|
Post by kris on Jun 30, 2020 8:37:05 GMT
|
|
|
Post by Telemachus on Jun 30, 2020 9:12:24 GMT
I must say I thought licence fees were covered by benefits but clearly there has been some conflict on the matter. Apart from anything else, it has got to be cheaper for the taxpayer to fund a boat licence than to pay for rented land-based accommodation.
|
|
|
Post by peterboat on Jun 30, 2020 10:08:49 GMT
It would appear that it was until this event when a boater didnt appear in court, maybe if he had defended it, it would not have required another court case
This welcome decision follows a difficult period for boat dwellers due to an adverse judgement in the Upper Tribunal in 2017 (Kirklees MBC v JM [2018] UKUT 219 (AAC)) which was undefended by the boater, and which had reversed a Social Security and Child Support Commissioners’ decision of 2002 (CH 884 2002) that boat licence fees, regardless of whether the boater had a mooring, were eligible for Housing Benefit. From 2017, many boat dwellers both with and without a home mooring saw the Housing Benefit for their boat licence either withdrawn on review or refused with a new claim.
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Jun 30, 2020 10:19:49 GMT
It would appear that it was until this event when a boater didnt appear in court, maybe if he had defended it, it would not have required another court case Your point is?
There are many reasons why someone does not appear in court, are you suggesting that the boater in question was responsible for the decision because I find it hard to apportion the law to someone (an individual) who may be vunerable/just taking the piss - that is no way to decide the law in my opinion.
|
|
|
Post by Telemachus on Jun 30, 2020 11:03:33 GMT
It would appear that it was until this event when a boater didnt appear in court, maybe if he had defended it, it would not have required another court case Your point is?
There are many reasons why someone does not appear in court, are you suggesting that the boater in question was responsible for the decision because I find it hard to apportion the law to someone (an individual) who may be vunerable/just taking the piss - that is no way to decide the law in my opinion.
But that is how the law works in all aspects. The boater must have lodged the appeal, that means the appeal has to be heard. If the boater then doesn’t turn up on the day they will lose. It is quite possible that the boater was ill on the day or had other difficulties, in which case they could have asked for a postponement. I suggest that the likely reasons are either that the boater was too ill to even pick up the phone to the court, or they got cold feet and decided they couldn’t be bothered to attend. The latter being the more probable.
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Jun 30, 2020 11:07:46 GMT
Your point is?
There are many reasons why someone does not appear in court, are you suggesting that the boater in question was responsible for the decision because I find it hard to apportion the law to someone (an individual) who may be vunerable/just taking the piss - that is no way to decide the law in my opinion.
But that is how the law works in all aspects. The boater must have lodged the appeal, that means the appeal has to be heard. If the boater then doesn’t turn up on the day they will lose. It is quite possible that the boater was ill on the day or had other difficulties, in which case they could have asked for a postponement. I suggest that the likely reasons are either that the boater was too ill to even pick up the phone to the court, or they got cold feet and decided they couldn’t be bothered to attend. The latter being the more probable. I'm just glad that someone overturned the decision - victory for common sense...
PS. the law doesn't always work the same for an individual case and then become the law of the 'land'.
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Jun 30, 2020 11:35:33 GMT
, it has got to be cheaper for the taxpayer to fund a boat licence than to pay for rented land-based accommodation. Definitely. A lot cheaper if no mooring is being paid for. It seems interesting. Are local authorities actually allowed to fun inadequate housing just because it is on water? Would they have to inspect the boat to ensure that it is an appropriate dwelling? Maybe that only happens if there are children. . CRT will be happy with the regular reliable payments so that's good. Interesting way to reduce the waiting list for social housing.
|
|
|
Post by naughtyfox on Jun 30, 2020 12:15:17 GMT
, it has got to be cheaper for the taxpayer to fund a boat licence than to pay for rented land-based accommodation. Definitely. A lot cheaper if no mooring is being paid for. Perhaps the UK's Conservative government could adapt Norman Tebbit's mantra and suggest people 'get on their boat' and go in search of a job? "RNLI, how may I help you?" "Benefits, please!"
|
|
|
Post by Jim on Jun 30, 2020 12:48:51 GMT
Some unemployed migrants get a boat before they bring their foreign bride here on "holiday" then leave it empty, denying a worthy hard working person of a home.
|
|
|
Post by kris on Jun 30, 2020 13:25:50 GMT
Some unemployed migrants get a boat before they bring their foreign bride here on "holiday" then leave it empty, denying a worthy hard working person of a home. I’ve not even read foxys post, but I don’t need to. I can guess from your post Jim.
|
|
|
Post by peterboat on Jun 30, 2020 13:55:51 GMT
It would appear that it was until this event when a boater didnt appear in court, maybe if he had defended it, it would not have required another court case Your point is?
There are many reasons why someone does not appear in court, are you suggesting that the boater in question was responsible for the decision because I find it hard to apportion the law to someone (an individual) who may be vunerable/just taking the piss - that is no way to decide the law in my opinion.
In some ways yes he can cause issues for others because it becomes a landmark case and is used for other claimants. Anyway problem sorted somebody backed by bargees and travelers went to court and convinced the Judge they were right
|
|
|
Post by kris on Jun 30, 2020 14:12:26 GMT
This will effect more boaters than perhaps people realise. I suppose the issue now is, if your claiming your liscence without having a home mooring. The local authority would need proof you spend most of your time in their area. Anyway this should free up a lot of people’s cases waiting on this outcome.
|
|
|
Post by JohnV on Jun 30, 2020 14:26:09 GMT
This will effect more boaters than perhaps people realise. I suppose the issue now is, if your claiming your liscence without having a home mooring. The local authority would need proof you spend most of your time in their area. Anyway this should free up a lot of people’s cases waiting on this outcome. Hmmmm do I spy a possible can of worms ?
If you are making a "continuous voyage" and moving in such a way as to comply in the fullest sense with "continuois cruising" Proving that you are staying in one restricted area, in order to claim from the local council. Won't that also prove to CRT that you are not conforming with their "terrms and conditions" and encourage them to deny you a licence ?
and coversely vice cersa ?
|
|
|
Post by kris on Jun 30, 2020 16:48:20 GMT
This will effect more boaters than perhaps people realise. I suppose the issue now is, if your claiming your liscence without having a home mooring. The local authority would need proof you spend most of your time in their area. Anyway this should free up a lot of people’s cases waiting on this outcome. Hmmmm do I spy a possible can of worms ?
If you are making a "continuous voyage" and moving in such a way as to comply in the fullest sense with "continuois cruising" Proving that you are staying in one restricted area, in order to claim from the local council. Won't that also prove to CRT that you are not conforming with their "terrms and conditions" and encourage them to deny you a licence ?
and coversely vice cersa ?
you are possibly right John, I know it will help a lot of older boaters who are struggling.
|
|
|
Post by naughtyfox on Jun 30, 2020 17:37:26 GMT
Apparently CRT's 'terms and conditions' are not The Law.
Discuss.
|
|