|
Post by kris on Nov 20, 2018 17:30:34 GMT
There has definitely been a lot of money. 10 years. 3 or 4 boats say 5 cabins £200 a month. That is enormously cheap so could be more. Yes there is demand. So £30k+ a year probably rather more. I'd put a conservative estimate of half a million GBP profit. Obviously that's not amazing but a lot of people go to work for less than £30k a year. And all cash. I didn't realise he had been at it for so long.
|
|
|
Post by kris on Nov 20, 2018 17:32:44 GMT
NigelMoore I'm getting nervous now you are using the word "act" more often. Do you think this DEFRA group is going to result in a new act of parliament? Realistically, no. I suspect that if the group DID do anything but enjoy social get-togethers, it would make recommendations either for byelaw provisions where possible, or for 'civil contracts'. There is - currently at least - too much government concern over housing and rights of the indigent for them to approve by Parliamentary dictat the expulsion of those perceived (by a small sector) to be social undesirables in untidy habitations. Then too, any Act unifying the disparate navigation authorities would be too major a task. let's hope so.
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Nov 20, 2018 17:49:18 GMT
NigelMoore I'm getting nervous now you are using the word "act" more often. Do you think this DEFRA group is going to result in a new act of parliament? Realistically, no. I suspect that if the group DID do anything but enjoy social get-togethers, it would make recommendations either for byelaw provisions where possible, or for 'civil contracts'. There is - currently at least - too much government concern over housing and rights of the indigent for them to approve by Parliamentary dictat the expulsion of those perceived (by a small sector) to be social undesirables in untidy habitations. Then too, any Act unifying the disparate navigation authorities would be too major a task. You are very clever Nigel, I’ll give you that.
|
|
|
Post by NigelMoore on Nov 20, 2018 19:26:18 GMT
There has definitely been a lot of money. 10 years. 3 or 4 boats say 5 cabins £200 a month. That is enormously cheap so could be more. Yes there is demand. So £30k+ a year probably rather more. I'd put a conservative estimate of half a million GBP profit. Obviously that's not amazing but a lot of people go to work for less than £30k a year. And all cash. The article of 4 years ago gave numbers of 3 barges averaging 20 occupants paying between £230 and £360 per month. Lost track of how many there are now, and do not know current rents, but a figure of £12,000/year is said now to go in boat registration fees to the EA.
|
|
|
Post by NigelMoore on Nov 21, 2018 0:40:11 GMT
I have a reservation over the reliance on Halsbury as cited, which in my opinion does not claim to extend PRN’s to include any right to ride roughshod over private riparian rights; it is disagreement over this that lies at the heart of Alistair’s approach. That has the potential to bring the remaining valid points into disrepute. I received my copy of Halsbury’s 5th edition volume on Water and Waterways yesterday – unexpectedly early. I was correct: confusing as the text and footnotes may be, there is clear acknowledgement that the PRN “ does not, in general, include the right to land persons or goods on the foreshore or banks, unless the person purporting to do so is the owner of the foreshore or banks or has the owner’s permission.” It would be nice to get the latest 2018 edition – not least because my case with BW is cited therein – but I am not prepared to shell out the nearly £700 it would cost!
|
|
|
Post by NigelMoore on Nov 21, 2018 1:07:06 GMT
Yes indeed – but do not forget that if this group gets together enough to forward recommendations to government, or more likely, to distribute amongst themselves an action plan, it is likely to involve strategies that are NOT dependent upon legislation, and that could be far worse. It is bad enough that secondary legislation can get passed with little effective scrutiny or protest - unilateral “policy” impositions are free even from that minimal public influence. As to secondary legislation – either Statutory Instruments or Byelaws - I was just reading through Hansard on BW from 1966 (it came up while I was searching for information on the Brentford transhipment depot). A most perspicacious speaker near the end of the debate (Mr Grant-Ferris) put it well: “ The hon. Member knows quite well what happens in statutory Orders. They are laid on the table and they can be prayed against, but often this is at a late hour, the Whips are put on and that is an end of it.”
|
|
|
Post by Allan on Nov 21, 2018 8:16:24 GMT
UMBEG and Oxford City Council PSPO spring to mind.
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Nov 21, 2018 8:16:52 GMT
There seem to be an awful lot of overlaps between pleasure boat use and residential boat use. For example someone stays on their boat for several months (a "summerboard") so they are in effect living on it during that time.
It seems to me that any draconian measures to "deal with" itinerant residential boaters will also impact pleasure boaters and limit their freedoms.
Of course if its just time limits then I suppose it will "put off" people who are simply using the 14d rule to dictate when they move. If it was 28 days they would do that. Whereas people out boating would probably want to move every day or every other day.
So maybe time limits will be the thing. With enforcement. I suppose if it goes to enforcement company then there is profit for them from fines etc.
Sad if it comes to that really. Mind you life on the cut has become more regulated in the 24 years I've been living on boats so I expect its fair to assume more regulation not less in future.
People say "I'd like the freedom of living on a boat" I say "the freedom to go one way, or the other, and have your movements tracked.
How lovely.
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Nov 21, 2018 8:17:45 GMT
UMBEG and Oxford City Council PSPO spring to mind. Did Oxford get the Public Space Protection Order sorted out in the end ?
|
|
|
Post by naughtyfox on Nov 21, 2018 9:32:50 GMT
The new BSS demands boats be fitted with CO detector-alarms. Why not also demand boats be fitted with trackers? Then it will be clear where boats are and what they've been up to.
|
|
|
Post by kris on Nov 21, 2018 9:35:28 GMT
The new BSS demands boats be fitted with CO detector-alarms. Why not also demand boats be fitted with trackers? Then it will be clear where boats are and what they've been up to. I think it might be beyond the remit of the safety scheme to demand trackers are fitted. Personally I would fight against such a move.
|
|
|
Post by naughtyfox on Nov 21, 2018 9:46:50 GMT
Well, your phone is showing where you are right now! Did you fight against that happening?
|
|
|
Post by kris on Nov 21, 2018 9:49:10 GMT
Well, your phone is showing where you are right now! Did you fight against that happening? that imformation isnt available to the idiots that work in cart. If you turn off any location services then the only people who can track your phone are the phone company(unavoidable.) and the police through the phone company can track you. Why would I want to allow a "charity" to invade my personnel privacy?
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Nov 21, 2018 10:30:18 GMT
|
|
|
Post by NigelMoore on Nov 25, 2018 14:31:44 GMT
The topic is now under discussion on CWDF.
|
|