Jump to content
Strawberry Orange Banana Lime Leaf Slate Sky Blueberry Grape Watermelon Chocolate Marble
Strawberry Orange Banana Lime Leaf Slate Sky Blueberry Grape Watermelon Chocolate Marble
peterboat

Petition for wide beam owners

Featured Posts

Following the recent "consultation" Us widebeam owners are going to have to pay more for exactly what we had before, so someone has started a petition to try and maybe get it changed, so if you feel unhappy with the consultation please sign and comment what you are not happy with and maybe ways it could be fairer follow the link do your stuff http://redirect.viglink.com/?key=bbb516d91daee20498798694a42dd559&u=https%3A//www.ipetitions.com/petition/wide-beam-licenc-increase

  • Love 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 minute ago, casper ghost said:

Is there a petition we can sign to agree with the proposal..

Or one to object that it is too small an increase :)

  • Greenie 3

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

The farcical change in licence fees has been brought about by the narrow minded people in their narrowboats.

  • Greenie 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

At one time the road fund licence was the same price for all cars, not any more. That's how things change, suck it up, you have had years of your fat boats bloating in the canals for free.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 minute ago, Boater Sam said:

At one time the road fund licence was the same price for all cars, not any more.

...and before that, they weren't. Plus ca change...have licence fees always been based simply on length ever since they were first introduced, I don't know?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
3 minutes ago, rusty69 said:

The farcical change in licence fees has been brought about by the narrow minded people in their narrowboats.

Licences have  been charged by Square area for years on the Thames.some short Term Mooring providers do make an extra charge for Boats exceeding 11 Metres.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
11 minutes ago, Boater Sam said:

At one time the road fund licence was the same price for all cars, not any more. That's how things change, suck it up, you have had years of your fat boats bloating in the canals for free.

But the proper canal system is built for wider beamed craft up to and over twenty feet in some places. Its only the silly narrow system forced on us by accountants 300 years ago that means people like me who wish to cruise the greater part of the inland system have to buy stupid ugly skinny narrowboats. So called fat boats in other words the vast majority of the worlds boats are quite simply better handling and VASTLY more comfortable if even stopped on only one night per year let alone lived on. To be honest I expected the increase to be greater but if like many people that have for many years lived on boats always based on cost by length and have sensibly budgeted say for retirement and then there is a substantial increase then I can see why they would be peed off. Why is it that so many freaky sized narrowboat owners moan about superior more sensibly sized boats? Is it the usual jealousy? something else? There are a few too many non narrow beamed craft in dumps like London but in reality much of the system is mainly inhabited by narrow beamed craft and most wider boats are on the proper canals and rivers such as the Trent etc etc and cause no problems. Perhaps its little man syndrome? I have a narrowboat but realise no one in their right mind would have one if they didn't need to traverse north to south inland but that's what we are stuck with.

  • Greenie 4

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
30 minutes ago, cereal tiller said:

Licences have  been charged by Square area for years on the Thames.some short Term Mooring providers do make an extra charge for Boats exceeding 11 Metres.

But we arnt on the Thames are we? I just want a fairer system in car terms the new taxation for cars brought in on the first of April, its only for cars registered on that date forward why didnt they do that for boats? it would have been easier no consultation needed and people would have had a choice, Instead we had the mess which cost a fortune set boat owner against boat owner and still didnt give CRT the answer they wanted. As Tim says I am up north the waterways I am on are designed for 1000 ton tankers does it matter if this much underused waterway had a different license system? not really the odd boats out up here are narrowboats not widebeams

  • Greenie 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
22 minutes ago, mrsmelly said:

....... but in reality much of the system is mainly inhabited by narrow beamed craft and most wider boats are on the proper canals and rivers such as the Trent etc etc and cause no problems. Perhaps its little man syndrome? I have a narrowboat but realise no one in their right mind would have one if they didn't need to traverse north to south inland but that's what we are stuck with.

Absolutely. We have narrowboats because they fit on the canals that we navigate. Unfortunately some people think there is no problem taking their fat boats to places that they are not suitable for. In marinas all around the country away from the rivers and canals, craft have been charged by area for 10 years plus because space is at a premium (in those marinas) and so you pay for your area. Space in the canals is limited hence charging by area seems sensible. If fat boats were suitable for the canal network, I would buy a fat boat. If all the waterways I navigate can take 1000 ton tankers then I would buy a fat boat. I would then expect to pay more as the area of the boat is bigger.

  • Greenie 2

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
10 minutes ago, Dr Bob said:

Absolutely. We have narrowboats because they fit on the canals that we navigate. Unfortunately some people think there is no problem taking their fat boats to places that they are not suitable for. In marinas all around the country away from the rivers and canals, craft have been charged by area for 10 years plus because space is at a premium (in those marinas) and so you pay for your area. Space in the canals is limited hence charging by area seems sensible. If fat boats were suitable for the canal network, I would buy a fat boat. If all the waterways I navigate can take 1000 ton tankers then I would buy a fat boat. I would then expect to pay more as the area of the boat is bigger.

I have never seen a boat wider than 7 feet or thereabouts being taken through a narrow lock :P

  • Greenie 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

The thing is, few of us disagree with the concept of bigger boats paying more than smaller boats. 

The next thing is, the area of a boat is a more accurate proxy for size than length alone. 

Therefor charging by area is fairer.

  • Greenie 4

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I'm glad most of the canal's near me are narrow, otherwise i'd have had to build a widebeam, and that would have been much harder.. 

  • Haha 3

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Thank goodness for bridges. Otherwise we'd have to be calculating the volume and that would make my brain hurt.

  • Haha 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
7 minutes ago, system 4-50 said:

Thank goodness for bridges. Otherwise we'd have to be calculating the volume and that would make my brain hurt.

Brain? :D

  • Haha 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I think, if you built the boat yourself, from scratch, not this self fit-out, cheating lark, but actually started with sheets of steel, then everything should be free, forever. Seems perfectly fair..

Casp'

  • Greenie 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

If 'size' is used, fees should be based on 'footprint' area in the water. Easy enough to measure (and certify by the builder or BSS examiner) and assign to the boat - and with computers - easy to set a base rate (fixed element + per area element) to use to calculate a pro-rata total.

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
4 minutes ago, Mike the Boilerman said:

Summary of the argument:

"I bought a boat too big to fit everywhere therefore I should pay less."

:giggles:

Have fat boats ever paid less (than anyone else)? 

:mellow:

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
14 minutes ago, casper ghost said:

I think, if you built the boat yourself, from scratch, not this self fit-out, cheating lark, but actually started with sheets of steel, then everything should be free, forever. Seems perfectly fair..

Casp'

 

Only if you mined and smelted the ore and rolled the steel in your own mills... 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 minute ago, Mike the Boilerman said:

 

Only if you mined and smelted the ore and rolled the steel in your own mills... 

Damn, I will next time...

  • Greenie 2

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
2 hours ago, peterboat said:

Following the recent "consultation" Us widebeam owners are going to have to pay more for exactly what we had before, so someone has started a petition to try and maybe get it changed, so if you feel unhappy with the consultation please sign and comment what you are not happy with and maybe ways it could be fairer follow the link do your stuff http://redirect.viglink.com/?key=bbb516d91daee20498798694a42dd559&u=https%3A//www.ipetitions.com/petition/wide-beam-licenc-increase

Signed it.

20% increase is a shocker. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 hour ago, rusty69 said:

The farcical change in licence fees has been brought about by the narrow minded people in their narrowboats.

I very much doubt that the changes in licence fees are anything to do with boaters. 

The whole thing was decided in a CRT /IWA management meeting or 3 and then an expensive consultation paid lip service to the general public

  • Greenie 4

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
9 minutes ago, matty40s said:

I very much doubt that the changes in licence fees are anything to do with boaters. 

The whole thing was decided in a CRT /IWA management meeting or 3 and then an expensive consultation paid lip service to the general public

True. The increases etc where decided then the bullshit consultation paper put out there, in fairness I think most of us knew that from day one. Think I will buy a tent.

  • Greenie 2

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!

Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.

Sign In Now

  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    No registered users viewing this page.

×

Important Information

We have placed cookies on your device to help make this website better. You can adjust your cookie settings, otherwise we'll assume you're okay to continue.