|
Post by Andyberg on Oct 7, 2023 9:54:08 GMT
I wonder why theres been no threads ‘Why are people who own boats less than 7ft wide commonly so toxic’ ? 🤷🏻♂️
|
|
|
Post by kris on Oct 7, 2023 9:59:00 GMT
can’t you work it out yourself? No, because I don't know what you pay. How could I? I know I pay just about 1k to CRT for my licence and mooring contribution. But then I've got a small boat with a cheap mooring at the top of the hill. I don't think ccers should pay more to CRT than a boat in a marina, that wouldn't be fair. I think you are suffering under the delusion that I am a cc’er. I’ll make it easy for you. What’s more 25% or 8% ? Come on jim even you can get this one.
|
|
|
Post by on Oct 7, 2023 11:09:45 GMT
The cc surcharge is tiny.
What the CRT are doing is going for the wide beans.
My 10ft6 wide nuclear fallout bunker licence is going up more than a cc narrow boat because I have a mooring.
|
|
|
Post by Andyberg on Oct 7, 2023 11:28:02 GMT
Who are going to be next? 🤷🏻♂️
|
|
|
Post by Arthur on Oct 7, 2023 11:43:12 GMT
I think the crt have got it right with their proposed rises everyone needs to pay their share continuous cruisers use more of the network and services, if they can actually be bothered to move as required, wide beam boat owners should just pay the increases instead of continually complaining its not fair. I also think they should introduce a 4 week maximum limit to prime city's like London.
|
|
|
Post by on Oct 7, 2023 11:50:23 GMT
Licence renewal every two weeks based on location could be interesting.
|
|
|
Post by Arthur on Oct 7, 2023 11:56:45 GMT
I agree and enforcement should be sent out to contract so non payers and bridge hoppers are quickly dealt with.
|
|
|
Post by fi on Oct 7, 2023 12:07:49 GMT
Yes, lrts get a parking enforcement company to help out, can be paid for by the licence increases. Ignore the fact that for many boaters one of the major attractions of life on water is a slower pace of life coupled with an attitude of empathy and help each other out. (i am talking real life attitude rather than the internet...).
|
|
|
Post by on Oct 7, 2023 12:19:58 GMT
Its a wonderful world.
It seems more or less inevitable that the CRT will get contract enforcement because groups are causing problems and claiming rights they don't have.
The Ward case on the K&A must be a warning. Six figure sum to deal with an idiot who when his boats got nicked was waving his phone around and saying the CRT had adverse possessed the boats. The use of the words adverse possession is a clue here. A very obvious one.
There was a time, generally before the squatting ban, when the cut was full of cool people but this has changed.
Obviously there still are cool people and I personally am happy to engage and be friendly with anyone from any background with any circumstances no problems in the real world.
What I don't like is the entitlement problem.
I'm knot knormal.
The internet is changing the world faster than most people realise. It is serious..
|
|
|
Post by fi on Oct 7, 2023 12:28:45 GMT
The 'entitlement problem' is there and increasing, however it hasn't taken over yet. If hard fast rules take over then IMO boating will be a lot less pleasurable, I'm not talking about complying with the generally lax rules we live with but suggestions about 2 week licence enforced by some nasty contractor who is incentivised to move you on make me wonder...
|
|
|
Post by Arthur on Oct 7, 2023 12:36:24 GMT
The bridge hoppers have no empathy nor have any willingness to help anyone but themselves mooring for prolonged periods on visitor moorings or on water points and service blocks, I would welcome harsh enforcement for these selfish people. I would also welcome a three strikes rule where your boat is removed after multiple infringements.
|
|
|
Post by on Oct 7, 2023 12:41:49 GMT
Enforcement is the key.
People will push and push and seek loopholes and take advantage.
Give them an inch and they take a mile.
The problem with allowing this is that it escalates and you get a snowball.
It may be unpalatable to some people but hitting hard is probably necessary. Zero Tolerance.
Otherwise the costs of enforcement later are going to basically bankrupt the CRT.
It is time for the navigation authority to get in charge if the navigation and if they can't handle the land use get some who can deal with it to sort it.
Otherwise its all fucked.
Basically.
|
|
|
Post by fi on Oct 7, 2023 12:51:22 GMT
So I once made three infringments of the rules within the same 1 to 2 month period.
1. Moored overnight on a lock landing whilst awaiting help on the Huddersfield Broad Canal 2. Stayed longer in Leeds Dock than 48 hours to sort boat out and attend an important doctors appointment to assess potential broken ribs issue. 3. Overstayed on a 24 hr mooring somewhere towards Liverpool for one extra day due to torrential rain
CRT as currently set up let me do that, but a suggestion of they should employ an incentivised contractor to enforce and take my licence away in those circumstances concerns me.
CRT may not be great, they need to concentrate on the piss takers more quickly, without penalising minor infringments.
|
|
|
Post by on Oct 7, 2023 14:23:35 GMT
The 14 day bit in the '95 Act is The Problem. This causes a bias where people who would never have considered living on a boat if they had to pay for a mooring are bound to turn up.
It is not rocket science.
Maybe it is good if the canals provide cheap housing. This is in demand. Good Idea. So charge people half the equivalent of land housing and you get cheap housing.
The problem is that a cc licence is massively too cheap. It is obvious. Any sensible business would get the customers in on a cheap offer then hit them really hard until they stop coming. 10 people paying 10 grand each is a lot better than 12 people paying 8 grand each. Fewer people to handle.
Demand and supply economics.
I think there must be some people who think that canals for some unknown reason should be exempt from market forces.
Why would this happen? Why should this happen?
If you can't stand the heat get out of the kitchen.
|
|
|
Post by fi on Oct 7, 2023 14:29:59 GMT
The 14 day bit in the '95 Act is The Problem. This causes a bias where people who would never have considered living on a boat if they had to pay for a mooring are bound to turn up. It is not rocket science. Maybe it is good if the canals provide cheap housing. This is in demand. Good Idea. So charge people half the equivalent of land housing and you get cheap housing. The problem is that a cc licence is massively too cheap. It is obvious. Any sensible business would get the customers in on a cheap offer then hit them really hard until they stop coming. 10 people paying 10 grand each is a lot better than 12 people paying 8 grand each. Fewer people to handle. Demand and supply economics. I think there must be some people who think that canals for some unknown reason should be exempt from market forces. Why would this happen? Why should this happen? If you can't stand the heat get out of the kitchen. The problem is the pisstakers and lack of ability to deal with them. No act comes into it if you don't try to enforce against the pisstakers.
|
|