IanD

It's selective quoting of figures to try and support a particular viewpoint (i.e. CRT are crap) while ignoring figures that go against this. The property market in general is always volatile, especially in 2022/23 -- lots of other property portfolios also lost money then. And of course some gained, it all depends on the portfolio -- just like pensions and other investments. Due to this volatility one single figure for one year is pretty much meaningless -- even if compared with how other similar portfolios did, which is not being done here, presumably because it might show that CART are no better or worse than any other comparable property portfolio. The only meaningful figures -- like with any other investment which has ups and downs -- is performance over a longer timespan, at least 5 years is normally used to rate performance. Unless anyone has any actual evidence that show otherwise, as opposed to anti-CART moaning... 😉

Since the level of enforcement is so low, it might just as well be £150/day, it would make no difference either way in reality. Enforcement using (expensive) staff only works when there are a large enough number of offenders in a small area to pay for them, and an enforcement method which makes it difficult to ignore or avoid payment and is quick and cheap to do. Clamping and then towing away cars does this, but there are no equivalent measures which would work on narrowboats... 😞

By that I assume you mean the views of boaters who think that CMers are bending/breaking the rules for their own benefit, regardless of the detrimental effect on others, and want to carry on paying as little as possible instead of a surcharge, and that the NBTA represents their views not the majority of boaters, and that they don't like this behaviour? That's not hate or prejudice, it's facing up to the facts and logically resenting yet another selfish minority screwing things up for the majority 😞

No it wasn't. You repeatedly put forward views which appear to try and divert blame away from CMers and deny that they're a problem (or only in Lunnon) and attack those who say this is not true, and also attack posters who agree with CART that they should pay a license fee supplement -- or even a bigger one than the relatively small 25% (after 5 years) that CART have proposed. These are exactly the views of the NBTA, and in any debate it's only fair that people disclose if they have any skin in the game, especially if they're appearing to put forward impartial views as "a concerned boater" (or whatever). Then at least anyone reading what they post can make an informed decision on whether to take what they say seriously or not... 😉 It's like MPs voting against the tobacco ban bill without disclosing that they have received major benefits from the tobacco industry... 😞

I doubt it -- depending how far outside the silly season you mean, of course, because CMers tend to be there all the year round. Towards the end of last October popular spots were still rammed with boats who didn't look like they were only there for a day or two, in a way that they weren't (say) ten years ago before the rise of the CMers. P.S. Disclosure of interest -- are you a member/supporter of the NBTA? You may have said before, if so saying it again shouldn't be difficult -- unless you don't want to admit it on CWDF... 🙂

But according to a certain poster you and I (and others) can't possibly be right about this, it's only a problem in that there Lunnon... 😉 (and anyway CMers and the NBTA are not to blame for any of this...)

Thank you for telling me that I was just imagining there being few or no mooring spaces in the "honeypot" spots I've visited in the past few years (none in London!), I'm obviously incapable of seeing them -- must look harder in future... 😉 P.S. Disclosure of interest -- are you a member/supporter of the NBTA? You may have said before, if so saying it again shouldn't be difficult 🙂

Like Farridge in Belgium -- I'm sure he *wanted* to be banned, because he got *far* more publicity that way...

Definitely a London thing, but by no means only a London thing -- which is exactly what I said, so please don't try and twist my words 🙂 But not your own, then? Sounds to me like a case of "I don't believe things which disagree with my opinions" -- you seem to be trying pretty hard to defend CMers, and attack those who dislike the negative effects they're having on the canal system. For the sake of disclosure of vested interests, are you by any chance an NBTA member/supporter? 😉

No -- it *is* a London thing, but not *only* a London thing -- from my observations (and those of other people) it happens all over the system in "honeypot" locations.

Which is...? By seeing them regularly on the towpaths and moorings round here, obviously... 😉 And the fact that whenever I'm out on the system boating, lots of visitor moorings nowadays seem to be chock-full of boats-- often with no sign of life -- in a way that they weren't before the rise in CMers over the last few years. This could be either coincidence or for some other exotic reason, but Ockham's Razor suggests otherwise... 😉

So you can't use the alternator side for normal entry/exit, so it doesn't need steps... 😉

True, side doors without a top hatch (like mine) are really intended for light/ventilation and as an emergency exit which will hopefully never be used -- ones with a top hatch are more likely to be used for non-emergency entry/exit which means steps are needed.

The boats lots of people complain about who sit on short-term moorings (or the same place on the towpath) for weeks/months or even years, and only shuffle round a tiny area if they move at all. Maybe they're NBTA members/supporters or not, but if not their aims seem rather similar, which is to bend or break the CC rules as far as possible. "Parasitic" seems the right term to me -- do you have a better one? To see this you need to observe one area repeatedly over a longish period of time, which obviously I didn't do on a one-way trip of a few days -- though I had suspicions about boats on visitor moorings in several places with no signs of life, this isn't proof. However many posters on here have mentioned such unmoving boats, again based on repeated sightings over a considerable time. But I do see this all the time (over repeated sightings) on the canals here in West London, and there are *plenty* of them... 😉

It will discourage CMers by making their cheap rule-bending parasitic lifestyle more expensive, so either some will change lifestyle as a result (get a home mooring/leave the canals) or fewer new people will be encouraged to become CMers to get a cheap home on the water which moves barely or not at all -- result, fewer CMers bending the rules and clogging up the canal system, and more money for CART (because the numbers who leave will be smaller than the money raised by the surcharge or switchers to HM). It won't discourage CMers (who pay the extra surcharge) from staying in the same spot, that's an enforcement problem which is quite separate from funding. But it does get more money for CART to try and close the funding gap. It solves the problem of "real CCers" who do a lot of miles paying more, so they're all in favour of it. But this goes against one of CART's stated reasons for the CC surcharge which is that 20% of boaters (CCers) are responsible for 75% of boat movements, which adds to wear on the infrastructure.