C&RT take on Continuous Moorers

[boatone]

C&RT take on Continuous Cruisers

C&RT Council Paper sets out their interpretation of the law relating to continuous cruising and itinerants overstaying at moorings.

 

[Mirror Painter]

C&RT Council Paper sets out their interpretation of the law relating to continuous cruising and itinerants overstaying at moorings.

Re continuous cruisers the document says:

The problem we face is in enforcing our interpretation of this widely drawn legislation, when the only sanction provided within our statutory powers is to remove the boat from the waterway. In the case of a residential boater, this would effectively mean loss of their home.

So? A bit like me loosing my home if I don't pay the mortgage then?

 

[oldgit]

A very thoughtful and interesting read !

 

[TrueBlue]

Re continuous cruisers the document says:

The problem we face is in enforcing our interpretation of this widely drawn legislation, when the only sanction provided within our statutory powers is to remove the boat from the waterway. In the case of a residential boater, this would effectively mean loss of their home.

So? A bit like me loosing my home if I don't pay the mortgage then?

Yes, and that's on which peeps rely.
The difference is that rivers and canals are licenced for cruising and NOT for living.

I get cross 'cause folks don't do the same thing on roads (well, not individually) so why here?

I have an awful feeling that some peeps are taking the P, pushing the system to breaking point, rather than working out some useful compromise.

 

[oldgit]

Perhaps the problem is equally down to the fact of there being both a lack of permanent winter moorings in boatyards as well as the hard core few who refuse/cannot pay the cost of a fixed base with power,water and sewage disposal.

 

[Golden Time]

Our policy is to serve a series of letters on the owner/occupier warning them of the consequences of failure to remove the boat. This correspondence takes several months and gives the owner/occupier ample opportunity to remedy matters and discuss any queries with the Trust.

So basically, as I have seen happen on my local waterway the offender is served numerous letters - stuck to his windows like a parking ticket. Then just before the final hammer drops he moves the boat and all is forgotten - and CRT consider it a win in their favour. Meanwhile he has occupied the middle 70ft of a 48hour visitors moorings leaving an obscur amount either side of him that is neither use nor ornament to most for nigh on 5 months.

Then there is the person who is "dug in" along the riverside. I dont mind this so much because they arent occupying the "easy" visitors moorings. Plus, they have taken time and effort to cut back a patch of weeds (that would otherwise be growing into the river) to make access to their boat safe and easy without inconvieniance to other water or towpath users. What I object to though is that this person flits from his dug in position, to less than 2 miles upstream and back again twice a month.

I feel like there is not enough reporting of bad practice going on. The system for reporting is not massively easy either. The boat checker online only allows you to report sitings of unlicensed boats. I would welcome a CRT "app" that gave us lock keeper numbers and nearest waterpoints etc... but with the addition of boat license reporting and overstay reporting. It would be so much simpler to have the app report your current location and send a snapshot straight to CRT.

 

[Bobobolinsky]

Re continuous cruisers the document says:

The problem we face is in enforcing our interpretation of this widely drawn legislation, when the only sanction provided within our statutory powers is to remove the boat from the waterway. In the case of a residential boater, this would effectively mean loss of their home.

So? A bit like me loosing my home if I don't pay the mortgage then?

No it's like the mortgage owner saying your "tendered" payment is no good so we intend to chuck out