CRT Licensing Review final report

[NigelMoore]

Just now, Alan de Enfield said:

Presumably then failure to display both your registration number, and, the licence is two offences and would be 'double the fine' ?

Cannot see why not.

13 hours ago, Tuscan said:

 I would not be suprised if CRT initiate a couple of by law prosecutions for not displaying an index number as this would appear to be a growing problem.

Do you think they would be any more willing to take the prosecution route over that, rather than continue with their predilection for s.8 removals? No registration number could be presumptive of no registration with no identification of an owner possible, so justifying, in such a position – more so than in situations where the owner is identified – the use of s.8.

[Froggy]

1 hour ago, b0atman said:

I seem to see more boats with no Identifying Number Name or licence disc moving around than in the past.

CRT need to be slapping notices on these and then lifting them out of the water if there is no satisfactory response within a statutory amount of time. Otherwise, what motivation is there for everybody else to toe the line?

Edited March 13, 2018 by Froggy

[MtB]

1 hour ago, Red Ruth said:

That is interesting - do you remember what gave you that impression Mike? Did you do any research or anything or was it hearsay? 

 

I've been trying to recall but can't. Was a long time ago!

I probably got it from a waterways magazine or possibly from a friend of mine who grew up on boats. Or more likely their father who gave a tons of good advice when we were looking for a boat. 

It wasn't from reading the law or formal legal advice though. I wasn't that thorough back then!

[NigelMoore]

4 minutes ago, Froggy said:

CRT need to be slapping notices on these and then lifting them out of the water if there is no satisfactory response within a given amount of time. Otherwise, what motivation is there for everybody else to toe the line?

As I have suggested - that would be a proper use of s.8. Yet perversely, as others have noted, they seem more reluctant to act when they cannot trace the owners.

[MtB]

2 minutes ago, NigelMoore said:

As I have suggested - that would be a proper use of s.8. Yet perversely, as others have noted, they seem more reluctant to act when they cannot trace the owners.

 

Would that be due to CRT's horror of contravening the HRA? Not knowing who lives on the boat means they can't apply for a court order, I'd imagine. 

Yet... embarking on S.8 who force the owner to pop up and identify themselves if they were to have any chance of halting the S.8 process. Win either way for CRT.

[NigelMoore]

17 minutes ago, Mike the Boilerman said:

 

Would that be due to CRT's horror of contravening the HRA? Not knowing who lives on the boat means they can't apply for a court order, I'd imagine. 

Yet... embarking on S.8 who force the owner to pop up and identify themselves if they were to have any chance of halting the S.8 process. Win either way for CRT.

I have never noticed any reluctance on CaRT’s part to evict residential boats on the HRA basis. They would not need any court order to remove a boat whose owner could not be identified, hence unable to be in a position to claim protected status. As you say, following the correct process would reveal them and encourage compliance – failing which, CaRT would be entitled to remove it.

That is precisely the rationale for s.8 of viable boats in my opinion.

[Red Ruth]

I think they tend to see s8 as a 'sanction' more than a management tool - i've seen loads of boats sunken for years and never moved. You can't really teach a sunken boat any lessons.. 

[Machpoint005]

18 hours ago, Alan de Enfield said:

Maybe here  : (Bye-Laws)

Marking of vessels 

(1) Every vessel on any canal shall have exhibited on the outside
thereof so as to be clearly legible at all times at a distance of
twenty yards
(i) her name and such index mark and number (if any) as the
Board shall have assigned to the vessel.

Does the Board assign a gender to the vessel too? Mine Ours isn't female!

17 hours ago, TheBiscuits said:

The registration number plates were gaffer taped in the cabin windows as a temporary fix 3 years ago.

As far as I know there is no obligation or requirement to display the number plates - just the number. A clearly legible felt-tip pen on a piece of paper in the window is fine -- so long as it doesn't fade too much over time.

Edited March 13, 2018 by Machpoint005
oops...

[Athy]

2 hours ago, Red Ruth said:

 You can't really teach a sunken boat any lessons.. 

You can't really teach any boat any lessons.

[Alan de Enfield]

55 minutes ago, Machpoint005 said:

Does the Board assign a gender to the vessel too? Mine Ours isn't female!

As far as I know there is no obligation or requirement to display the number plates - just the number. A clearly legible felt-tip pen on a piece of paper in the window is fine -- so long as it doesn't fade too much over time.

 

55 minutes ago, Machpoint005 said:

Every vessel on any canal shall have exhibited on the outside thereof so as to be clearly legible at all times at a distance of twenty yards

Indeed - My Cruiser has a self adhesive 'number plate' set below a self adhesive set of Small Ships Register (SSR) numbers.

[NigelMoore]

2 minutes ago, Alan de Enfield said:

 

Indeed - My Cruiser has a self adhesive 'number plate' set below a self adhesive set of Small Ships Register (SSR) numbers.

Interestingly enough, if you do not venture beyond CaRT's scheduled rivers, their registration number does NOT have to be displayed, if you are registered under the MSA and already display that number.