|
Post by NigelMoore on Apr 30, 2017 21:48:36 GMT
My point was to provide the best answer I could to your queries, and attempt to clarify any potential mutual misunderstandings.
|
|
|
Post by kris on Apr 30, 2017 21:55:47 GMT
My point was to provide the best answer I could to your queries, and attempt to clarify any potential mutual misunderstandings. now I understand.im quite aware of the legal standing of having a tender. I was merely pointing out regardless of what Crt say, I will keep a tender because it is useful to me.
|
|
|
Post by cuthound on May 5, 2017 16:50:36 GMT
I misread the title, thought it said "Changes to rules on fenders". Having just had new fenders fitted thought CRT might want to charge me more for having them.
|
|
|
Post by tadworth on May 10, 2017 1:00:28 GMT
Just looked at the terms and conditions for long term moorings,
6.8
"You may keep a tender on the water at the mooring providing you obtain our prior written consent, and you pay an additional charge notified to you by us."
Looks like the canal at mooring sites is a different canal from the rest, and CaRT fairyland laws apply there.
|
|
|
Post by JohnV on May 10, 2017 8:10:23 GMT
Just looked at the terms and conditions for long term moorings, 6.8 "You may keep a tender on the water at the mooring providing you obtain our prior written consent, and you pay an additional charge notified to you by us." Looks like the canal at mooring sites is a different canal from the rest, and CaRT fairyland laws apply there. doesn't read that way to me ......... if you are renting a 65' mooring and you keep a 65' boat ..... and a 16' dinghy moored there you are occupying an 81' mooring and I would consider it only just that you pay for such and that you should get permission first, from whoever owns the moorings
|
|
|
Post by kris on May 10, 2017 13:30:45 GMT
Just looked at the terms and conditions for long term moorings, 6.8 "You may keep a tender on the water at the mooring providing you obtain our prior written consent, and you pay an additional charge notified to you by us." Looks like the canal at mooring sites is a different canal from the rest, and CaRT fairyland laws apply there. doesn't read that way to me ......... if you are renting a 65' mooring and you keep a 65' boat ..... and a 16' dinghy moored there you are occupying an 81' mooring and I would consider it only just that you pay for such and that you should get permission first, from whoever owns the mooringsif your dingy is 16' then it's to big for a tender. It should have its own liscence and mooring if you want to keep it in the water near your boat.
|
|
|
Post by JohnV on May 10, 2017 13:32:43 GMT
doesn't read that way to me ......... if you are renting a 65' mooring and you keep a 65' boat ..... and a 16' dinghy moored there you are occupying an 81' mooring and I would consider it only just that you pay for such and that you should get permission first, from whoever owns the mooringsif your dingy is 16' then it's to big for a tender. It should have its own liscence and mooring if you want to keep it in the water near your boat. the size was just an example ..... if you wish to make that 10' or even 6'....... the principle and the argument still holds water
|
|
|
Post by kris on May 10, 2017 13:40:51 GMT
if your dingy is 16' then it's to big for a tender. It should have its own liscence and mooring if you want to keep it in the water near your boat. the size was just an example ..... if you wish to make that 10' or even 6'....... the principle and the argument still holds water I never said it doesnt π
|
|
|
Post by tadworth on May 10, 2017 18:45:09 GMT
Just looked at the terms and conditions for long term moorings, 6.8 "You may keep a tender on the water at the mooring providing you obtain our prior written consent, and you pay an additional charge notified to you by us." Looks like the canal at mooring sites is a different canal from the rest, and CaRT fairyland laws apply there. doesn't read that way to me ......... if you are renting a 65' mooring and you keep a 65' boat ..... and a 16' dinghy moored there you are occupying an 81' mooring and I would consider it only just that you pay for such and that you should get permission first, from whoever owns the mooringsYou can't keep a tender there unless its moored in your mooring space, isn't that obvious ?
|
|
|
Post by JohnV on May 10, 2017 18:50:09 GMT
doesn't read that way to me ......... if you are renting a 65' mooring and you keep a 65' boat ..... and a 16' dinghy moored there you are occupying an 81' mooring and I would consider it only just that you pay for such and that you should get permission first, from whoever owns the mooringsYou can't keep a tender there unless its moored in your mooring space, isn't that obvious ? so you rent a mooring where it's length includes the extra space needed for your dinghy ? ........ isn't that in effect what CRT are saying ?
|
|
|
Post by tadworth on May 10, 2017 21:58:42 GMT
You can't keep a tender there unless its moored in your mooring space, isn't that obvious ? so you rent a mooring where it's length includes the extra space needed for your dinghy ? ........ isn't that in effect what CRT are saying ? But we still have the problem that the rules of the canals are the bylaws, either they and only they apply, or else CaRT makes the rules itself via contract terms and the bylaws are then torn up. To make contracts CaRT must either own the land in the sense of private ownership, or have specific clear authority given by parliment to create theses contracts and arbitrary rules. A vague and selective quote from 1962 transport act can't be that.
|
|
|
Post by JohnV on May 10, 2017 22:19:51 GMT
so you rent a mooring where it's length includes the extra space needed for your dinghy ? ........ isn't that in effect what CRT are saying ? But we still have the problem that the rules of the canals are the bylaws, either they and only they apply, or else CaRT makes the rules itself via contract terms and the bylaws are then torn up. To make contracts CaRT must either own the land in the sense of private ownership, or have specific clear authority given by parliment to create theses contracts and arbitrary rules. A vague and selective quote from 1962 transport act can't be that. I'm sorry but this seems to be wandering away from the point. I would expect (although I have not researched it) that off side moorings would not come under the umbrella of "canal acts" as it is access across land (presumably in CRT's land and property portfolio). In which case the canal acts have no bearing on the matter. To disagree with that you would have to be arguing that CRT have no right to charge for offside moorings at all. If it is in the land and property portfolio then CRT are perfectly entitled to make contracts just as they are entitled to charge rent. My reading of it would be that where they are dealing with the offside and access across land belonging to the property management arm of CRT the only limitations on the charges and conditions would be commercial ones.
|
|
|
Post by NigelMoore on May 10, 2017 22:26:18 GMT
Offside moorings against land owned by CaRT DO come under the umbrella of canal Acts - those Acts expressly permit [and used to control] the charging and conditioning of use of such property.
|
|
|
Post by JohnV on May 10, 2017 22:36:52 GMT
Offside moorings against land owned by CaRT DO come under the umbrella of canal Acts - those Acts expressly permit [and used to control] the charging and conditioning of use of such property. Thank you for that Nigel (I am glad I said I hadn't researched it !!!) Sorry Tadworth it seems I was off beam
|
|
|
Post by NigelMoore on May 10, 2017 23:55:11 GMT
Offside moorings against land owned by CaRT DO come under the umbrella of canal Acts - those Acts expressly permit [and used to control] the charging and conditioning of use of such property. Thank you for that Nigel (I am glad I said I hadn't researched it !!!) Sorry Tadworth it seems I was off beam Why say you were 'off beam'? Only the relevance of canal Acts was misunderstood.
|
|