Liveaboards being evicted in UK

Status
Not open for further replies.
sixtimes said:
If its known like you said .than why harress boaters with freats ov termination of licence.
Click to expand...

(I keep telling myself not to respond 'cos I'm increasingly sure this is a troll but the points raised, whilst naive and disengenous to those in the know, could mislead)

Because you shouldn't be there perchance?

Why are you (ostensibly) hanging around in an area that everyone knows is prone to flooding and strong stream warnings when, if you are a genuine continuous cruiser, you have thousands of miles of sheltered, safe canals to choose from?

A genuine CC'er with half an ounce of common sense would have been off up the Trent & Mersey at the first sign of winter setting in. Or up onto the Leicester setion of the GU, down onto the GU proper, the Midlands are your oyster then. Oxford, BCN, Stratford, up the Shroppy even

That's the point Sixtimes, you're supposed to keep moving, constantly, every fortnight at the most. Its up to you to make sure you can. You'll get cut a certain amount of slack if you have a genuine problem provided you haven't been taking the mick already.

The life of a continous cruiser is not an easy one. It's tough living on a boat in winter with no fixed base. If you can't cope with it, move back onto the bank!
 
They want me in a moorings well why not provide me with a suitable one then .as like the judge said in the geoff mayers case and kicked it out of court
 
They probably dont mind if you are on a mooring or not if you stick to the rules of the licence, if you want a mooring its up to you to find one surely!
 
liamb said:
They probably dont mind if you are on a mooring or not if you stick to the rules of the licence, if you want a mooring its up to you to find one surely!
Click to expand...

I think he is attempting to have the waterways authorities find him a mooring, free or subsidised of course, in the same way as those land based local authorities that find houses for people.
 
Cart are doing exactly the same to me as they did too geoff mayers .only he was stuck in ice.i was stuck in floods.been reading is bloggs about it.and exactly the same responce he got from ppl like you on here.but in the end the judge threw it out ov court .saying give him his licence back and leave him alone till you give him a suitable moorings .and threw it out ov court
 
Last edited:
sixtimes said:
Cart are doing exactly the same to me as they did too geoff mayers .only he was stuck in ice.i was stuck in floods.been reading is bloggs about it.and exactly the same responce he got from ppl like you on here.but in the end the judge threw it out ov court .saying give him his licence back and leave him alone till you give him a suitable moorings .and threw it out ov court
Click to expand...

Well let's actually get the facts straight shall we? At least as far as it's possible to do with the information that is in the public domain on this one ...

It did indeed go to court and the judge sent all the parties concerned away to have one last go at resolving their issues. Specifically, he asked BW if it was not possible to find Mr. Mayers a suitable mooring and adjourned the case pending the outcome of those discussions

As far as I'm aware, offers of moorings were made by BW but declined as unsuitable and Mayers then made his own arrangements moorings wise and ceased to be, or claim to be, a continious cruiser. That being the end of the matter, the case was never actually fully heard in court and it set no precedent for future actions

He ducked the issue, it would seem, by using an obvious loophole (one which I have previously mentioned) by paying up for a permanent mooring. Doesn't matter how muchh time you spend on it and how much time you spend elsewhere. If you've got the mooring you're legit and that's that (if you live permanently on the mooring that might risk the ire of the local planning department but that's a whole different legal matter)

Given that Geoff Mayers has something of a "robust" reputation on inland waterways related forums that's as much as I'm prepared to say on that matter other than to add that neither BW in the past nor CART today take the matter to court based on just a couple of months of overstaying (ice or no ice)

BTW, for the sake of accuracy I must point out that the actual facts of the Mayers case are a bit vague. There is no credible impartial information on what happened in court and subsequently and I've been forced to interpolate from the information put in the public domain by Mr. Mayers, his supporters and his detractors
 
sixtimes said:
Cart are doing exactly the same to me as they did too geoff mayers .only he was stuck in ice.i was stuck in floods.been reading is bloggs about it.and exactly the same responce he got from ppl like you on here.but in the end the judge threw it out ov court .saying give him his licence back and leave him alone till you give him a suitable moorings .and threw it out ov court
Click to expand...

If your case is sound and CRT has acted incorrectly then you are likely to win your case. However, it is no good saying just because somebody else won a case it automatically means CRT are always wrong. The court's decision is based solely on the facts of the specific case. As you probably know BWB/CRT "wins" if that is the correct word most of the cases it takes to court, which suggests it does not take court action unless it has exhausted all other possibilities to resolve the issue.
 
Sopposing i had a moorings.(not that i have.) how long are you aload too stay away from it .as ive heard cart are crackin down on things like that
 
The following document from the Canal and River Trust is enlightening ...

http://canalrivertrust.org.uk/media/library/2305.pdf

It clearly demonstrates that there is a balanced and reasonable approach to the problem and that court action is a last resort

It also deminstrates that the scale of the problem is far greater than it was in my day! Around 4,000 continuous cruises out of 35,000 or so boats in total is a lot. Interesting to note that 14% of CC's have been subject to enforcement action and that during a 6 month survey in 2010/2011 about a 1,000 boats were found to have moved no more than 5km and a further 1,000 no more than 10km. Around half the so called continious cruisers had therefore basically not moved much at all during that 6 month period
 
sixtimes said:
Sopposing i had a moorings.(not that i have.) how long are you aload too stay away from it .as ive heard cart are crackin down on things like that
Click to expand...

Well you couldn't get away with arranging a "ghost" mooring, your boat would have to spend a reasonable amount of time on it otherwise quite reasonably CART would take te view that you had made a false declaration on your licence application, revoke your licence and you'd be back to square one

I suggest you read the link I just posted, it pretty much covers the bases and sets out your options. I'm afraid if you think that you can live afloat in one place for free or on the cheap you are going to have ongoing issues with the authorities though. Living on a boat is not a cheap housing solution, never has been, never will be
 
Something else that researching this matter has reminded me of ...

The original proposals for what ended up being the British Waterways Act 1995 within which was enacted the legislation that effectively created the status of "continuous cruiser" had no such provision.

As orginally draughted, EVERY boat on the canals and waterways managed by British Waterway would have been legally required to have a permanent home mooring

It was the IWA, RBOA and NABO* whose collective lobbying resulted in changes to the bill at committee stage to allow for people permanently cruising the waterways without a home mooring

It is notable that those organisations are all broadly supportive of CART with regard to tackling the enforcement of abuse of those arrangements

(* Inland Waterways Association, Residential Boat Owners Association and National Association of Boat Owners)
 
Rigger Mortice said:
Erbas,

I admire your patience and, whilst we both know that 6x isn't listening, I've learnt a lot from your postings. Thanks. Very interesting.
Click to expand...

Me too.

I am not a narrowboater but I do envy those narrowboaters who enjoy (almost) free mooring facility as Continuous Cruisers (presumably having paid their annual licence fee).

It seems to me that permitting 14 days free in any one spot is extremely generous. Boy, imagine coastal marinas and harbours offering that deal!

So, there seems to be three categories:

1. Genuine Continuous Cruisers - who abide by the rules and keep moving. They are, understandably, pissed off when they arrive at a nice spot to find all the on-line moorings permanently occupied by False Continuously Cruisers claiming that they have to be there to send their kids to school/have a hurty foot/are selling Vegan burgers - or whatever. The Genuine Continuous Cruisers, if they are smart, will have planned ahead and will already be on the waiting list for a residential berth (not, as some may think, ultra expensive) for when they tire of Continuously Cruising.

2. Fat, rich, retirees who are indulging in having a NB for lengthy leisure holidays. They are paying rather a lot to keep their pride and joy in a marina. Not a group likely to attract much sympathy as they neither represent the freedom ethos or the disenfranchised, homeless, hard done-by, sector.

3. The False Continuous Cruisers who expect to be given moorings for free. Or, at least be tolerated for hammering their stakes into whatever portion of towpath they choose. The fact that the canal system is not actually owned by them is not important. For the same reason why should they not be permitted to camp in a public park or recreation ground?

What a pity, such a wonderful resource wasted.

The video shown does, to my eyes, seem a little one dimensional. If every single canal dweller held the same responsible attitudes I would be he first to triumph their cause. However, life is not like that. There will always be those who abuse, those who antagonise, those who rail against any authority - no matter how benign it may be. It is this minority which spoil it for the rest and, it seems to me,that it is this minority who are targeted by the CRT. Quite rightly so, IMO.

I think I will stick to offshore cruising for a while longer. :)
 
U say im not listening .well maybe i ad better things to do .cart moan that it cost them loads to take us to court.well dont take us then.u lost a quater million pound on the nigel moores case .wot a waste ov money.plus u didnt turn up in court.ha ha .u lost loads ov cases.oh i see u got mr parry checking things now maybe..i noticed too that most ov the section 8 cases that u so called won and are bragging about on cart site .there bin no boater or soliciter presant on the case .well maybe if there was u mite not ov got the outcome that u wanted.. maybe im wrong and it wasnt needed for them to defend themselves in court that day.
 
Last edited:
I think we're now going around in circles with friend Sixtimes now recycling points already made and addressed coupled with his efforts to incite hate mail

Sixtimes, if you're a troll this one has run its course, move on before it gets out of hand. if you're genuine I wish you long life and happiness whatever the outcome of your dispute with CART
 
Status
Not open for further replies.

Share this page

Top