CRT Licensing Review final report

[Jess--]

I suspect that if you dug down deep enough you would find that a very large number of boats are sporting licenses that are technically invalid

a large number of these will be down to invalid bss certs, with their current bss rendered invalid by work carried out on the boat since the inspection

on the 5% evasion rate I wonder whether that is a snapshot figure (i.e. on the 1st of march 5% of boats seen in this area were unlicensed) or using figures taken over a longer period, if a short period it could easily have caught quite a few boats that were a couple of weeks late in getting their license.

London (and canals in other large cities with high accommodation costs) will always see the largest apparent evasion due to dreamers buying a cheap boat to live on in london with no clue as to whats required (license / insurance / bss / movement etc) or even the cynical view that if they buy a wreck of a boat for and get away with it for 6 months before losing the boat it's still massively cheaper than the alternative of renting a small flat

Edited March 9, 2018 by Jess--

[Momac]

My main concern over unlicensed boats is they may not be safe and may be uninsured.

C&RT have been making some inspections in our area in recent years but that seems rare. but even then they do not make on board inspections and do not ask for evidence of insurance.

Some people do not display an index plate, for no good reason. On excuse given to me was ‘’it spoiled the look of the boat’’.

These days there should not be any need for a license to be displayed but C&RT are so antiquated they still ask us every time we go through a lock on the Trent and that can be several times in a weekend.

[Naughty Cal]

3 minutes ago, MartynG said:

My main concern over unlicensed boats is they may not be safe and may be uninsured.

C&RT have been making some inspections in our area in recent years but that seems rare. but even then they do not make on board inspections and do not ask for evidence of insurance.

Some people do not display an index plate, for no good reason. On excuse given to me was ‘’it spoiled the look of the boat’’.

These days there should not be any need for a license to be displayed but C&RT are so antiquated they still ask us every time we go through a lock on the Trent and that can be several times in a weekend.

And then they don't do anything with the data anyway! The lockies take your index number but the information isn't registered against the boats sightings 

[Tanglewood]

4 hours ago, alan_fincher said:

The fact that on multiple occasions CRT have said they don't actually look at the paper licences, and indeed that at one stage they even actively said they no longer needed to be displayed?

OK they later said their staff had been in error saying the latter, but even now thy say if they can identify the boat, they are not interested in the licence.

Oh this is news, so are we required to display a licence?  I know ignorance is no defence, but its amazing how effectively the idea that you no longer need a licence got passed round.  But this is the first I have heard about that being an 'error'. 

[john6767]

18 minutes ago, Tanglewood said:

Oh this is news, so are we required to display a licence?  I know ignorance is no defence, but its amazing how effectively the idea that you no longer need a licence got passed round.  But this is the first I have heard about that being an 'error'. 

What does it say about displaying your licence on the letter that the two licences were attached to?

[Chewbacka]

16 minutes ago, Tanglewood said:

Oh this is news, so are we required to display a licence?  I know ignorance is no defence, but its amazing how effectively the idea that you no longer need a licence got passed round.  But this is the first I have heard about that being an 'error'. 

I think CRT use the index number on their recording system, so they don’t look for a licence, however (I forget which) one of the old ‘laws’ specifically states that the licence must be displayed, so it would be unwise for CRT to tell you there is no need to display.

[Machpoint005]

35 minutes ago, Chewbacka said:

I think CRT use the index number on their recording system, so they don’t look for a licence, however (I forget which) one of the old ‘laws’ specifically states that the licence must be displayed, so it would be unwise for CRT to tell you there is no need to display.

The basic standpoint seems to be that if they know you have a licence they don't bother whether they can see it or not. Hope so, as it's about time I stuck my new one up.

[rgreg]

The IWA's view of the new licensing terms:SIDEBAR 

IWA Bulletin - 8th March 

IWA News

 

LICENCE REVIEW IS A MISSED OPPORTUNITY

Following publication of the outcome of Canal & River Trust’s licence review consultation on 6th March, The Inland Waterways Association regrets that Canal & River Trust has failed to take the opportunity to produce a modern licensing system that addresses the problems it inherited on its creation in 2012. 

IWA sees this as a missed opportunity to solve some of the issues caused by the current licensing system, and in particular the effect of the continuous cruising option introduced by the British Waterways Act 1995 as an alternative to having a home mooring.  After spending a significant amount of resource on a major review and consultation, it is disappointing that so little has come of it. 

The review does nothing to address two of IWA’s key concerns; the increasing use of widebeam boats on inappropriate waterways to the detriment of other waterways users,  and ensuring that boaters without a home mooring cruise an appropriate distance. IWA will continue campaigning for these concerns to be resolved.

In response to the detail contained in Canal & River Trust proposals: 

• IWA is concerned that many boaters will face a significant increase in their licence fees within 2 years as a result of the changes to the prompt payment discount
• IWA considers that a licence based on boat area (length x beam) would have been a fairer and simpler system rather than the proposed three width bands
• IWA notes the loss of the 1 day visitor licence and considers that it should continue to be available online to encourage compliance by occasional users, eg of canoes and trailable boats, and to encourage more people to get afloat affordably.

[Momac]

3 hours ago, Tanglewood said:

 are we required to display a licence? 

There is a request to display a license, one on each side of the boat  on the letter to which the license is attached.

A request .is not the same as a  requirement.

However , elsewhere , C&RT do say its a legal requirement to display the license together with the boat name and index.

https://canalrivertrust.org.uk/enjoy-the-waterways/boating/licensing-your-boat/licensing-faqs

I doubt anyone would be prosecuted for not displaying a license  providing hey have paid and have insurance and a valid BSS certificate.

[NigelMoore]

2 hours ago, MartynG said:

There is a request to display a license, one on each side of the boat  on the letter to which the license is attached.

A request .is not the same as a  requirement.

However , elsewhere , C&RT do say its a legal requirement to display the license together with the boat name and index.

https://canalrivertrust.org.uk/enjoy-the-waterways/boating/licensing-your-boat/licensing-faqs

I doubt anyone would be prosecuted for not displaying a license  providing hey have paid and have insurance and a valid BSS certificate.

It is. See the General Canal Byelaws 1976 -

Display of licences 4. (1) The owner of a pleasure boat shall not knowingly cause or permit to be used on a canal (not being a river waterway) any pleasure boat in respect of which a pleasure boat licence has been issued unless the licence for the time being in force is displayed on the pleasure boat in such a manner and position as to be clearly visible from outside the pleasure boat at all times. (2) The owner of a commercial vessel shall not knowingly cause or permit to be used on a canal (not being a commercial waterway) any commercial vessel in respect of which a commercial vessel licence has been issued unless the licence for the time being in force is displayed on the commercial vessel in such a manner and position as to be clearly visible from outside the commercial vessel at all times. (3) No person shall knowingly cause or permit to be concealed a pleasure boat licence or commercial vessel licence required to be displayed on a pleasure boat or commercial vessel in accordance with this Bye-law.

The offence is punishable by a fine not exceeding £100.

However, they would not bother prosecuting; they consider the fine a “derisory” penalty, so have never bothered to prosecute for any byelaw offence since they ‘took over’.

[jam]

13 hours ago, TheBiscuits said:

And another 2.5% discount for using the online licensing system from 2020.

Incorrect.

It is 2.5% for using the online system and 2.5% for payment in full. Paying by direct debit only gains 2.5% discount if using the online system.

[MtB]

3 minutes ago, jam said:

Incorrect.

It is 2.5% for using the online system and 2.5% for payment in full. Paying by direct debit only gains 2.5% discount if using the online system.

 

And being picky....

If it is 2.5% Discount then a further 2.5% off what is left, that does not quite equal 5%.

[TheBiscuits]

9 minutes ago, jam said:

Incorrect.

It is 2.5% for using the online system and 2.5% for payment in full. Paying by direct debit only gains 2.5% discount if using the online system.

Oops! Well caught, I misread the table the first time.

 

5 minutes ago, Mike the Boilerman said:

And being picky....

If it is 2.5% Discount then a further 2.5% off what is left, that does not quite equal 5%.

The table I have just re-read says that if you prompt pay in full AND use the online licence tool you get a 5% discount.

It is not two 2.5% discounts on a net reducing balance.

 

[Tanglewood]

On 3/9/2018 at 18:24, MartynG said:

There is a request to display a license, one on each side of the boat  on the letter to which the license is attached.

A request .is not the same as a  requirement.

However , elsewhere , C&RT do say its a legal requirement to display the license together with the boat name and index.

https://canalrivertrust.org.uk/enjoy-the-waterways/boating/licensing-your-boat/licensing-faqs

I doubt anyone would be prosecuted for not displaying a license  providing hey have paid and have insurance and a valid BSS certificate.

Yes I get that, (difference between requirement and request) so now I know, I shall mend my ways, lead by example as my granny used to say!   Thanks Nigel Moore for posting the actual wording, but I still think it wondrous amazing that the information that one did not need to display, spread like wildfire, but the information that in fact one  does, fizzled like a damp squib!

[BargeeSpud]

 

 

The 20% extra for Widebeam boats is easily raised to something more equitable once the principle is established. 

Why?

[alan_fincher]

 

Why?

I assumed that the suggestion being made is that once you have incorporated a percentage mark-up for wide beams, and established the principle, they is no reason why CRT will in future always keep that percentage the same.

[Momac]

C&RT could change their method every year if they wish.  However the new arrangements seem to me to be a long term plan. Inflation may of course be added.

[Arthur Marshall]

 

Yes I get that, (difference between requirement and request) so now I know, I shall mend my ways, lead by example as my granny used to say!   Thanks Nigel Moore for posting the actual wording, but I still think it wondrous amazing that the information that one did not need to display, spread like wildfire, but the information that in fact one  does, fizzled like a damp squib!

Seeing as  how the licence letter says it must be displayed and that all it takes is a phone call to CRT to check, it aint much of a squib. What may be truly amazing is that there are still some people around who take what they read on the net as gospel and see no need to verify it! 

I think I now have a subject for this week's topical song... 

[alan_fincher]

 

Seeing as  how the licence letter says it must be displayed and that all it takes is a phone call to CRT to check, it aint much of a squib. What may be truly amazing is that there are still some people around who take what they read on the net as gospel and see no need to verify it!

You seem to be aware that before putting it on the net people rang CRT to verify the situation, and were at the time told you no longer needed to display licences, and the requirement had been dropped.

CRT later confirmed that the CRT staff who had been giving this answer to those who had rung up were in error in doing so.

If you couldn't at the time get the true story "from the horses mouth", I think it is completely unfair to criticise anybody who believed what appeared to be the CRT official line!

[MtB]

 

Seeing as  how the licence letter says it must be displayed and that all it takes is a phone call to CRT to check, it aint much of a squib. What may be truly amazing is that there are still some people around who take what they read on the net as gospel and see no need to verify it! 

 

Right in that case, I'm definitely displaying my licence disks from now on. Thanks for clarifying. 

(See what I did there?)

[Froggy]

 

How do you make that up?

CRT specifically stated that despite a majority of responses being in favour of charging more for "boaters without a home mooring" they have not altered licence prices for these.  They are going to look at "options" for busiest waterways such as in London and Bath, which probably means either a congestion charge or a no return within x days type of policy.

 

From the report:

Licence considerations in respect of mooring status

2.7 A majority indicated they would support a change to take mooring status into account as part of the licensing system. However, there were heavily polarised views with a significant number arguing strongly against this, stating that any such distinction would be highly divisive. This issue was also linked by respondents to the growing congestion on the Trust’s busiest waterways in London and around Bath where the growing numbers of liveaboard boaters without a home mooring reflects the availability and economics of housing in such costly cities.

2.8 Notwithstanding the majority in favour of a change, the Trust does not propose to introduce a different licence fee for boats without a home mooring. Our intention is to take forward a further stage of work to look at options that would address the growing use of canals in London and other areas by boats without a home mooring and how to develop a fair means of reflecting the significant benefit gained by such use.

I have heard of a corporate body being called "a soul" but I'm not sure that is the correct spelling.

 

Maybe before the CRT look at penalising continuous cruisers they should take into account whether the demand for 'home moorings' exceeds the supply.

[Jerra]

 

These days there should not be any need for a license to be displayed but C&RT are so antiquated they still ask us every time we go through a lock on the Trent and that can be several times in a weekend.

I thought it was in one of the many Acts of parliament that it must be displayed.

If it is it amuses me how many boaters sat CRT can't make their own rules and should stick to what the law allows and then consider CRT to be doing wrong when they want boaters to keep within the law.

[NigelMoore]

 

CRT later confirmed that the CRT staff who had been giving this answer to those who had rung up were in error in doing so.

On the other hand, the ‘Online Boat Checker’ is still fairly dismissive of the importance of displaying a licence disk. Tap in the registration number of a boat not displaying a current licence, and it might well respond with: “This boat is licensed. The owner might have forgotten to display it.”

 No “thank you for reporting that, we will write to them and remind them of the obligation”. Does not mean they might not do so, but the implicit message that comes across is “thanks, but the boat is legit.” So the general impression is not so foolish.

 And – it is not so terrible that they don’t trouble themselves over the matter; they are under no obligation to enforce byelaws, they simply can if they choose [and they have chosen never to do so, at least by the proportionate direct avenue provided within the byelaw provisions]. Where it does not matter to them, because the law, in this instance, existed to help identify unlicensed boats in days when computerised records were never dreamt of, and they now know immediately whether the boat is licensed or not, the offence of not displaying the licence becomes purely technical.

[Red Ruth]

I had no reg number or licence displayed last summer (i was painting and waiting to get to a printer) and the enforcement people just wanted me to display the index number plate thing. They said they can't read the licence anyway without peering in at the window, so they just use the plate. Now they're 'print-your-own' it'd be just as easy to display a fake one anyway. That's interesting they don't have to enforce byelaws I didn't know that

[Froggy]

 

Alan,poor Baldrick! I knew him,a fellow of limited jest.

This is all getting very silly! There should be an 'eating popcorn' greenie. This emoticon will have to do instead:

Edited March 12, 2018 by Froggy