonder if there is any useful purpose in making people move if it has no effect.

 

JP

[Captain Pegg]

BTW i reckon several on here are enjoying your one sided little spat with Cuthound.

Bob

I don't see Cuthound involved at all. Mixed up forum members perhaps?

 

JP

[Athy]

Is it possible to have a one-sided spat? That's perhaps akin to one hand clapping.

[Mike Todd]

But I can't see how declaring that your boat is a primary residence in an anonymous survey would be an issue in that respect. Whether it's your home, you're renting under the radar or a leisure boater on the towpath it's all the same - an issue for enforcement and licencing.

 

I should also note that since C&RT has started issuing short term licences / not renewing for lack of movement, the overwhelming majority are now bumbling around the >20 mile range quite nicely and are therefore complying with the requirements. With a very small number of exceptions, the days of sitting tight or cruising back and forth between Kings Cross and Hackney are largely over.

The survey was carried out by CaRT and even the less paranoid might wonder if their responses were traceable!

 

Let's be clear: 'bumbling around a >20 mile range' is not complying with any requirement. The only requirement that exists for boat(er)s without a home mooring is to engage in a bona fide journey. What they are doing is taking note of the fact that at present their movement pattern is unlikely to cause CaRT not to be satisfied that are making such a journey. I know that this is a convoluted concept that seems to be beyond some folk's comprehension, but sadly that is how the law stands. CaRT would be acting entirely within the hopelessly inadequate (or so some think) legislative framework if they later stated that those - let us say - not visiting at least 5 different parishes in succession were not, at first sight, meeting the requirement.

[nicknorman]

Does that improve the general situation for other boaters in central areas; say by spreading out the number of boats over a wider area at any one given time?

Serious question because while I would never advocate not having enforcement I do wonder if there is any useful purpose in making people move if it has no effect.

JP

I think the effect it has is to make things a bit more difficult for those who would otherwise want to plonk their boat down in one place near work/school/shops/services. As such it will reduce the number of people wanting to live on the canals just to have cheap accommodation in areas they otherwise couldn't afford to live in, and thus IMO it's a good thing as it helps to prevent the canals in "hotspots" being even more choked than they are. Anyone who want to continuously cruise to explore the system is not significantly affected.

[Captain Pegg]

I think the effect it has is to make things a bit more difficult for those who would otherwise want to plonk their boat down in one place near work/school/shops/services. As such it will reduce the number of people wanting to live on the canals just to have cheap accommodation in areas they otherwise couldn't afford to live in, and thus IMO it's a good thing as it helps to prevent the canals in "hotspots" being even more choked than they are. Anyone who want to continuously cruise to explore the system is not significantly affected.

If it has that outcome then I agree it's a good thing. Anything that weeds out those trying to contribute to the economy from those trying to take from it is a good thing in my book. It isn't such a hardship that it should deter people who really don't have a great deal of choice.

 

JP

[Jambo]

Based purely on my subjective experience I would say it's helped quite a bit. People now have much wider ranges so a bigger chunk of their time is spent outside of the more popular spots than previously. That's been at least partially offset by more boats arriving but it still just about works and is still enjoyable.

[Captain Pegg]

Let's be clear: 'bumbling around a >20 mile range' is not complying with any requirement. The only requirement that exists for boat(er)s without a home mooring is to engage in a bona fide journey. What they are doing is taking note of the fact that at present their movement pattern is unlikely to cause CaRT not to be satisfied that are making such a journey. I know that this is a convoluted concept that seems to be beyond some folk's comprehension, but sadly that is how the law stands. CaRT would be acting entirely within the hopelessly inadequate (or so some think) legislative framework if they later stated that those - let us say - not visiting at least 5 different parishes in succession were not, at first sight, meeting the requirement.

I may struggle with the comprehension but it isn't because I lack the understanding.

 

The legal requirement is to use the vessel bona fide for navigation for the period of the licence. That in itself places no requirement on distance travelled. Wasn't this the point of the reference to the Mersey ferry made by the judge in one of the relevant cases involving CRT?

 

As the law is of necessity vague on what bona fide for navigation literally means, it is up to CRT as the licensing authority to determine how they discharge that requirement. You are therefore correct to say that complying with any particular set of criteria does not in itself demonstrate absolute legal compliance. And yes they can turn around at a later date and require a more stringent set of conditions to be met.

 

However I would suggest that whatever conditions CRT are applying in practice at any given point in time is in realistic terms the level required for legal compliance.

 

I don't doubt they have set a limit below which they have a fighting chance of achieving full enforcement and that is a pragmatic approach.

 

Equally though I cannot see how any reasonable interprepretation of the law could lead to a requirement to progressively cruise around the (whole) network. I don't believe that is what is required by not having a home mooring.

 

Jon

[Jak]

Ok. So reading through the thread if suggest this. Home mooring, fine we got that.

 

Continuous cruise. I seems very clear that this covers (and I am very jealous of you) those on a journey through the network. iMHO if you have a fixed place of work or school this is NOT a model to fit. All I have read does not point to this being ping ponging up and down the same stretch. It that CCing? Not at all. Live on a boat, love it and work/school. Get a mooring to suit. FFS it's not hard to understand is it?

[Captain Pegg]

Ok. So reading through the thread if suggest this. Home mooring, fine we got that.

Continuous cruise. I seems very clear that this covers (and I am very jealous of you) those on a journey through the network. iMHO if you have a fixed place of work or school this is NOT a model to fit. All I have read does not point to this being ping ponging up and down the same stretch. It that CCing? Not at all. Live on a boat, love it and work/school. Get a mooring to suit. FFS it's not hard to understand is it?

There is no reason why anyone should have a home mooring if they can move regularly and don't shuttle backward and forwards. It's just that not many people naturally want and are properly able to do that.

 

CCing is a creation of the licence terms and conditions and not of the law.

 

JP

Edited December 18, 2016 by Captain Pegg

[nicknorman]

CCing is a creation of the licence terms and conditions and not of the law.

JP

Well I'd rephrase that to say it is one interpretation of the law. Others are available but would need to be proven in court to keep CRT off your back.