|
Post by tadworth on Aug 4, 2017 11:16:11 GMT
Which I think also confirms that the trading licence is therefore not a subdivision of a pleasure boat licence and is therefore not a mandatory statutory licence, but a voluntary civil contract. ?
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Aug 4, 2017 16:04:02 GMT
|
|
|
Post by NigelMoore on Aug 4, 2017 16:36:10 GMT
Not quite. What Mr Deards said was: " Section 10 (which only applies in respect of registration of pleasure boats on the Trustβs river navigations β i.e. not houseboats or boats used for the carriage of goods) allows the Trust to classify and sub-divide pleasure boats and to fix registration charges to be paid provided those charges do not exceed the βappropriate prescribed chargesβ in respect of such pleasure boats. The appropriate prescribed charges are defined in section 7, as such charges as the Trust may from time to time determine." As I have pointed out previously, the Board undertook to apply the same classification scheme as the relevant schedule to the 1971 Act, to the pleasure boat licence scheme, and as the 1983 Act directly regulated the ratio of river registrations to licences [in terms of fees], there is an implied requirement to maintain the same classifications according to length. Where Mr Deards is either dishonest or ignorant [according to your degree of cynicism] is where he defines the "prescribed charges" as anything they choose, rather than - as the Act expressly clarifies - the rigid prescribed charges of the schedules. As noted previously: the "prescribed charges" are no longer of effect as listed in 1971, but as far as river registrations are concerned, are still limited, to the stated percentage of the equivalent licence fee [for which, admittedly, they can unilaterally "from time to time determine"].
|
|
|
Post by peterboat on Aug 24, 2017 15:45:13 GMT
Just read the Tillergraph and it would appear that the 3rd phase of the consultation will be delayed!! I wonder if the answers they have been getting arnt the ones they want to hear. I hope the whole thing is cancelled nowt wrong with length only
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Aug 24, 2017 15:55:50 GMT
Just read the Tillergraph and it would appear that the 3rd phase of the consultation will be delayed!! I wonder if the answers they have been getting arnt the ones they want to hear. I hope the whole thing is cancelled nowt wrong with length only I am pretty certain a few women may disagree with your last 5 words π€£ππ
|
|
|
Post by peterboat on Aug 24, 2017 16:36:51 GMT
Just read the Tillergraph and it would appear that the 3rd phase of the consultation will be delayed!! I wonder if the answers they have been getting arnt the ones they want to hear. I hope the whole thing is cancelled nowt wrong with length only I am pretty certain a few women may disagree with your last 5 words π€£ππ I hope so or I am in big trouble
|
|
|
Post by Allan on Aug 25, 2017 19:41:42 GMT
Just read the Tillergraph and it would appear that the 3rd phase of the consultation will be delayed!! I wonder if the answers they have been getting arnt the ones they want to hear. I hope the whole thing is cancelled nowt wrong with length only C&RT have just refused to provide information relating to stage 2 - www.whatdotheyknow.com/request/national_review_of_boat_licencinPerhaps, they want Involve to rewrite the 'independent' report ... However, they have provided some info regarding numbers attending workshops and confirmed the widebeam owners were not specifically invited. This might come back to bite them as government guidelines, which C&RT purport to follow, suggest that they should consult with those specifically affected.
|
|
|
Post by naughtyfox on Aug 26, 2017 4:55:34 GMT
Smoke and mirrors, this would be a farce if it wasn't for the fact that boaters are paying for this through their licences. I think 'Involve' (stupid name) are involved in this conspiracy to con boaters.
|
|
|
Post by Allan on Aug 26, 2017 7:31:02 GMT
Smoke and mirrors, this would be a farce if it wasn't for the fact that boaters are paying for this through their licences. I think 'Involve' (stupid name) and involved in this conspiracy to con boaters. Perhaps if Ian Rogers had done what he told C&RT's trustees he would do by way of communicating with boaters in 2016, he would might least have something in writing that would justify a review. It seems to me that he simply got cold feet about holding live web chats - www.whatdotheyknow.com/request/2016_live_web_chats
|
|
|
Post by peterboat on Aug 26, 2017 18:19:32 GMT
Just read the Tillergraph and it would appear that the 3rd phase of the consultation will be delayed!! I wonder if the answers they have been getting arnt the ones they want to hear. I hope the whole thing is cancelled nowt wrong with length only C&RT have just refused to provide information relating to stage 2 - www.whatdotheyknow.com/request/national_review_of_boat_licencinPerhaps, they want Involve to rewrite the 'independent' report ... However, they have provided some info regarding numbers attending workshops and confirmed the widebeam owners were not specifically invited. This might come back to bite them as government guidelines, which C&RT purport to follow, suggest that they should consult with those specifically affected. I can say that I tried very hard to get invited and was refused and yes I am a widebeam owner, Richard my mate tried as well same story! I really do hope this comes back and bites them hard very hard, as it might be a lesson to change things for changes sake
|
|
|
Post by gigoguy on Aug 26, 2017 18:47:10 GMT
C&RT have just refused to provide information relating to stage 2 - www.whatdotheyknow.com/request/national_review_of_boat_licencinPerhaps, they want Involve to rewrite the 'independent' report ... However, they have provided some info regarding numbers attending workshops and confirmed the widebeam owners were not specifically invited. This might come back to bite them as government guidelines, which C&RT purport to follow, suggest that they should consult with those specifically affected. I can say that I tried very hard to get invited and was refused and yes I am a widebeam owner, Richard my mate tried as well same story! I really do hope this comes back and bites them hard very hard, as it might be a lesson to change things for changes sake I got an invite and attended the Northwich one. Strangely enough there were no wide beamers there. And that surprised me as there are a few up and down the T&M and The Weaver. They said they'd invited 25 but only 5 or 6 of us were there. I've had the impression all along it's a scam.
|
|
|
Post by naughtyfox on Aug 26, 2017 18:49:07 GMT
Yes, they are sticking the knife into us all. And, so far, getting away with it. You didn't really expect them to be transparent and honest. Did you??
|
|
|
Post by gigoguy on Aug 28, 2017 17:38:41 GMT
So what do we do if we don't like the final proposal?
|
|
|
Post by naughtyfox on Aug 28, 2017 17:49:05 GMT
Be meek and pay up. I have other suggestions but they are rather naughty and I'd only get a PM from the boss.
How about marrying someone rich who will support you, and then licence fees mean not a jot.
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Aug 28, 2017 17:51:38 GMT
So what do we do if we don't like the final proposal? Nothing, because the majority are too thick. They won't recognise an issue until it actually hits them. By that time it will be too late, because there won't be any support for them.
|
|