Jump to content

DEFRA Working Party into Boats Used As Accommodation.


Alan de Enfield

Featured Posts

1 hour ago, Mike Todd said:

I think the point that was being made when I posted was that it needs some constraint on the design for the plate and its position in order to make the APNR feasible.

It just isn't feasible anyway.  The thing about an untaxed or uninsured car is that it has, somewhere or other, a permanent residence which can be traced - everything on a public road can be via observation and CCTV these days.  As all cars have numberplates, any passing copper can check it and stop the driver, who then must provide some form of ID or the car is, if uninsured, immediately forfeit.

The thing about a boat without a number on it, once it's been spotted, is that the next day it's somewhere else and unless you're going to have a quantity of CRT boats whizzing up and down the canal, with a call-on tug to come and take the offender away there and then, the damn thing is basically untraceable.

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

5 hours ago, Tanglewood said:

Thank you, NigelMoore, for  your clarification, and the rather delicious quote!

 

I suppose only a judge about to retire from the scene could get away with so explicitly calling the law “an ass”; referring to the appellant by his preferred nickname, and indulging in such whimsical poesy.

 

It could be demurred that the judgment relied more on departmental practice guide than statute; this would be a classic example of “judge made law”.

  • Greenie 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

2 hours ago, Arthur Marshall said:

It just isn't feasible anyway.  The thing about an untaxed or uninsured car is that it has, somewhere or other, a permanent residence which can be traced - everything on a public road can be via observation and CCTV these days.  As all cars have numberplates, any passing copper can check it and stop the driver, who then must provide some form of ID or the car is, if uninsured, immediately forfeit.

The thing about a boat without a number on it, once it's been spotted, is that the next day it's somewhere else and unless you're going to have a quantity of CRT boats whizzing up and down the canal, with a call-on tug to come and take the offender away there and then, the damn thing is basically untraceable.

 

I don't think it is that black and white: firstly, there are only 2000 ish miles of waterways, much less than the roads and there are very few places to hide off road, as it were. Secondly, it would depend on the determination of CaRT - if they found that not having a licence plate as well as not having a licence was ultimately a route to seizing a boat then they could be as immediate as with cars ie once spotted then it is impounded straight away and you only get it back once you have satisfied the authority. If there were sufficient CCTV systems around the network it would be quite quick to find - look back at the occasional boat theft that is often resolved by vigilant folk on here and similar.

 

But to be clear: I am not advocating such an approach (at least not yet!) but simply responding to the suggestion  that it is not feasible - especially as it manifestly is.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

14 hours ago, Mike Todd said:

I have been amazed how well vehicle number plate recognition works in some places and how it is integrated into other customer services. Staying overnight at a motel within the perimeter of a motorway service station I was a little surprise that by the time we had reached the check in not only the registration but place of parking was already identified. For that level of application is cannot be unduly expensive. It has to be at least feasible that an automated system could be used on the canals with a high degree of compliance and low level of false reports. 

 

The issue of mandating registration plates is only as difficult as gaining the necessary legislative  time (assuming that the lawyers conclude that CaRT does not currently have the powers. Compliance would be no more difficult than at present and would, potentially give CaRT an additional means of tackling non-registration and licensing.

 

All of this pre-supposes a high level of acceptance to avoid too many disgruntled folk vandalising the system (always possible whatever security is used) Key to this is always to link it with the provision of additional benefits (however perceived) to canal users.

 

Indeed, even our local rubbish dump, sorry recycling centre, uses it to ensure that only vehicles registered in its catchment area can use it.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

13 hours ago, Arthur Marshall said:

It just isn't feasible anyway.  The thing about an untaxed or uninsured car is that it has, somewhere or other, a permanent residence which can be traced - everything on a public road can be via observation and CCTV these days.  As all cars have numberplates, any passing copper can check it and stop the driver, who then must provide some form of ID or the car is, if uninsured, immediately forfeit.

The thing about a boat without a number on it, once it's been spotted, is that the next day it's somewhere else and unless you're going to have a quantity of CRT boats whizzing up and down the canal, with a call-on tug to come and take the offender away there and then, the damn thing is basically untraceable.

 

 

A man on a bike would be more efficient than a boat for catching offenders, and CRT already have them apparently covering all canals at least once a fortnight.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

11 hours ago, Mike Todd said:

I don't think it is that black and white: firstly, there are only 2000 ish miles of waterways, much less than the roads and there are very few places to hide off road, as it were. Secondly, it would depend on the determination of CaRT - if they found that not having a licence plate as well as not having a licence was ultimately a route to seizing a boat then they could be as immediate as with cars ie once spotted then it is impounded straight away and you only get it back once you have satisfied the authority. If there were sufficient CCTV systems around the network it would be quite quick to find - look back at the occasional boat theft that is often resolved by vigilant folk on here and similar.

 

But to be clear: I am not advocating such an approach (at least not yet!) but simply responding to the suggestion  that it is not feasible - especially as it manifestly is.

But that's not true; there are plenty of 'off-road' places to hide from CRT. Essentially, waterways controlled by someone else such as EA, NT, MLC, Peel...  So, once you're spotted w/o a licence - make a run for the border.  For London, the Thames is within 8 hours of Black Jack's lock, Broxbourne and all points in-between. (Mind you, they are pretty secure border points.) 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

On 27/11/2018 at 09:17, Mike the Boilerman said:

 

I wonder if you could outline the mechanism by which you managed to get them to accept you as a resident without having a postcode please? The have been a number of threads on here over the years where boaters have tried to pay council tax and they all report their local council refuses to accept their payments, saying they need a postcode. Many thanks if you can. 

Good question. We obtained the postcode first by registering the boat with the Post Office. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

4 hours ago, cuthound said:

 

Indeed, even our local rubbish dump, sorry recycling centre, uses it to ensure that only vehicles registered in its catchment area can use it.

Wow - that would have been a problem for me when I was clearing out my mum's house and using the local tip (towards which she paid council tax), fortunately they didn't have that.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

3 hours ago, DaveP said:

But that's not true; there are plenty of 'off-road' places to hide from CRT. Essentially, waterways controlled by someone else such as EA, NT, MLC, Peel...  So, once you're spotted w/o a licence - make a run for the border.  For London, the Thames is within 8 hours of Black Jack's lock, Broxbourne and all points in-between. (Mind you, they are pretty secure border points.) 

That is not hiding, unless you call it hiding in plain sight. From an enforcement point of view, shifting a problem into someone else's patch might be considered a win! Further, I suspect several of those will soon make Cart look like the soft option.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

18 hours ago, Arthur Marshall said:

It just isn't feasible anyway.  The thing about an untaxed or uninsured car is that it has, somewhere or other, a permanent residence which can be traced - everything on a public road can be via observation and CCTV these days.  As all cars have numberplates, any passing copper can check it and stop the driver, who then must provide some form of ID or the car is, if uninsured, immediately forfeit.

The thing about a boat without a number on it, once it's been spotted, is that the next day it's somewhere else and unless you're going to have a quantity of CRT boats whizzing up and down the canal, with a call-on tug to come and take the offender away there and then, the damn thing is basically untraceable.

 

I am guessing that boat positioning will be more along the lines of automated sat-nav tracking.

Implemented by giving a choice of the fixed annual 'go-anywhere/moor-anywhere' license much the same as now - except it will be at double/treble the current price - but avoidable by fitting a' registered tracker' to automatically charge per mile, per lock, per mooring, per hour away from your home mooring.

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

5 hours ago, cuthound said:

 

Indeed, even our local rubbish dump, sorry recycling centre, uses it to ensure that only vehicles registered in its catchment area can use it.

....yes...that prompts a memory of my our local recycling centre - I am only a casual user but I have a vague recollection of my car number being flashed up on the display screen as I entered.

I have not been lately 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

5 hours ago, Yank on the Cut said:

Good question. We obtained the postcode first by registering the boat with the Post Office. 

It is not just councils. I have a garage that has it's own electric supply and meter. After 26 years Npower decided to separate it from my house meter, and have dedicated an account for it - but now find their stupid computer can't send me a bill because the garage itself does not have it's own post code.

Like as you say, I have to apply to the PO for one.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

2 hours ago, Horace42 said:

I am guessing that boat positioning will be more along the lines of automated sat-nav tracking.

Implemented by giving a choice of the fixed annual 'go-anywhere/moor-anywhere' license much the same as now - except it will be at double/treble the current price - but avoidable by fitting a' registered tracker' to automatically charge per mile, per lock, per mooring, per hour away from your home mooring.

 

So moving less becomes cheaper than exploring the whole network. I thought the problem was not enough space in popular spots for the explorer to moor, due to the people who don't really want to move but somehow manage the 20 miles a year. ( I have heard of the registration plates moving and the boat staying put)

Link to comment
Share on other sites

29 minutes ago, tree monkey said:

Not at all, it's a fairly common suggestion to not have your home logged in the sat nav for the reasons mentioned 

 

Correct. For a decade or more I've had the house next door entered in my satnav as 'home'. And they've done NOTHING to deserve it!

  • Greenie 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

9 hours ago, DaveP said:

But that's not true; there are plenty of 'off-road' places to hide from CRT. Essentially, waterways controlled by someone else such as EA, NT, MLC, Peel...  So, once you're spotted w/o a licence - make a run for the border.  For London, the Thames is within 8 hours of Black Jack's lock, Broxbourne and all points in-between. (Mind you, they are pretty secure border points.) 

"Secure border points" though, suggests that CaRT would want you to remain within their jurisdiction even unlicensed, which they do not. If they were concerned with properly enforcing licences, they would doubtless want to have you charged with the offence of being without one before 'escaping' - but as their preferred option is s.8, giving you a DEMAND to remove the boat within 28 days, why would they prevent that?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

4 hours ago, Detling said:

So moving less becomes cheaper than exploring the whole network. I thought the problem was not enough space in popular spots for the explorer to moor, due to the people who don't really want to move but somehow manage the 20 miles a year. ( I have heard of the registration plates moving and the boat staying put)

....but back to basics, the DEFRA meetings without 'boating' input could mean they want to discuss broader issues and various money making options where boating problems could be used for a pilot scheme, but not wanting boaters at the meetings to confuse everybody by pointing out solutions better suited to boaters.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

4 hours ago, NigelMoore said:

"Secure border points" though, suggests that CaRT would want you to remain within their jurisdiction even unlicensed, which they do not. If they were concerned with properly enforcing licences, they would doubtless want to have you charged with the offence of being without one before 'escaping' - but as their preferred option is s.8, giving you a DEMAND to remove the boat within 28 days, why would they prevent that?

It's likely to be the other way around.  Certainly a few years ago the Bridgewater Canal Company were threatening to chain off the three access points onto CRT waters.  This was just before they unilaterally changed the access agreement to stop what they regarded as a floating slum developing between their canal and CRT canals.

 

The boats causing the problem for them would wait until they had nearly run out a 28-day formal notice then skip over the border onto the other canal, then rinse and repeat.

Link to comment
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.
×
×
  • Create New...

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.