|
Post by naughtyfox on Jan 21, 2017 11:20:42 GMT
I put this in New to Boating as I thought this to be the most suitable place. This is an age-old thingy I'm sure, but we're still newcomers in this kind of thing.
Say we want to leave our boat for 3 months at a private moorings on the non-towpath side of a canal. We pay the farmer/land owner what he asks, but then he says he expects we have an 'end of garden licence' from CRT. I'm guessing this means all the cash we give him goes into his pocket, and none of it to CRT. Do CRT issue 'end of garden' licences for 3 months? I mean, it's not like it's OUR garden!
Trying to keep things simple and not going into issues whether boats don't actually need mooring permits, and Riparian Rights, and all that sort of murky stuff which.... let's face it... doesn't get many people anywhere.
|
|
|
Post by Robbo on Jan 21, 2017 11:25:12 GMT
I believe when you apply for EOG moorings you need to own the land.
|
|
|
Post by Robbo on Jan 21, 2017 11:34:17 GMT
So how comes there are lines of boats at such places? The boat owners don't all own the land, I'm sure. The land owner will have permission for the moorings with CRT.
|
|
|
Post by lollygagger on Jan 21, 2017 12:23:40 GMT
Stall them for three months. Tell 'em you're in Finland for starters.
|
|
|
Post by TonyDunkley on Jan 21, 2017 13:27:54 GMT
I put this in New to Boating as I thought this to be the most suitable place. This is an age-old thingy I'm sure, but we're still newcomers in this kind of thing. Say we want to leave our boat for 3 months at a private moorings on the non-towpath side of a canal. We pay the farmer/land owner what he asks, but then he says he expects we have an 'end of garden licence' from CRT. I'm guessing this means all the cash we give him goes into his pocket, and none of it to CRT. Do CRT issue 'end of garden' licences for 3 months? I mean, it's not like it's OUR garden! Trying to keep things simple and not going into issues whether boats don't actually need mooring permits, and Riparian Rights, and all that sort of murky stuff which.... let's face it... doesn't get many people anywhere. In reality there is no such thing as an 'end of garden licence'. Your farmer/landowner has probably heard talk of End of Garden mooring permits and fees, but in truth they don't exist either, . . . other than in the warped minds of the wretched band of C&RT office chair polishers who have nothing better to do than dream up seemingly endless quantities of pseudo-legal crap to dish out to boatowners. Just make your arrangements for leaving your boat with the owner of the offside land where you want to leave it. It's no business of C&RT's, whatever they may say to the contrary.
|
|
|
Post by Mr Stabby on Jan 21, 2017 14:44:06 GMT
One thing I can do is, if I get the chance, ask boaters tied up beside farmland / on the non-towpath side, how they go about their payments. I have an offside mooring on a farm. I pay the farmer for mooring, that is £312.50 a year and I also need a mooring permit from CRT which is around £450 per annum (photo below). It's about half the cost of mooring at Brinklow Marina where I was before, although I don't have electricity and there isn't an Elsan point. I do have a water supply.
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Jan 21, 2017 14:47:20 GMT
I guess that's why people pay.
It's much cheaper than the costs, stress and worry of fighting through the courts.
Rog
|
|
|
Post by Mr Stabby on Jan 21, 2017 15:10:17 GMT
"and I also need a mooring permit from CRT which is around £450 per annum" need? But Tony has just said that we don't need such, in such cases. And what happens if you want a mooring permit for just 3 months? Why have you not told CRT to take a running jump, as far as a mooring permit is concerned? "Just make your arrangements for leaving your boat with the owner of the offside land where you want to leave it. It's no business of C&RT's, whatever they may say to the contrary." My understanding is that I do need a mooring permit, certainly every other boat here has one, and many of the boaters have lived aboard for a decade or more. If it was optional/ unnecessary then I would imagine one of them would have worked that out by now?
|
|
|
Post by Mr Stabby on Jan 21, 2017 15:22:37 GMT
Yet Tony implies Mooring permits are not needed? It's all very confusing. I have tried to make sense of it all, but struggle. I think we all have it in mind, that CRT may send round their Liverpool Thug Team to smash in our knee caps if we are too cheeky. I think Tony's views on the matter are somewhat akin to pikeys deciding that road tax isn't needed on their Ford Transits.
|
|
|
Post by NigelMoore on Jan 21, 2017 15:24:26 GMT
Trying to keep things simple and not going into issues whether boats don't actually need mooring permits, and Riparian Rights, and all that sort of murky stuff which.... let's face it... doesn't get many people anywhere. Accepting this, but answering what may be a slightly oblique query to yours, for so long as the mooring is an acceptable one for CaRT anyway, then using it as a temporary mooring although neither engaged in navigation nor at your designated home mooring, ought to be unobjectionable to them. Not saying it will be – cue the Wingfield case and the original Dunkley case – but it ought to be. The answer to your last post would be what dogless has described. For probably the majority of boaters though, the answer in the first place would be ignorance; they would – very naturally in ordinary circumstances - never think to question the right in the first place.
|
|
|
Post by NigelMoore on Jan 21, 2017 15:30:46 GMT
Yet Tony implies Mooring permits are not needed? It's all very confusing. I have tried to make sense of it all, but struggle. I think we all have it in mind, that CRT may send round their Liverpool Thug Team to smash in our knee caps if we are too cheeky. I think Tony's views on the matter are somewhat akin to pikeys deciding that road tax isn't needed on their Ford Transits. Hardly. Tony does not argue that a licence is not needed on the canals; he argues that caRT have no jurisdiction to charge for mooring to private offside banks, as per virtually all of the original enabling Acts. The ability to charge for such facilities was reserved to the owners of such land, hence any charges by CaRT on top of that are prohibited under the 2012 amendment to the 1962 Act.
|
|
|
Post by bodger on Jan 21, 2017 15:41:38 GMT
Nigel and Tony may enjoy the challenge of arguing the legal niceties, but in the real world it is less hassle to do what Iconoclast suggests and get on with enjoying life without looking forward with relish to their next appointment in court.
The cost of £450 is hardly a big deal if it gives you a feeling of security of tenure.
|
|
|
Post by TonyDunkley on Jan 21, 2017 16:25:08 GMT
Yet Tony implies Mooring permits are not needed? It's all very confusing. I have tried to make sense of it all, but struggle. I think we all have it in mind, that CRT may send round their Liverpool Thug Team to smash in our knee caps if we are too cheeky. I think Tony's views on the matter are somewhat akin to pikeys deciding that road tax isn't needed on their Ford Transits. I think you should take more care to read and understand what was actually said before posting stupid comments like that ! C&RT don't have entitlement to charge for mooring to offside private land, any more so than did the Canal Companies who built the canals in the first place. In an earlier post you said - "I have an offside mooring on a farm. I pay the farmer for mooring, that is £312.50 a year and I also need a mooring permit from CRT which is around £450 per annum (photo below)." - whereas the reality is that you don't need a mooring permit from C&RT at all, . . . . permission to moor from the landowner is all that's needed. C&RT attempt to justify the EoG fee by claiming that it's a charge for the exclusive use of the 'waterspace' alongside the private land, but a moments careful thought about this exposes it for the utter nonsense it is. The very act of buying a boat Licence entitles the owner of the boat to occupy 'waterspace', in a canal, commensurate with the dimensions of the boat for the period for which the Licence is valid. Hence, unless you have a boat that can be in two different places at the same time, paying the EoG charge amounts to paying for the same thing twice. Are you and your fellow moorers entirely happy to do that, . . . or is it just that you haven't thought about it enough and are allowing yourselves to be conned ?
|
|
|
Post by bodger on Jan 21, 2017 16:35:05 GMT
I do question everything, but I also try to stay within what I consider to be my own reasonable limits. It's a subject that's not going to go away from my mind, so I shall follow it to an extent. I do like to see justice maintained and wrongdoings exposed. Sometimes I am very tenacious. Forewarned is forearmed, and all that. Sometimes I'm ready to go in with all guns blazing, other times it's best to apply the brakes and stay out of trouble. Where do we all draw our limits? (in similar vein, and a slightly silly idea - what would happen if one 'continuously cruising' boat was to pull a string of, say, ten other boats behind it, so that they could all avoid mooring fees, whilst their owners were away? - are there T&C's about this sort of thing?) I don't know, but for sure, if you met Nicknorman waiting for a lock there would be fireworks!
|
|
|
Post by bodger on Jan 21, 2017 16:43:47 GMT
I think Tony's views on the matter are somewhat akin to pikeys deciding that road tax isn't needed on their Ford Transits. C&RT attempt to justify the EoG fee by claiming that it's a charge for the exclusive use of the 'waterspace' alongside the private land, but a moments careful thought about this exposes it for the utter nonsense it is. The very act of buying a boat Licence entitles the owner of the boat to occupy 'waterspace', in a canal, commensurate with the dimensions of the boat for the period for which the Licence is valid. Hence, unless you have a boat that can be in two different places at the same time, paying the EoG charge amounts to paying for the same thing twice. Are you and your fellow moorers entirely happy to do that, . . . or is it just that you haven't thought about it enough and are allowing yourselves to be conned ? I think we were all well aware of your viewpoint already. My own viewpoint, which will be very controversial, is that it is like paying road tax and believing it gives you a right to occupy 8sq.m. of tarmac outside your house for no extra charge. I remember those wonderful days when parking on residential urban streets was strictly on alternate sides of the road for each day over the working week, which made a lot of sense and ensured that dumpers didn't park their vehicle and effectively abandon it, sometimes for weeks on end.
|
|