SSR renewal

Joker said:
"Dear Sir, We do not have a Renewal option, however we advise you to use option 2 which is for the re-registration of a vessel and in the additional notes mention you wish to renew."

I'm afraid to say this is completely barking. The certificate expires every five years. We therefore have to renew every five years. Not to have a renewal option on the website strikes me as incredibly unhelpful.
Click to expand...
I disagree. Thanks to the wonderfully wordy legal system that we have in England this is factually correct. We register our vessels on the SSR therefore we need to re-register.
 
Well - no, it isn't. Re-registering in the context of the website refers to the registering of a boat as a consequence of a change of ownership. The previous registration expire when you sell the boat.
 
WightMistress said:
Just been down the same route and sent the same email. I wonder if anything will be done.
Click to expand...

Been there, done that!

I have this problem at each 'renewal'. I fail to see what difference residency of 183 days makes. It's a British boat, I have a British passport and sailed from Britain. Most cruisers are of retirement age and have paid their taxes throughout their working life, they do not return every six months! The registration still costs 25 quid, so what's the difference - it's just a continuation of registration!
 
The residence requirement has come about because of the abuse of the register by people overseas using it to escape wealth taxes on their boats. For most people with boats on the register, it's a none problem. I seem to recall threads on here decrying the ease with which nasty furiners were abusing our SSR, so clearly the MCA can't win.....
The history of the register can be found in this useful summary from the RYA here http://www.rya.org.uk/SiteCollectio...ion in the UK/BOAT REGISTRATION IN THE UK.pdf .
 
duncan99210 said:
The residence requirement has come about because of the abuse of the register by people overseas using it to escape wealth taxes on their boats. For most people with boats on the register, it's a none problem. I seem to recall threads on here decrying the ease with which nasty furiners were abusing our SSR, so clearly the MCA can't win.....
The history of the register can be found in this useful summary from the RYA here http://www.rya.org.uk/SiteCollectio...ion in the UK/BOAT REGISTRATION IN THE UK.pdf .
Click to expand...
Thank you for the link. It confirms the SSR was introduced after the UK joined the EU. I wonder is there any danger SSR will no longer be recognised by EU countries after Brexit? It's clear, for instance, from another thread on here that the self-declaration facility is being exploited to under-declare yacht size for tax and fee purposes.
 
Irish Rover said:
Thank you for the link. It confirms the SSR was introduced after the UK joined the EU. I wonder is there any danger SSR will no longer be recognised by EU countries after Brexit? It's clear, for instance, from another thread on here that the self-declaration facility is being exploited to under-declare yacht size for tax and fee purposes.
Click to expand...

Just to be clear, SSR may have come about since the UK joined the EEC/EC/EU, but it is in no way a measure compelled or even encouraged by Brussels. What the RYA account doesn't mention is that it was mainly at the behest of the French authorities, who were perturbed by unregistered British boats cruising their waters; and equally by the interests of British sailors who had no easy means of becoming registered for such voyages.

Whether one country or group of countries can arbitrarily decide not to recognise legal registration in another, I doubt. (Were they able, we can all identify a bunch of convenience registrations which might already have been outlawed.) But I imagine it would be an issue under UNCLOS rather than something the EU can unilaterally decide.
 
Last edited:
I'm no lawyer so I'm not going to argue any aspect of this. I'm surprised however to read that rules relating to the registration of leisure craft come under UNCLOS. It does seem the UK is tightening up some loopholes in relation to the SSR. However as long as the system is based exclusively on self-declaration then it is wide open for abuse.
 
macd said:
Just to be clear, SSR may have come about since the UK joined the EEC/EC/EU, but it is no no way a measure compelled or even encouraged by Brussels. What the RYA account doesn't mention is that it was mainly at the behest of the French authorities, who were perturbed by unregistered British boats cruising their waters; and equally by the interests of British sailors who had no easy means of becoming registered for such voyages.

Whether one country or group of countries can arbitrarily decide not to recognise legal registration in another, I doubt. (Were they able, we can all identify a bunch of convenience registrations which might already have been outlawed.) But I imagine it would be an issue under UNCLOS rather than something the EU can unilaterally decide.
Click to expand...

Correct. Ships registration (like most things maritime) is nothing to do with the EU. There is an international requirement that ships should be able to provide evidence of their flag state, but is not prescriptive about how this is done. However the most common way is an "official" document issued by the flag state. In the early days of small boats voyaging in international waters this was often ignored, but the explosion of activity in the latter part of the last century changed this, and in particular the increase in (British) yachts visiting France which has laws requiring visiting yachts to provide documentary evidence. Hence the SSR which was introduced as a simple and limited method of providing British residents (mostly then citizens) with such evidence. All well discussed in Parliament at the time. Inevitably as the make up of the British boat owning population has changed over the years the eligibility requirements have been refined to clarify that residency is required in line with the original purpose.

The existing registration (Part 1) remained including the important features of being a register of title and being open to a wider range of applicants. However for obvious reasons most people use the SSR if they are eligible, but the simple self declaring system is wide open to abuse, hence the need to regularly check that the applicant is still eligible. about 15 years ago when the registry was reorganised the 5 year update of registration was extended to Part 1, partly to ensure the register was up to date and partly to raise revenue to fund the registry.

Doubt there is any danger that the SSR as a document will be rejected by any other state. It is well accepted world wide as evidence of flag state. There is nothing in Brexit (whatever form it takes) that is likely to change this in Europe simply because the EU has no current influence on such matters.
 
Irish Rover said:
I'm no lawyer so I'm not going to argue any aspect of this. I'm surprised however to read that rules relating to the registration of leisure craft come under UNCLOS. It does seem the UK is tightening up some loopholes in relation to the SSR. However as long as the system is based exclusively on self-declaration then it is wide open for abuse.
Click to expand...

Neither am I a lawyer, which is why I used words like "doubt" and "imagine".

As the RYA document makes clear, SSR is a measure under UK merchant shipping law, which in turn incorporates the country's obligations under UNCLOS.

Clearly self-declaration is open to abuse. No doubt the same is true of income tax, SORN, the entire VAT edifice, whether you're old enough to drink in pubs and many other aspects of everyday life. If it becomes a problem of sufficient magnitude, I suppose there may be action. In that case, the actor, I daresay, would be HMG.
 
Last edited:
Tranona said:
Doubt there is any danger that the SSR as a document will be rejected by any other state. It is well accepted world wide as evidence of flag state. There is nothing in Brexit (whatever form it takes) that is likely to change this in Europe simply because the EU has no current influence on such matters.
Click to expand...
It is well known that SSR is being widely abused and will continue to be. I'd imagine you'd have to travel a long way in the world to find someone who doesn't know someone with a friend or relative living in the UK whose address could be used. It would probably be easy enough to sort out that aspect by asking for a Social Insurance Number or such like. The other aspect is self-declaration which may become an issue if more countries introduce cruising taxes and abuses are detected.
Delaware registration has been accepted for years even though it is not a Flag State but there have been rumblings recently of a crack down on that.
 
Irish Rover said:
It is well known that SSR is being widely abused and will continue to be. I'd imagine you'd have to travel a long way in the world to find someone who doesn't know someone with a friend or relative living in the UK whose address could be used. It would probably be easy enough to sort out that aspect by asking for a Social Insurance Number or such like. The other aspect is self-declaration which may become an issue if more countries introduce cruising taxes and abuses are detected.
Delaware registration has been accepted for years even though it is not a Flag State but there have been rumblings recently of a crack down on that.
Click to expand...

There are two issues here. The first is the legitimacy of the document - that is does the person qualify to hold it and the second is its acceptance by others. There are signs that the registry is being more proactive about ensuring applicants are legitimate, first by being more explicit about the requirements and second by enforcing them more rigorously. However it would need more positive government action and perhaps a move away from self declaration to make it more effective. Difficult to see how this would happen without changing the simple, low cost nature of the process.

As to acceptance by the state being visited, that is up to the government of that state and it is clear that some states accept the Delaware registration and others do not. A cynic might say that certain people in the state's political system might have undue influence on the state's decision!
 
Out of idle curiosity, before responding to Irish Rover above, I checked out the The Merchant Shipping (Registration of Ships) Regulations 1993.

Those who have argued that it's perverse for the MCA to call "renewal" anything else, may be interested in this from the SSR section:

Renewal
97.—(1) Application for renewal of registration may be made during the last 3 calendar months of the current registration period. [My bolds]

http://www.legislation.gov.uk/uksi/1993/3138/made
(The 1995 act has little to say about SSR, although it has fascinating insights about improper colours and who may board to seize them. It does not include pompous jobsworths in marinas, however distinguished their maritime history may have been.)
 
Last edited:
Tranona said:
There are two issues here. The first is the legitimacy of the document - that is does the person qualify to hold it and the second is its acceptance by others. There are signs that the registry is being more proactive about ensuring applicants are legitimate, first by being more explicit about the requirements and second by enforcing them more rigorously. However it would need more positive government action and perhaps a move away from self declaration to make it more effective. Difficult to see how this would happen without changing the simple, low cost nature of the process.

As to acceptance by the state being visited, that is up to the government of that state and it is clear that some states accept the Delaware registration and others do not. A cynic might say that certain people in the state's political system might have undue influence on the state's decision!
Click to expand...
I should make it clear I think the SSR is an excellent facility for UK boaters. I wish we had a similar system in Ireland, even though I would no longer be eligible even if we had. I can't see how it would cost too much to police the residency aspect by way of requiring applicants to include their NIN or similar on the form. As regards the other abuses in relation to LOA etc I'm sure there are cost effective ways to police it - production boats would be easy to check and others could require a builders certificate or a survey which shouldn't cost more than a couple of hundred pounds. It would be a pity if the scheme fell into disrepute because of abuses.
I don't understand the last sentence of your post but maybe I'm not supposed to.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

Other threads that may be of interest

E
Nimbus 305 or Marex 330
Replies
19
Views
781
Time Out
T

Share this page

Top