A Question To Ponder

[Alan de Enfield]

23 minutes ago, mark99 said:

Archie Meads is ready, sitting and awaiting the phone calls.  Lol.

Screw Archimedes !!!!

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

[Horace42]

9 hours ago, PhilAtterley said:

I assume you have a boat Licence, which covers using your boat on the canals, and not a Pleasure Boat Certificate (registration). 

However you want to see things - as the Licence entitling you to occupy an area of 'waterspace' above the C&RT controlled, not owned, canal bed or allowing you to occupy a boat shaped 'hole' in the water that no-one owns, or the reality, which is that you are buying a years worth of entitlement to keep and use your boat on the C&RT controlled canals, there is no getting away from the fact that when you bought your Licence you paid for the right to occupy that hole in the water or the infinitely moveable bit of 'waterspace' above a boat-sized bit of the canal bed - why are you so happy about being conned into paying for the same thing twice because it sometimes happens to remain stationary at the bottom of your garden for a while ?

I never said I was happy with it. I know I am being conned but there is not much I can do about it. My situation is further complicated by the fact that there is a strip of CRT owned land at the canal edge that I have to cross the reach my boat and therefore I am charged extra for a separate CRT long term lease to use this piece of land to moor my boat. But because this piece of land is only accessible from the canal, or by crossing my land (it is equivalent to extending my garden) - I pay 50% of the going rate for this mooring right.

 

 

[magictime]

1 hour ago, Horace42 said:

I never said I was happy with it. I know I am being conned but there is not much I can do about it. My situation is further complicated by the fact that there is a strip of CRT owned land at the canal edge that I have to cross the reach my boat and therefore I am charged extra for a separate CRT long term lease to use this piece of land to moor my boat. But because this piece of land is only accessible from the canal, or by crossing my land (it is equivalent to extending my garden) - I pay 50% of the going rate for this mooring right.

If I'm understanding PhilAtterley correctly, I wonder if he'd actually think you're not being conned because CRT can legitimately charge you to moor against their land. I mean, he hasn't suggested there's anything dodgy about paid-for towpath moorings.

[Arthur Marshall]

1 hour ago, magictime said:

If I'm understanding PhilAtterley correctly, I wonder if he'd actually think you're not being conned because CRT can legitimately charge you to moor against their land. I mean, he hasn't suggested there's anything dodgy about paid-for towpath moorings.

Well, as I'm moored against privately owned farm land, and don't have to cross any CRT owned soil to get to it, and yet still have to pay a few hundred quid a year to CRT for the right to park my boat, I can see why he thinks I'm being conned.

CCers have the right to stay in the same place for 14 days but then have to move on.  I suppose the mooring permit just amends this right to an open-ended period for those who find that convenient.  There are those who say there is no legal basis for this, but then there are those who say there is no legal basis for any towpath side moorings, or for fines for over-staying, or, indeed, for the charges at Llangollen.  Until one of them have the nerve (and finances) to take it to court and win, the rest of us grimace and stump up.

[Mike Todd]

On 7/2/2017 at 12:11, Arthur Marshall said:

Well, as I'm moored against privately owned farm land, and don't have to cross any CRT owned soil to get to it, and yet still have to pay a few hundred quid a year to CRT for the right to park my boat, I can see why he thinks I'm being conned.

CCers have the right to stay in the same place for 14 days but then have to move on.  I suppose the mooring permit just amends this right to an open-ended period for those who find that convenient.  There are those who say there is no legal basis for this, but then there are those who say there is no legal basis for any towpath side moorings, or for fines for over-staying, or, indeed, for the charges at Llangollen.  Until one of them have the nerve (and finances) to take it to court and win, the rest of us grimace and stump up.

If you 'moored' your boat on your privately owned land then there would be no need (as I understand it) to pay CaRT anything for that privilege. However, you are actually moored on their land (or floating above) and only attached to your land. Without that permit you would be subject to the same rules about staying put (or not) as anywhere else.

[MtB]

9 minutes ago, Mike Todd said:

If you 'moored' your boat on your privately owned land then there would be no need (as I understand it) to pay CaRT anything for that privilege. 

 

I think you are mistaken there. CRT will require you to enter into an "End Of Garden Mooring Agreement" with them, for which you'll be charged 50% of the local rate for a similar on-line mooring. 

IF you just moor your boat there with no EOG agreement in place, you'll start getting emails telling you to 'continue your journey'. 

Edited July 3, 2017 by Mike the Boilerman

[Machpoint005]

On 01/07/2017 at 20:46, F DRAYKE said:

Since when does a widebeam use twice the amount that a narrow boat uses?

Neither width of boat "uses" water -- as far as I know, my general observation that the water flows back to fill the hole when you move on applies to fat boats and narrow boats just te same. As it does for a canoe. Or a fish, for that matter.

On 01/07/2017 at 21:05, 1agos said:

Maybe every time it uses a lock.

One lockful is one lockful regardless of what is in the lock. If I follow a 70ft boat down a lock, his transit uses exactly the same amount of water as my 48ft.

[Horace42]

On 02/07/2017 at 12:11, Arthur Marshall said:

Well, as I'm moored against privately owned farm land, and don't have to cross any CRT owned soil to get to it, and yet still have to pay a few hundred quid a year to CRT for the right to park my boat, I can see why he thinks I'm being conned.

CCers have the right to stay in the same place for 14 days but then have to move on.  I suppose the mooring permit just amends this right to an open-ended period for those who find that convenient.  There are those who say there is no legal basis for this, but then there are those who say there is no legal basis for any towpath side moorings, or for fines for over-staying, or, indeed, for the charges at Llangollen.  Until one of them have the nerve (and finances) to take it to court and win, the rest of us grimace and stump up.

Whether CC's are moved on every 14 days or not, it is a fact that they moor somewhere, and will do this every day of the year, aparantly free of charge to them if using CRT moorings  - which are provided and maintained by CRT at some cost to CRT.

Probably CC's pay to moor some times at privately owned sites , presumably a contribution is paid to CRT by the site owner - but I am not aware of any mechanism by which CRT can ensure they get paid. 

Whereas I pay CRT to use my own garden to moor.

Aparently the logic behind the charge is that it bestows a right to a permanent exclusive use of the water at that spot, the 'cruising' license only allows you to put your boat in the CRT owned water, the point being there is no obligation on CRT to ensure you can cruise anywhere.

[Mike Todd]

On 03/07/2017 at 14:07, Mike the Boilerman said:

 

I think you are mistaken there. CRT will require you to enter into an "End Of Garden Mooring Agreement" with them, for which you'll be charged 50% of the local rate for a similar on-line mooring. 

IF you just moor your boat there with no EOG agreement in place, you'll start getting emails telling you to 'continue your journey'. 

You misunderstood the point. If you put the boat on your land, rather than in the water, no agreement is needed. Mooring against your land means that you are as much in CaRT water as when mooring anywhere else. There is nothing special about the water adjacent to your land.

[leeco]

2 hours ago, Mike Todd said:

You misunderstood the point. If you put the boat on your land, rather than in the water, no agreement is needed. Mooring against your land means that you are as much in CaRT water as when mooring anywhere else. There is nothing special about the water adjacent to your land.

What if he dug into his land a few feet and increased the waterway?

[Richard10002]

9 hours ago, leeco said:

What if he dug into his land a few feet and increased the waterway?

CRT charge marinas for being connected to their canal, so the same would apply - wouldn't it?

[Alan de Enfield]

2 minutes ago, Richard10002 said:

CRT charge marinas for being connected to their canal, so the same would apply - wouldn't it?

But - only 9% of income.

If there is no income is there no charge ?

Even if they charged 9% of a 'similar mooring' cost then it would be better than the 50% of a 'similar mooring' cost that they currently charge.

[Mike Todd]

On 05/07/2017 at 09:24, Alan de Enfield said:

But - only 9% of income.

If there is no income is there no charge ?

Even if they charged 9% of a 'similar mooring' cost then it would be better than the 50% of a 'similar mooring' cost that they currently charge.

Only 9% once they have agreed the principle and the business plan. Unlikely in the event that the land owner just wants to fill his personal 'marina' at CaRT's expense.

Edited July 7, 2017 by Mike Todd