March of the Widebeams

[PaulJ]

1 hour ago, matty40s said:

Indeed..

As you are approaching Teddington thought Id share my photo of the two dolphins I passed at Kew earlier this year with you.

This should be proof to Cathy that professional photographers are very much still needed 😀

Good to run into you as always..

[Peanut]

Competition for the fisherman.

[dogless]

38 minutes ago, IanD said:

 

I'm not claiming any virtue, just recognising the fact that CCers contribute less to CART finances -- which maintain the canals that we all use -- than HMers because of either the 9% levy for marinas, or the EOG fee, or the big chunk CART receive from farm moorings, or the entire sum they get from online moorings. My £300pa contribution -- which I don't mind paying in the slightest! -- is much smaller than many of these other sums, I'm just using it as an example.

 

In my view this justifies the CC surcharge on the grounds of "fairness", CCers who use the canals should make the same contribution to CART funds as HMers do.

 

In your view (I assume you're a CCer?) everyone paying more -- not just you (and widebeam owners) -- is "fairer".

 

These two views are diametrically opposed, and we're never going to agree.

No I have a mooring (not that it's relevant) but unlike yourself I was suggesting what I felt would have been the most even and least divisive way of raising extra cash with ALL boaters contributing.

 

And I say again, you pay your mooring fees ... nothing more nothing less.

 

To claim reflected glory because the mooring provider's contract requires THEM  to pay C&RT a fee, is as ridiculous as claiming you make charitable contributions because having paid your mooring fee the provider  buys their shirts in a charity shop. 

 

We disagree ... I can live with that, and as it happens C&RT have selected your preferred way of raising extra funds 👍🏻

 

In a nutshell I believe there was a better, fairer, more productive way and you don't.

 

Rog

Edited July 31 by dogless

[IanD]

57 minutes ago, dogless said:

No I have a mooring (not that it's relevant) but unlike yourself I was suggesting what I felt would have been the most even and least divisive way of raising extra cash with ALL boaters contributing.

 

And I say again, you pay your mooring fees ... nothing more nothing less.

 

To claim reflected glory because the mooring provider's contract requires THEM  to pay C&RT a fee, is as ridiculous as claiming you make charitable contributions because having paid your mooring fee the provider  buys their shirts in a charity shop. 

 

We disagree ... I can live with that, and as it happens C&RT have selected your preferred way of raising extra funds 👍🏻

 

In a nutshell I believe there was a better, fairer, more productive way and you don't.

 

Rog

I'm not "claiming reflected glory", I just think that all boaters -- CCers and HMers -- should make the same overall contribution to CART finances which keep the canals navigable -- well, some of the time... 😞

 

You seem to think that the money going out to CART from the marinas is somehow disconnected from the money going into marinas from boaters. I'd have thought that any accountant would say that if for every 100p the boater pays the marina gets to keep 91p (to provide facilities) and CART get 9p (to maintain the canals), the boater has contributed 9p to CART just as much if they'd paid it directly as a license fee.

 

I also think that there have been historical anomalies in the way CART set license fees (e.g. for CCers and widebeams) which are now being partly corrected. Unsurprisingly those who now have to pay more as a result think it's "unfair" -- but another point of view is that HMers and narrowboaters used to be treated "unfairly" compared to CCers and widebeam owners, and that the surcharges make things "fairer".

 

Again, these two viewpoints are diametrically opposed and there's never going to be agreement between the two... 😞 

Edited July 31 by IanD

[beerbeerbeerbeerbeer]

I think we get your point, you’ve repeated yourself often enough,

It’s remarkable how you will keep banging on,

 

[peterboat]

1 hour ago, IanD said:

I'm not "claiming reflected glory", I just think that all boaters -- CCers and HMers -- should make the same overall contribution to CART finances which keep the canals navigable -- well, some of the time... 😞

 

You seem to think that the money going out to CART from the marinas is somehow disconnected from the money going into marinas from boaters. I'd have thought that any accountant would say that if for every 100p the boater pays the marina gets to keep 91p (to provide facilities) and CART get 9p (to maintain the canals), the boater has contributed 9p to CART just as much if they'd paid it directly as a license fee.

 

I also think that there have been historical anomalies in the way CART set license fees (e.g. for CCers and widebeams) which are now being partly corrected. Unsurprisingly those who now have to pay more as a result think it's "unfair" -- but another point of view is that HMers and narrowboaters used to be treated "unfairly" compared to CCers and widebeam owners, and that the surcharges make things "fairer".

 

Again, these two viewpoints are diametrically opposed and there's never going to be agreement between the two... 😞 

I think at some point, a challenge will be made in court by NTBA, using the details in the act itself to get T&Cs definitions overruled. The act is clear licence fees are based on length. Also the definitions of licences is clear as well. It will be interesting if they win because they will either try to get a new act through parliament or just raise licence fees for all

[beerbeerbeerbeerbeer]

3 minutes ago, peterboat said:

I think at some point, a challenge will be made in court by NTBA, using the details in the act itself to get T&Cs definitions overruled. The act is clear licence fees are based on length. Also the definitions of licences is clear as well. It will be interesting if they win because they will either try to get a new act through parliament or just raise licence fees for all

you’ve done it now,

you’ve mentioned ‘them’,

 

were you aware ‘them’ down in London are planning a strike of sorts. A refusal to pay the license fee. 

[MtB]

3 hours ago, PaulJ said:

As you are approaching Teddington thought Id share my photo of the two dolphins I passed at Kew earlier this year with you.

This should be proof to Cathy that professional photographers are very much still needed 😀

Good to run into you as always..

 

That looks more like a moorhen to me than a dolphin!!

 

 

[IanD]

2 hours ago, beerbeerbeerbeerbeer said:

I think we get your point, you’ve repeated yourself often enough,

It’s remarkable how you will keep banging on,
 

It's remarkable how many times you seem determined to say that. At least I'm saying something with actual content, not just trolling... 😉 

 

1 hour ago, peterboat said:

I think at some point, a challenge will be made in court by NTBA, using the details in the act itself to get T&Cs definitions overruled. The act is clear licence fees are based on length. Also the definitions of licences is clear as well. It will be interesting if they win because they will either try to get a new act through parliament or just raise licence fees for all

I thought the act was clear that CART could charge license fees based on pretty much any criteria they chose? For example surcharges for widebeams have been around for years, as have discounts for certain boat categories like historic or butties, and nobody has tried to claim that these are illegal.

 

License fees are currently based on length (with surcharges/discounts on top of this), but as far as I'm aware there's nothing to stop them changing to area (width*length) or displacement or anything else. Maybe @Alan de Enfield can clarify this?

Edited July 31 by IanD

[Tacet]

2 hours ago, IanD said:

I'm not "claiming reflected glory", I just think that all boaters -- CCers and HMers -- should make the same overall contribution to CART finances which keep the canals navigable -- well, some of the time... 😞

 

You seem to think that the money going out to CART from the marinas is somehow disconnected from the money going into marinas from boaters. I'd have thought that any accountant would say that if for every 100p the boater pays the marina gets to keep 91p (to provide facilities) and CART get 9p (to maintain the canals), the boater has contributed 9p to CART just as much if they'd paid it directly as a license fee.

 

😞

You pay (as do I)  to moor your boat in a marina; the mooring rates are essentially set by supply and demand.  They are not directly any more or less because the marina owner has to pay CRT a connection fee.  That obligation is, ultimately a burden in the land - not a mooring expense.  So whilst there is a small point, I think it is stretching it to say  marina moorers contribute to CRT any more than one could claim to pay Corporation Tax or employ a groundsman etc because the marina does.

 

The 9% of your mooring fee reduces to 7.2% as it  most likely is subject to VAT and the payment to CRT will be based on an exclusive sums.  And the access fee is established from time to time, but it is a bottom slice charge and not a side-by-side arrangement. Which further means your mooring charge is detached from the income to CRT.

[matty40s]

...especially when some marinas dont pay CRT a penny, not all marinas have to pay the connection fee.

[peterboat]

1 hour ago, beerbeerbeerbeerbeer said:

you’ve done it now,

you’ve mentioned ‘them’,

 

were you aware ‘them’ down in London are planning a strike of sorts. A refusal to pay the license fee. 

I had heard about it on the London boaters Facebook group,  however when I posted I had forgotten all about it, or maybe it was in the back not my mind. I can't blame them to be honest and if they gofund me I will send them some dosh

[Lady M]

39 minutes ago, matty40s said:

...especially when some marinas dont pay CRT a penny, not all marinas have to pay the connection fee.

On the other hand, some marinas lease their entire site from CRT.

[Peanut]

8 hours ago, Tacet said:

You pay (as do I)  to moor your boat in a marina; the mooring rates are essentially set by supply and demand.  They are not directly any more or less because the marina owner has to pay CRT a connection fee.  That obligation is, ultimately a burden in the land - not a mooring expense.  So whilst there is a small point, I think it is stretching it to say  marina moorers contribute to CRT any more than one could claim to pay Corporation Tax or employ a groundsman etc because the marina does.

 

The 9% of your mooring fee reduces to 7.2% as it  most likely is subject to VAT and the payment to CRT will be based on an exclusive sums.  And the access fee is established from time to time, but it is a bottom slice charge and not a side-by-side arrangement. Which further means your mooring charge is detached from the income to CRT.

Ian is engaged in creative accounting.

His argument would be, that if I buy my ice cream from beerbeerbeerbeer, then I am paying more to CRT because he pays CRT to run his business. At least the principal is no different, I pay for beerbeerbeerbeer's ice cream, the fact that he pays CRT to be able to run his business has nothing to do with the amount I would pay to CRT.

[Mike Todd]

On 30/07/2024 at 19:26, beerbeerbeerbeerbeer said:

Thing is I’ve quite accepted that I’ll now be paying more. Its now kind of so what? 🤷‍♀️ who cares. 

What rubs me is the excuses made (not necessarily by CRT) but some folk in here. 

 

To be told I’ve had it easy and not been contributing to the coffers because I want it cheap it’s quite an insult. When the same guy uses the system more than a lot of non home moorers but …well anyway, whatever. 
 

Now, I have absolutely no objection to home moorers wizzing about. It’s great. There’s more than a few on here where I like to hear of their travels. 
 

This has driven me to Wetherspoons. 

 

 

 

someone told me today the winter heating allowance will be means tested !?

Not separately means tested - that would be too expensive - but conditional - on receiving Pension Credit or other state benefit (which are themselves means tested)

 

This was originally a short term, largely political, device that needed to be as simple as possible in order to bring in quickly. I seem to recall that at first it was only ever intended to be a one-off but other pressures led to its continuation. It always was an anomaly but it was too sensitive to touch for the last government. 

 

The change is not great optics an does not make a large impact on the deficit (however large it is, its large!) but is probably important in a totemic way.

[Lady M]

It is a big change compared with the last two years when an extra £300 was paid.  Now, fuel costs are still (about 50%?) higher than they were in 2021 and I, for one, was hoping for something extra to the 'usual' £200 per household.  In other words, instead of receiving £500, now there will be no help at all.

[IanD]

11 hours ago, Peanut said:

Ian is engaged in creative accounting.

His argument would be, that if I buy my ice cream from beerbeerbeerbeer, then I am paying more to CRT because he pays CRT to run his business. At least the principal is no different, I pay for beerbeerbeerbeer's ice cream, the fact that he pays CRT to be able to run his business has nothing to do with the amount I would pay to CRT.

 

You may well think that, so let me offer an alternative scenario...

 

Instead of charging marinas the 9% levy (which is passed on to boaters via the mooring fee), CART decide to remove this (so the marinas charge 9% less) and add a surcharge to the license fee for boats with a home mooring, such as to bring in exactly the same total revenue to CART.

 

I don't know what the average HM pays when you include marinas and EOG and farm and online moorings, but to show how the numbers work let's say that it's the same £3200 per year that I pay. CART would need to raise £300 per HMer from the license fee surcharge, I believe the average license fee today is about £700 (£25M/35k boaters), so this would have to go up to £1000 which is a 43% "HM surcharge".

 

The money paid out by HMers (on average) is identical to today. The money received by CART is identical to today. The net income to marinas is identical to today. The only difference is how the money flows from the HM boater to CART, direct instead of via the marina.

 

So compared to a 43% "HM surcharge", the current 25% "CC surcharge" looks like a bargain, don't you think?

 

Of course if the average mooring fee is lower than £3200 then the "HM surcharge" is lower; it would equal the 25% "CC surcharge" at £1860/year -- which may be a better guess given shorter boats and where marinas are. That would mean the same surcharge for both CCers and HMers, in other words a flat 25% increase in the the license fee for everyone -- which is then "fair", isn't it, no division between boaters?

 

(but HMers would pay 9% lower marina fees than today because the CART charge to marinas would be gone)

 

Does anyone know what the average mooring fee across all HMers is?

Edited August 1 by IanD

[Lady M]

It will depend on the size of the boat!

[IanD]

4 minutes ago, Lady M said:

It will depend on the size of the boat!

Of course it will, just like the license fee does, for example both depend on length -- that's why I said "average"... 😉 

Edited August 1 by IanD

[Lady M]

Also mooring fee rates do vary quite considerably from boat clubs charging virtually nothing to very expensive city centre residential berths.

[IanD]

1 minute ago, Lady M said:

Also mooring fee rates do vary quite considerably from boat clubs charging virtually nothing to very expensive city centre residential berths.

Obviously, hence "average"... 😉 

[Hudds Lad]

Finally met a moving widebeam on the Oxford at a bridge (101 or 102, somewhere like that), was waiting for one coming through who told me it was behind him so I hung back. One chap spotting on the front, one on the tiller and another on the side, they actually seemed quite happy. Don't see what all the fuss is about  

[Mike Todd]

4 hours ago, IanD said:

 

You may well think that, so let me offer an alternative scenario...

 

Instead of charging marinas the 9% levy (which is passed on to boaters via the mooring fee), CART decide to remove this (so the marinas charge 9% less) and add a surcharge to the license fee for boats with a home mooring, such as to bring in exactly the same total revenue to CART.

 

I don't know what the average HM pays when you include marinas and EOG and farm and online moorings, but to show how the numbers work let's say that it's the same £3200 per year that I pay. CART would need to raise £300 per HMer from the license fee surcharge, I believe the average license fee today is about £700 (£25M/35k boaters), so this would have to go up to £1000 which is a 43% "HM surcharge".

 

The money paid out by HMers (on average) is identical to today. The money received by CART is identical to today. The net income to marinas is identical to today. The only difference is how the money flows from the HM boater to CART, direct instead of via the marina.

 

So compared to a 43% "HM surcharge", the current 25% "CC surcharge" looks like a bargain, don't you think?

 

Of course if the average mooring fee is lower than £3200 then the "HM surcharge" is lower; it would equal the 25% "CC surcharge" at £1860/year -- which may be a better guess given shorter boats and where marinas are. That would mean the same surcharge for both CCers and HMers, in other words a flat 25% increase in the the license fee for everyone -- which is then "fair", isn't it, no division between boaters?

 

(but HMers would pay 9% lower marina fees than today because the CART charge to marinas would be gone)

 

Does anyone know what the average mooring fee across all HMers is?

A significant number of HMers do not pay an indirect levy to CaRT so the change would be significant.

[Peanut]

3 hours ago, IanD said:

 

 

Ian, you continue to insist that a percentage of the payment you make to the Marina is a payment you make to CART for the use of the navigation. This is simply not so. It is true that CART makes an income from a charge on businesses and land, but it is your boat licence which grants you the use of the canal system, which you may use as little or often as a boat without a Home Mooring.

 

You also assert that for the amount you pay, including the charge made by CART on the business, gives you exactly the same services as that of a boat without a Home Mooring.  This is also completely untrue.

 

You must be aware that in taking a Home Mooring, you gain the benefits associated with it. A secure place to leave your boat for as long as the contract allows, in a place convenient to you, a mains hook up, on site facilities, Elsan, pump out, fuel, water, all conveniently available. Parking for your car, the list goes on. None of that is available to a boat Without a Home Mooring. It is true that what you get varies between marinas, end of garden, and farmers moorings, or other online moorings. But then the fees are different too, and if you don't like the offer, you are free to leave it. The fact that you, and many others, take a Home Mooring, suggests that you are content to pay for the benefits it gives you.

 

Coming up with different charging regimes, makes no difference to the above. In particular, I believe CART should charge businesses which rely on the navigation and their connection to it. It underpins their business model, and CART should not be subsidising private businesses.

 

So, you are not getting the same deal as a boat without a Home Mooring, but extras you are happy to pay for.

 

[Alan de Enfield]

53 minutes ago, Peanut said:

Ian, you continue to insist that a percentage of the payment you make to the Marina is a payment you make to CART for the use of the navigation. This is simply not so. It is true that CART makes an income from a charge on businesses and land, but it is your boat licence which grants you the use of the canal system, which you may use as little or often as a boat without a Home Mooring.

 

You also assert that for the amount you pay, including the charge made by CART on the business, gives you exactly the same services as that of a boat without a Home Mooring.  This is also completely untrue.

 

You must be aware that in taking a Home Mooring, you gain the benefits associated with it. A secure place to leave your boat for as long as the contract allows, in a place convenient to you, a mains hook up, on site facilities, Elsan, pump out, fuel, water, all conveniently available. Parking for your car, the list goes on. None of that is available to a boat Without a Home Mooring. It is true that what you get varies between marinas, end of garden, and farmers moorings, or other online moorings. But then the fees are different too, and if you don't like the offer, you are free to leave it. The fact that you, and many others, take a Home Mooring, suggests that you are content to pay for the benefits it gives you.

 

Coming up with different charging regimes, makes no difference to the above. In particular, I believe CART should charge businesses which rely on the navigation and their connection to it. It underpins their business model, and CART should not be subsidising private businesses.

 

So, you are not getting the same deal as a boat without a Home Mooring, but extras you are happy to pay for.

 

 

 

Surely out of the (average) marina mooring fee of £3200, you are indirectly paying £300 additional to the licence fee to C&RT, and £2900 to the marina to cover all the extras that you list.

 

A secure place to leave your boat for as long as the contract allows, in a place convenient to you, a mains hook up, on site facilities, Elsan, pump out, fuel, water, all conveniently available. Parking for your car, the list goes on.

 

If you are paying the same (average) licence fee as a CCer of £1000, they you are contributing 30% more to C&RT than a CCer is, and CCers have the navigation, bins, refuse diposal etc etc available to them 24/7/365.

 

CCers need to pay considerably more than the 'new' rates to bring them into line with the amoubt C&RT actually gets from a HMer.