License Fee Consultation

[canalboat]

Apparently CRT are going to let us all have a say in their consultation for licence fees.  There doesn't seem to be anything current about it on their website for us to join in on at present.  I did however find one proposal from IWA that they offer as making the licensing system more simple:-

"Fees for licences could be significantly increased (to an amount that would be similar to paying for both a licence and a mooring at present). A substantial discount (back down to current licence fee levels) would then be available to boaters who pay mooring fees to CRT or third parties or who are genuinely continuously cruising". 

Would it not be simpler to merely create an expensive category of licence for those without a home mooring and who stay in one area (however many miles that is) for more than Xdays?

[KevMc]

That doesn't simplify anything ... it introduces a whole range of complexity. An admin nightmare even before you consider the battles to decide if you are "genuinely continuously cruising"

[peterboat]

Or just leave it as it is? without wasting millions that could have been better spent on repairs

[Dharl]

12 minutes ago, peterboat said:

Or just leave it as it is? without wasting millions that could have been better spent on repairs

that would be the better option! .....

 

As Devils Advocate though how about as well as charging by the length that the width is also taken into consideration...... ?

 

[MtB]

If they charged for width as well as length they could raise millions MORE to spend on repairs!

[NigelMoore]

The difference between river registrations and the all waterways licence again brings up interesting anomolies over the charging regime. Under the 1983 Act, while charges for a certificate was pegged at a maximum percentage of the licence, any increases proposed for the certificates had additionally to be subjected to scrutiny by the IWAAC.

Despite certain objectors, under the umbrella of the Public Bodies Bill the IWAAC were abolished. So - does that mean [because the rises can no longer be approved by the IWAAC] that no increases in charges for certificates can any longer be made, regardless of how high the licences are hiked?

It is a nice point, though I am aware of course of argument to the opposite effect.

[Ray T]

"Fees for licences could be significantly increased (to an amount that would be similar to paying for both a licence and a mooring at present). A substantial discount (back down to current licence fee levels) would then be available to boaters who pay mooring fees to CRT or third parties or who are genuinely continuously cruising". 

 

So does one assume "third parties" includes private marinas?

Edited August 8, 2017 by Ray T

[matty40s]

Does thus mean CC-ERS who dont get the discount get the right to secure parking, secure gated towpaths and a guaranteed mooring at a variety of visitor moorings of their choice for 52 weeks of the year??????

NO??

Oh, it's just the IWA bright and selfish ideas group ..have they turned away from their first target of widebeams??

[peterboat]

11 minutes ago, matty40s said:

Does thus mean CC-ERS who dont get the discount get the right to secure parking, secure gated towpaths and a guaranteed mooring at a variety of visitor moorings of their choice for 52 weeks of the year??????

NO??

Oh, it's just the IWA bright and selfish ideas group ..have they turned away from their first target of widebeams??

More than likely they have lost lots of members due to their ill though out ideas, people like me who complained they wernt representing me, and when they tried to wash over the lack of consultation they sort of said it was for the best!! The lieing barstewards who mostly have yogurt pots so hope for large reductions

1 hour ago, Mike the Boilerman said:

If they charged for width as well as length they could raise millions MORE to spend on repairs!

And then give them a two thirds reduction because they can only cruise one third of the waterways perfik

[Wanderer Vagabond]

31 minutes ago, matty40s said:

Does thus mean CC-ERS who dont get the discount get the right to secure parking, secure gated towpaths and a guaranteed mooring at a variety of visitor moorings of their choice for 52 weeks of the year??????

NO??

Oh, it's just the IWA bright and selfish ideas group ..have they turned away from their first target of widebeams??

If you read the IWA proposals you will be unsurprised that they haven't turned away from their first target of widebeams since they propose a length times width method of calculating the cost of the licence.

As KevMc says above it is just an administrative nightmare that they are proposing, they want the CC's to prove that they are covering more than 300 miles per year by being fitted with trackers (as though there aren't any means of fiddling the results!). I more than comply with this already (average 1000+ miles a year) but I have no intention of having someone track my every move, if I wanted that I'd join Facebook.

[matty40s]

So if say moored in Limehouse basin would my licence be about £14k with how much rebate??...would this be acceptable to someone from the IWA ??#notthoughtthisthrough

[Jim Riley]

Include a moorng fee in the licence and you can then moor wherever, whenever you want?

[Nightwatch]

Leave it as it is.

if we start differing the price for wide beams hen they would want less as a fat boat can't cover the whole system. Having said that, Nightwatch is only 6'8" beam. I'd save loads.

[cuthound]

Perhaps they should charge by draught? After all it is the deep draughted old ex-working boats that require the expensive dredging, not clone boats... 

[Detling]

On 8/8/2017 at 15:16, matty40s said:

Does thus mean CC-ERS who dont get the discount get the right to secure parking, secure gated towpaths and a guaranteed mooring at a variety of visitor moorings of their choice for 52 weeks of the year??????

NO??

Oh, it's just the IWA bright and selfish ideas group ..have they turned away from their first target of widebeams??

Where does it say this is an IWA idea, it is just someone's idea so why do you blame all odd ideas on the IWA. Please aim you anger at the correct target.

 

[matty40s]

24 minutes ago, Detling said:

Where does it say this is an IWA idea, it is just someone's idea so why do you blame all odd ideas on the IWA. Please aim you anger at the correct target.

 

Read the OP

[Ratkatcher]

An interesting concept, should they push through this odd idea might we find that a lot of the lower cost moorings (like ours, north of Birmingham) suddenly get snapped up by boats that never moor there?

CRT have not appeared to sell off 2 moorings in our block - no longer advertised but certainly never been occupied for the past few months.  Thinking about it, the long-term moorings south of Brewood appear to have no boats moored there and are not being advertised - perhaps it is already happening!

[b0atman]

Whaley bridge lots of empty long term moorings available as Ghost moorings .These should be cheap they are in a tree tunnel so solar no good plenty of sap and bird poo to be cleaned of boats daily .

 

[canalboat]

1 hour ago, Detling said:

Where does it say this is an IWA idea, it is just someone's idea so why do you blame all odd ideas on the IWA. Please aim you anger at the correct target.

 

Its published in their latest IWA magazine but I suppose that doesn't clarify whose idea it is.

[Detling]

7 hours ago, canalboat said:

Its published in their latest IWA magazine but I suppose that doesn't clarify whose idea it is.

Not having seen their magazine I thought they wanted 300 miles movement for a CC licence. Sorry for any offence.