London Boaters - Government Review

[Paul C]

2 hours ago, alan_fincher said:

That is not my memory of it, and I'm unclear why it needs a new licence category.

 

Surely a mooring provided by CRT under a roving mooring agreement is "somewhere a boat can reasonably be kept"?

 

I have struggled since with the idea that a "roving mooring" permit is not legal, but a "winter mooring" permit is.

I don't think the winter mooring permit is legal.

[Alan de Enfield]

2 minutes ago, Paul C said:

I don't think the winter mooring permit is legal.

NABO have argued that since day 1.

 

It is just 'protection money', but being as many liveaboard / CC boaters like the idea it has never really been questioned or challenged.

When I asked the question here a couple of years ago I was widely derided and accused of "trying to spoil it for proper boaters".

[Teasel]

3 hours ago, alan_fincher said:

That is not my memory of it, and I'm unclear why it needs a new licence category.

I might have got the 3rd licence category bit wrong actually - i had another look at the press release about it and it looks like it was the 'cherry picking' of eligible applicants and areas that was the problem. i'm not sure winter moorings are legal either. The roving mooring permits didn't produce a 'place' for s17(3)(c)(i) purposes though I don't think as there was no one place - if that worked then all cc's could also fall under that category. 

[David Mack]

1 hour ago, Paul C said:

I don't think the winter mooring permit is legal.

If a winter mooring  - i.e. exclusive use of a piece of the towpath for a few months over the winter - isn't legal, how is a long term towpath mooring legal?

[Alan de Enfield]

26 minutes ago, David Mack said:

If a winter mooring  - i.e. exclusive use of a piece of the towpath for a few months over the winter - isn't legal, how is a long term towpath mooring legal?

If I remember it's because the CCers claim to be 'CCers' and do not have a 'home mooring', they are therefore signing the licence application to say they will CC for the duration of the licence 14 day movement etc etc etc. Taking a winter mooring breaks that agreement as they will not be moving for X-months.

 

Maybe the answer is to take a 6 month 'CC' licence and a 6 month 'home mooring' licence.

 

With a 6-month CC licence you could honestly sign up to :

 

"the applicant for the relevant consent satisfies the Board that the vessel to which the application relates will be used bona fide for navigation throughout the period for which the consent is valid without remaining continuously in any one place for more than 14 days or such longer period as is reasonable in the circumstances."

Edited June 14, 2018 by Alan de Enfield

[Paul C]

27 minutes ago, David Mack said:

If a winter mooring  - i.e. exclusive use of a piece of the towpath for a few months over the winter - isn't legal, how is a long term towpath mooring legal?

Its probably worth clarifying. There are different kinds of winter moorings. 1) those where you choose a designated visitor mooring spot; and 2) those where you don't (but are excused the normal requirements of moving around). I believe type 1 are okay. CCers seem to get upset when this type of deal is labelled as a home mooring ie they are no longer "CCers" during the contract with the winter mooring - but pragmatically its basically the same as any other kind of mooring contract. Its type 2 which were dodgy.

[David Mack]

Isn't your type 2 the Roving Mooring Permit? Earlier you said the winter mooring permit (i.e. a fixed location) isn't legal.

[magictime]

15 minutes ago, Alan de Enfield said:

If I remember it's because the CCers claim to be 'CCers' and do not have a 'home mooring', they are therefore signing the licence application to say they will CC for the duration of the licence 14 day movement etc etc etc. Taking a winter mooring breaks that agreement as they will not be moving for X-months.

 

Maybe the answer is to take a 6 month 'CC' licence and a 6 month 'home mooring' licence.

 

With a 6-month CC licence you could honestly sign up to :

 

"the applicant for the relevant consent satisfies the Board that the vessel to which the application relates will be used bona fide for navigation throughout the period for which the consent is valid without remaining continuously in any one place for more than 14 days or such longer period as is reasonable in the circumstances."

Maybe the idea is just that it's "reasonable in the circumstances" to stay longer than 14 days in one spot if you've paid CRT for a winter mooring there? 

 

I mean, surely that's how the situation would be viewed if a CCer paid to moor in a private marina for a month or three? I've never heard it suggested that staying on a paid-for mooring for longer than 14 days is illegal if you happen to be licensed as having 'no home mooring'.

[David Mack]

And a fixed winter mooring can surely be legal 

a) by CRT deeming your boat to have a home mooring for the duration of the winter mooring period (and reverting to cc at the end of that period) relieving you of the need to "satisfy the Board..."; or

b) CRT deciding that whee a boater has entered into a winter mooring agreement for a particular location it would be reasonable in the circumstances to stay longer than 14 days at that location.

[Paul C]

6 minutes ago, David Mack said:

Isn't your type 2 the Roving Mooring Permit? Earlier you said the winter mooring permit (i.e. a fixed location) isn't legal.

The "ie" doesn't hold - there are more than one type of winter mooring. The "type 2" was never named Roving Mooring Permit though.

2 minutes ago, David Mack said:

And a fixed winter mooring can surely be legal 

a) by CRT deeming your boat to have a home mooring for the duration of the winter mooring period (and reverting to cc at the end of that period) relieving you of the need to "satisfy the Board..."; or

b) CRT deciding that whee a boater has entered into a winter mooring agreement for a particular location it would be reasonable in the circumstances to stay longer than 14 days at that location.

Agree - the ones with a fixed location are a non-issue.

[Gareth E]

I'd suggest that whether winter moorings are legal or otherwise matters not a jot. Some boaters find them to be of value. Others, who don't, are not inconvenienced by the move. OK there may be one or two places where winter moorers 'stich up' popular spots but let's be honest, so few boats move during those months that this is irrelevant. CRT benefit with additional much needed revenue. Everybody is happy (except perhaps some who enjoy making others unhappy), so what's the problem?

 

It's a bit like the 'law' that vehicles are not allowed on the towpath. I keep my motor bike on my boat, it's my only transport. I regularly push it along the towpath to gaps in hedges, to get it onto the road. What I'm doing is illegal, technically. I've never been challenged and don't expect to be. Obviously riding a motor bike along a towpath would be dangerous, I'd never do this.

 

Sometimes a law exists, for a reason, but some activities covered under it are usurped by common sense, quite rightly too.  

[mrsmelly]

I have had periods of ccing and periods of moorings over the years and always comply well within the law, in fact when ccing we practicaly never stay unpaid for more than 48 hours in one place as we realy do move around. I now in winter take a short term marina or somewhere mooring as I am getting on a bit and dont want the old girl falling on icy locks etc. Anyway if someone is a genuine ccer but CART slap their winter stoppages on that reduce their range dramaticaly as it often can then do CART accept they have made it impossible to comply or do  they look at each individual case. Not applicable to me but  there are genuine ccers out there who on occasion fall into this scenario. It didnt use to matter but today things are being policed better?

[ditchcrawler]

On 13/06/2018 at 06:08, Tuscan said:

Due to the recent increase in boat related crime in central London I’m told there is space in previously overcrowded places like Victoria Park so maybe the peak has passed.

I remember going through London not that many years ago when no one would moor there. You have to admit that London boaters have opened up a lot of the tow path, lets hope it doesn't go back to where it was

[Iain_S]

1 hour ago, mrsmelly said:

(snip)

Anyway if someone is a genuine ccer but CART slap their winter stoppages on that reduce their range dramaticaly as it often can then do CART accept they have made it impossible to comply or do  they look at each individual case. 

(snip)

A case of "without remaining continuously in any one place for more than 14 days or such longer period as is reasonable in the circumstances.", I would have thought?

[Alan de Enfield]

8 minutes ago, Iain_S said:

A case of "without remaining continuously in any one place for more than 14 days or such longer period as is reasonable in the circumstances.", I would have thought?

I've paid to stay - so - in the circumstances, I'm going to stay !

[Sir Nibble]

I wonder if what is happening is CaRT offering the simple choice to the government that the waterways can be a leisure resource or a housing resource and which do they want.

[Tim Lewis]

On 12/06/2018 at 15:58, WotEver said:

Not before time. My missus cried when we drove past the demolished Pebble Mill. We spent very many hours there in the 70’s and 80’s. The Mailbox was always destined to fail, and post houses in Bristol are also suffering now. I edited hundreds of hours of stuff for the beeb before it effectively stopped making programming in The Midlands. Even Spielberg recognised the talent pool when he shot Ready Player One in Brum last year. 

From BBC Archive

 

[WotEver]

3 hours ago, Tim Lewis said:

From BBC Archive

 

Thanks. Sad

 

swmbo did over 300 broadcasts for Radio 2, the vast majority of them from Pebble Mill. 

[jds_1981]

On 12/06/2018 at 15:20, RLWP said:

Well, kilometres anyway. That seems to be how the Lee navigation works, two weeks in a 1 kilometre stretch then move on to another one (no you can't keep swapping between two adjacent kilometres)

I think it's at least a mile, but I have certainly seen boats take months to cover an 8 mile stretch.

On 12/06/2018 at 17:02, welly said:

There's a boat just down from Camden, outside The Constitution pub, that hasn't moved in at least 18 months. I wonder what he does for water, unless he does 3am runs down to St. Pancras. And I wonder what the hold up with the CRT not pulling his boat out of the water is. For all the mithering about "continuous moorers", if the CRT doesn't (or can't) do anything about it then people will continue to do so.

 

I think they have to follow some long and arduous process. Not uncommon to get a response from them that they are "are aware of the boat but unable to provide any more details"

[Alan de Enfield]

13 minutes ago, jds_1981 said:

I think it's at least a mile, but I have certainly seen boats take months to cover an 8 mile stretch.

I think they have to follow some long and arduous process. Not uncommon to get a response from them that they are "are aware of the boat but unable to provide any more details"

The K&A (Bath to Foxhangers) was split into 14 neighbourhoods with the requirement  to move into another neighbourhood every 14 days (and not back to the previous one) and to do a minimum of 12 neighbourhoods in a 12 month period.

 

[mrsmelly]

3 minutes ago, Alan de Enfield said:

The K&A (Bath to Foxhangers) was split into 14 neighbourhoods with the requirement  to move into another neighbourhood every 14 days (and not back to the previous one) and to do a minimum of 12 neighbourhoods in a 12 month period.

 

That in its entirety is a  nice 2/3 day cruise. I am not condoning or otherwise the printing of so called " Neighbourhoods " but wonder what bit of legslation covers it? 

[Alan de Enfield]

33 minutes ago, mrsmelly said:

That in its entirety is a  nice 2/3 day cruise. I am not condoning or otherwise the printing of so called " Neighbourhoods " but wonder what bit of legslation covers it? 

As far as I'm aware 'none'.

It was entitled the K&A Project and was an attempt to resolve some of the issues of overstaying and just 'not-moving' and was basically just enforcing the law, but giving guidance as to what they considered to be 'acceptable'.

 

After the 1st 3 month period the Quarterly report showed

 

 14 boaters have received pre enforcement letters (pre CC1)
 10 have received first enforcement letters (CC1)
 13 received second stage enforcement letters (CC2)
 16 received third stage enforcement letters (CC3)
At the end of April 33 boats were still in the CC enforcement process. However, many cases were closed in readiness for the new CC process. All boats that had only received a pre CC1 by the end of February had their enforcement cases closed.

Extended Stay Requests
26 requests for extended stay have been approved in the Local Plan area between 1 February and 30 April, 1 is pending, and no request has been declined.

[Sir Nibble]

Astonishing. You would think that with the number of boat seizures people would just comply. I've done six of those neighbourhoods plus caen hill in one day.

[David Mack]

1 hour ago, mrsmelly said:

That in its entirety is a  nice 2/3 day cruise. I am not condoning or otherwise the printing of so called " Neighbourhoods " but wonder what bit of legslation covers it? 

 

We all know the legislation is too woolly to cover anything specifically. But in issuing the map and requirements, CRT are essentially saying that boaters that comply will be deemed to "satisfy the Board" and can carry on, whereas those who fall short, particularly those that fall well short of these requirements will not "satisfy the Board" and will be subject to enforcement. And until such time as a boater subject to enforcement successfully challenges the reasonableness of these requirements in court, CRT will continue to proceed on this basis.

[Sir Nibble]

I hope there aren't crusaders whispering. "the law is on your side" in the ears of vulnerable people.