Mooring in Marina unlicenced

[ditchcrawler]

2 hours ago, Rob VP said:

You don't need a TV license just for owning the equipment, you only need one if you actually use it to watch live TV.

There is a thread running on that one

 

[Jerra]

1 hour ago, Alan de Enfield said:

 

And the 'old answer' - "if you've nothing to hide what's the problem ?"

 

Does anyone really think that they are not being monitored much of the time ?

Your phone can be tracked,

The British Security Industry Authority (BSIA) estimated there are now up to 5.9 million closed-circuit television cameras in the country

Your car number plate is being scanned numerous times a day

Your credit / debit card history shows where you have been, what you have purchased

Loyalty cards ……………..

 

etc etc etc

 

Its the world we live in and the penalty we pay for technology.

You seem to be mistaking some of what I am asking/saying.   

 

1.  Is the technology really more cost effective than a simple business agreement with the marinas?

 

2.  I would agree we are being tracked.  I didn't say I objected to it or didn't know it happened.  I did try to draw your attention to the furore created by suggesting this should be compulsory a year or two ago in a discussion on this forum.  IIRC I even suggested RFIDs as an answer to checking if boats were moving enough.

 

 

1 hour ago, Rob VP said:

I'm sorry but you are incorrect. You can read about it on the TV licensing website to understand better.

Again you seem to be missing what I have said.  I didn't say you have to have a licence if you own a TV I said you would be treated as if you would watch the TV because you own one.

 

I do wish folk would read and take in  what is written before replying.   Having been in the situation of owning a TV but not watching I know how you are treated.

[MtB]

21 minutes ago, doratheexplorer said:

I'm not displaying.  I do have a licence

 

You REBEL, you.

 

You sure know how to "stick it to the man" don't you!

 

[mayalld]

16 hours ago, Winn said:

So it's really a case of  'I have to pay so you have to also'  and a polite enquiry about possible money savings is met with hostility.  Thankfully they got some decent advice, despite you! 

A large number of boaters use their boats for only 6 months of the year. For the other 6 months, only (say) 10% of boats actually use the canals.

 

The vast majority of boaters, whether CCers, moored on-line or in an NAA marina pay a licence all year round. This reflects the fact that the licence fee simply distributes the annual contribution that all boaters make to the running of the canals amongst boaters.

 

The position of marinas with no NAA is an anomaly, which enables a small number of boaters to financially benefit, which can only have one of two effects;

 

1) The shortfall is reflected in a slightly higher licence fee for all.

2) CRT have less money to spend on fixing things (or to waste on rebranding if you will)

 

So, let us consider a brave new world where nobody needs a licence in a marina. That's going to mean lots of people saving money isn't it?

 

Well, clearly it isn't, because CRT will need to make up that shortfall, which they will do by increasing the licence fee to compensate for the hordes now getting 6 month licences.

 

Of course, the CCers and on-line moorers will still need to buy a 12 month licence, so they will be paying lots more, and I guess that even after the fee rise, a 6 month licence for a marina dweller will be slightly less than a 12 month licence is now.

 

So, there you have it, I could benefit (a little bit) from this, whilst others would lose (a lot). On the whole, I think that I prefer the current system as it's more equitable.

 

Each of us wants CRT to continue to maintain the canal even when we aren't using it, so paying all year round seems fair to me.

[Alan de Enfield]

19 minutes ago, Jerra said:

1.  Is the technology really more cost effective than a simple business agreement with the marinas?

In the long run - Yes.

 

Marina owners don't need to deploy / employ staff on checking licences, issuing short term licences every time one wants to leave the marina.

 

Longer term, the RFID can be used by C&RT for (as you suggest) movement monitoring and not only reduce the labour cost, but overcome the complaints "I moved 100 miles between the sightings and they didn't log me"

 

The problem comes if the Tracker is able to be removed from the boat (and what isn't removable with the right tools) and taken for a nice bike-ride, or a trip to Ibiza etc etc.

[Jerra]

1 hour ago, Alan de Enfield said:

In the long run - Yes.

 

Marina owners don't need to deploy / employ staff on checking licences, issuing short term licences every time one wants to leave the marina.

 

Longer term, the RFID can be used by C&RT for (as you suggest) movement monitoring and not only reduce the labour cost, but overcome the complaints "I moved 100 miles between the sightings and they didn't log me"

 

The problem comes if the Tracker is able to be removed from the boat (and what isn't removable with the right tools) and taken for a nice bike-ride, or a trip to Ibiza etc etc.

I was meaning cost effective to CRT.   Will boaters have to purchase these RFIDs or will they be supplied?  What is going to be the eventual cost of readers?  They could quite easily make interfering with their equipment again the T&Cs leading to loss of licence.  Before anyone jumps up and down I know the law doesn't allow that but they will eventually need new legislation and in the mean time I suspect they would get away with it.

 

P.S.  You are sure it will be cost effective to the marina and they would happily install such a system?

[doratheexplorer]

2 hours ago, Mike the Boilerman said:

 

You REBEL, you.

 

You sure know how to "stick it to the man" don't you!

 

Like a boss!!!! I keep my rebellion to a sensible level.  I forgot left a lock gate open once, then remembered and felt bad so moored up and walked all the way back to close it only to find it had closed all by itself!

[MtB]

16 minutes ago, doratheexplorer said:

Like a boss!!!! I keep my rebellion to a sensible level.  I forgot left a lock gate open once, then remembered and felt bad so moored up and walked all the way back to close it only to find it had closed all by itself!

 

No it hadn't...

 

I closed it for you! (Whilst muttering under my breath bloody wimmin boters, think they can just IGNORE all the rules, I bet she don't have no licence neither...)

 

[doratheexplorer]

1 minute ago, Mike the Boilerman said:

 

No it hadn't...

 

I closed it for you! (Whilst muttering under my breath bloody wimmin boters, think they can just IGNORE all the rules, I bet she don't have no licence neither...)

 

Thanks Mike, I owe you one then!

[David Mack]

2 hours ago, Alan de Enfield said:

 

Marina owners don't need to deploy / employ staff on checking licences, issuing short term licences every time one wants to leave the marina.

 

 

For the vast majority of marinas, i.e those with a NAA, the staff don't have to issue short term licences as the boats will already have a long term licence. Of course they do have to check the long term licence, but most also check on BSS and insurance, which they want boats to have, to minimise risk to other marina users, quite apart from any CRT requirement, so any extra work involved is minimal. 

[Chewbacka]

2 hours ago, mayalld said:

A large number of boaters use their boats for only 6 months of the year. For the other 6 months, only (say) 10% of boats actually use the canals.

 

The vast majority of boaters, whether CCers, moored on-line or in an NAA marina pay a licence all year round. This reflects the fact that the licence fee simply distributes the annual contribution that all boaters make to the running of the canals amongst boaters.

 

The position of marinas with no NAA is an anomaly, which enables a small number of boaters to financially benefit, which can only have one of two effects;

 

1) The shortfall is reflected in a slightly higher licence fee for all.

2) CRT have less money to spend on fixing things (or to waste on rebranding if you will)

 

So, let us consider a brave new world where nobody needs a licence in a marina. That's going to mean lots of people saving money isn't it?

 

Well, clearly it isn't, because CRT will need to make up that shortfall, which they will do by increasing the licence fee to compensate for the hordes now getting 6 month licences.

 

Of course, the CCers and on-line moorers will still need to buy a 12 month licence, so they will be paying lots more, and I guess that even after the fee rise, a 6 month licence for a marina dweller will be slightly less than a 12 month licence is now.

 

So, there you have it, I could benefit (a little bit) from this, whilst others would lose (a lot). On the whole, I think that I prefer the current system as it's more equitable.

 

Each of us wants CRT to continue to maintain the canal even when we aren't using it, so paying all year round seems fair to me.

If large numbers of boaters move to the six month licence, then those buying 12month licences will look for a significant reduction on the winter half of their licence because of all the stoppages etc.  So this would justify CRT charging a lot more for a six month licence than half of a 12 month licence.  So the result would be a 12 month licence costing a bit more than now (say 14/12 of current cost) and a 6 month licence costing say 11/12.  Total revenue the same, or possibly more for CRT and everybody feels worse off.  So we should all be careful...................

[LadyG]

18 hours ago, Alan de Enfield said:

To whom do you wish to be similar to ?

............... never end a sentence with a preposition, there's something else wrong ................

Edited July 17, 2018 by LadyG

[Momac]

On 16/07/2018 at 17:18, Alan de Enfield said:

Add

Newark

Colwick

Shobnal

 

and dozens more.

I may be wrong but I thought a full time license was required in Newark Marina  . The river Devon flows through the moorings which are owned by the rowing club but operated by the marina (so I am told). Perhaps the front pond at Newark is different?

 

Boats in Farndon Marina do not need to be licensed if they do not leave the marina.

 

Many boats don't go out for six months of the year so buying a 6 month license makes complete sense . Some buy a short term license  as and when required. When the license fees increase due to boat width I expect many owners of cruisers will look to ways of saving paying license fees and I suspect the result will be less income for the C&RT.

 

[Chewbacka]

3 minutes ago, MartynG said:

I may be wrong but I thought a full time license was required in Newark Marina  . The river Devon flows through the moorings which are owned by the rowing club but operated by the marina (so I am told). Perhaps the front pond at Newark is different?

 

Boats in Farndon Marina do not need to be licensed if they do not leave the marina.

 

Many boats don't go out for six months of the year so buying a 6 month license makes complete sense . Some buy a short term license  as and when required. When the license fees increase due to boat width I expect many owners of cruisers will look to ways of saving paying license fees and I suspect the result will be less income for the C&RT.

 

If enough move to six month licences such that income falls then they will find a way of increasing the 6 monthly price.

[Alan de Enfield]

14 minutes ago, MartynG said:

I may be wrong but I thought a full time license was required in Newark Marina 

Definitely No licence required.

Our boat was in Newark and did not even have a registration number.

The Marina require a BSS and insurance but that's it.

 

Before we could take the boat out we had to get it registered with C&RT

[Arthur Marshall]

11 hours ago, Rob VP said:

You don't need a TV license just for owning the equipment, you only need one if you actually use it to watch live TV.

I had a black & white TV and a video recorder.  I got prosecuted for not having a colour licence, as the video recorded in colour.  it was irrelevant whether I could see it or not.  i think you'll find the same applies to owning the equipment.

[Robbo]

13 minutes ago, Arthur Marshall said:

I had a black & white TV and a video recorder.  I got prosecuted for not having a colour licence, as the video recorded in colour.  it was irrelevant whether I could see it or not.  i think you'll find the same applies to owning the equipment.

You can own the equipment, but if you don’t use it for broadcast TV you don’t need the license.

[Rob VP]

47 minutes ago, Arthur Marshall said:

 i think you'll find the same applies to owning the equipment.

You think wrong.  

[Iain_S]

Just now, LadyG said:

............... never end a sentence with a preposition, there's something else wrong ................

That is a proposition up with which I cannot put.

[Arthur Marshall]

2 hours ago, Robbo said:

You can own the equipment, but if you don’t use it for broadcast TV you don’t need the license.

Not arguing, but it aint what they told me.  They told me that if you posessed the equipment, and therefore had the ability to watch it, you had to have a licence.  i accept that may not have been true.  I would be interested to hear, though, if anyone has ever managed to persuade a court that while they had all this stuff, it was never used to watch broadcast TV.  I have my doubts.

[zenataomm]

Post #46

 

You guys are on a duplicate thread regarding the issue of TV licence, and accordingly are lagging behind.

 

The above will get you back on track.

See you over there.

[nikvah]

Just reiterating but...CRT supply the water that floats your boat, this costs them. No locks, no level, no marina. The license is only a contribution CRT investments and govt funding keep us afloat.

[cuthound]

10 hours ago, zenataomm said:

Post #46

 

You guys are on a duplicate thread regarding the issue of TV licence, and accordingly are lagging behind.

 

The above will get you back on track.

See you over there.

 

So can you watch broadcast TV without a licence when moored in one of the non-NAA marinas? ?

[mayalld]

16 hours ago, MartynG said:

I may be wrong but I thought a full time license was required in Newark Marina  . The river Devon flows through the moorings which are owned by the rowing club but operated by the marina (so I am told). Perhaps the front pond at Newark is different?

 

Boats in Farndon Marina do not need to be licensed if they do not leave the marina.

 

Many boats don't go out for six months of the year so buying a 6 month license makes complete sense . Some buy a short term license  as and when required. When the license fees increase due to boat width I expect many owners of cruisers will look to ways of saving paying license fees and I suspect the result will be less income for the C&RT.

 

According to CRT, boats in such marinas are not entitled to short term licences.

[zenataomm]

2 hours ago, cuthound said:

 

So can you watch broadcast TV without a licence when moored in one of the non-NAA marinas? ?

……. only the adverts.

11 hours ago, nikvah said:

Just reiterating but...CRT supply the water that floats your boat, this costs them. No locks, no level, no marina. The license is only a contribution CRT investments and govt funding keep us afloat.

Not always.

Harefield moorings for example are on the river Colne (controlled by Thames Water) which in turn feeds The Grand Union.