Jump to content

Email from cart


bigcol

Featured Posts

6 minutes ago, matty40s said:

People living in areas outside of the English canal system(foreigners )will pay a special licence fee approximately double of the normal licence fee.

This is due to the low value of the pound at present. Scotland will be included in this as it is evident from the Sturgeon that the Scottish want to leave the UK even though they didn't in the last referendum.

Just as well I gave them my mum's address in Warwickshire!

Link to comment
Share on other sites

9 minutes ago, matty40s said:

People living in areas outside of the English canal system(foreigners )will pay a special licence fee approximately double of the normal licence fee.

This is due to the low value of the pound at present. Scotland will be included in this as it is evident from the Sturgeon that the Scottish want to leave the UK even though they didn't in the last referendum.

......and free if you have a bus pass.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Ain't this just the way of the world? Really can't be bothered getting worked up about it. I'll leave that to people with more energy to waste. I'll just continue on my 4mph journey of blissfull ignorance.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

4 minutes ago, Rumsky said:

Ain't this just the way of the world? Really can't be bothered getting worked up about it. I'll leave that to people with more energy to waste. I'll just continue on my 4mph journey of blissfull ignorance.

 

And That precisely is what their banking on!

Link to comment
Share on other sites

7 minutes ago, Rumsky said:

Ain't this just the way of the world? Really can't be bothered getting worked up about it. I'll leave that to people with more energy to waste. I'll just continue on my 4mph journey of blissfull ignorance.

Where do you get up to 4 MPH

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 minute ago, bigcol said:

 

And That precisely is what their banking on!

As has has been said its probably only an illusion of choice, as with many things relating to large organisations, so I'm happy to oblige and keep my blood pressure lower than my oil pressure.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I'm always astonished when peeps think that Consultation means outcomes are open to negotiation.

They're not always, more often it's a case of "This is what's going to happen, this is how and when, we're telling you this so you have the opportunity to get used to it and if you have a more sensible business alternative, we'll welcome it, otherwise it happens!"

Link to comment
Share on other sites

The email came this morning so I have filled in the survey. Not that I expect it will make much if any difference but at least I took the chance to air my views.

One particular gripe with the proposals was the introduction of the wide beam surcharge for any boat over the standard narrowbeam width. This doesn't seem fair to the many cruiser owners whose boats are say 7'4" wide yet would still be expected to pay the 25% or 50% surcharge.

Also the removal of the one day licence would encourage those day sailors who trailer their boats to either go elsewhere or just not pay for a licence. Why would they pay for 1 week when they only want 1 day? CRT say that the 1 day licence takes too much admin time, well if their system was better equipped to deal with these 1 day tickets online then it needn't take much admin work at all.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

For those looking at Col's link, the response that it has "Been filled in on this PC" is nothing more than a text message, it doesn't look at IP addresses or MAC addresses, it just knows that the link Col provided has already been filled out (possibly by someone other than Col if he hasn't done it) - the link ID was generated JUST for Colin.  A better choice of words would be "This survey link has already been completed".

 

Edited by Psycloud
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Received and filled out the survey last night. I found issues with the way some of the questions were worded. For instance

Q24 - one of the options was - Introduce – at a higher fee – a new licence that would permits boats without a home mooring to remain within a limited area (provided they satisfy the Trust concerning their bona fide navigation) 

In my mind this is just encouraging CM'ers which is one of the issues that C&RT are currently trying to discourage. Personally I currently pay C&RT for my licence and for my mooring. If they were to go down this route there is a high likelihood I would give up my mooring and move my boat around this 'limited area' as the chances are that even if they lift the license fee for this option it will still work out far cheaper than my licence and mooring combined. I can see C&RT actually losing money on their mooring sales if this is the case. 

  • Greenie 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

2 minutes ago, Sweeny Todd said:

Received and filled out the survey last night. I found issues with the way some of the questions were worded. For instance

Q24 - one of the options was - Introduce – at a higher fee – a new licence that would permits boats without a home mooring to remain within a limited area (provided they satisfy the Trust concerning their bona fide navigation) 

In my mind this is just encouraging CM'ers which is one of the issues that C&RT are currently trying to discourage. Personally I currently pay C&RT for my licence and for my mooring. If they were to go down this route there is a high likelihood I would give up my mooring and move my boat around this 'limited area' as the chances are that even if they lift the license fee for this option it will still work out far cheaper than my licence and mooring combined. I can see C&RT actually losing money on their mooring sales if this is the case. 

I think this is a case of best way to win a losing battle - they can't control all the CM's so might as well charge them extra.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 minute ago, Psycloud said:

I think this is a case of best way to win a losing battle - they can't control all the CM's so might as well charge them extra.

I agree, but I also think this will encourage more CM'ers. Why would someone choose to pay a few thousand pounds a year for a mooring when they can move in a limited area, use all the facilities within this area and still probably be better off than if they were paying for the mooring? In my case they would need to raise my licence by just under 400% to make this a more expensive option than having to pay for my mooring. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

13 minutes ago, Athy said:

Why, when we were formerly asked to fill forms in, are we now urged to fill them out?

It’s those pesky Yanks again...

It appears that this is a British/American distinction. The 

Corpus of Contemporary American English (COCA) reports 92 incidences of “fill out a/the/this form” and just 2 of “fill in a/the/this form”, clearly establishing “fill out” as the standard idiom in American English. I haven’t worked out how to search the British National Corpusyet, but I wouldn’t be surprised if the results were reversed there.

Edit:

OK, I got the BNC to respond to queries—although it sure takes its sweet time—and I got 19+7=26 results for “fill in a/the form”, and 5+1=6 for “fill out a/the form”. So it does appear that British English favors fill inover fill out, although not to the degree to which American English favors fill out over fill in.

From here:

https://english.stackexchange.com/questions/1514/fill-out-a-form-or-fill-in-a-form

Link to comment
Share on other sites

3 minutes ago, WotEver said:

It’s those pesky Yanks again...

 

 

Yes, but it does seem to be gaining currency over here. To me, "fill in" is more logical, as the form has gaps for information, and you write that information IN the gaps.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

On 12/10/2017 at 21:47, nicknorman said:

50% more for fat boats, full price for butties and historic boats, a 1000% surcharge for London boaters, 50% surcharge for live aboard CCers - does this mean my marina-moored leisure narrowboat will now be free? Goodie!

 

100% surcharge for shiny boats too would be good... 

 

On 12/10/2017 at 21:47, nicknorman said:

One of their reasons is that most people now pay in a timely manner so the discount is unnecessary. Hmmm, have they thought how things might progress if they remove said discount? They are a bit thick!

 

Two points strike me about the pre-payment discount.

Firstly it was introduced in the high inflation days decades ago when 10% was a reasonable reward for prompt payment. I've always been surprised it was not reduced down towards 2.5% as would be reasonably today. 

Secondly when I had a Thames licence and my boat in the marina, and my licence fell due for renewal in 1st Jan each year, I would wait until April to actually buy the licence as that is when I first emerged out onto the Thames. As Nick hints at, CRT will suffer major cashflow problems if they drop the pre-payment discount as there will be no point in buying a license until prompted so to do by being spotted by a CRT spotter. 

And thirdly given CRT don't require us to display a licence these days, there will be no pressure of any sort being brought to bear on the chancers who would never buy a licence if they thought they could get away with it. At the moment the marginal cases still buy a licence in advance to get the 10%. Once that is withdrawn, there is no financial penalty attached to waiting for CRT to force them to buy a licence, and possibly some considerable financial advantage.

Edited by Mike the Boilerman
Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 hour ago, Naughty Cal said:

The email came this morning so I have filled in the survey. Not that I expect it will make much if any difference but at least I took the chance to air my views.

One particular gripe with the proposals was the introduction of the wide beam surcharge for any boat over the standard narrowbeam width. This doesn't seem fair to the many cruiser owners whose boats are say 7'4" wide yet would still be expected to pay the 25% or 50% surcharge.

Also the removal of the one day licence would encourage those day sailors who trailer their boats to either go elsewhere or just not pay for a licence. Why would they pay for 1 week when they only want 1 day? CRT say that the 1 day licence takes too much admin time, well if their system was better equipped to deal with these 1 day tickets online then it needn't take much admin work at all.

There's an area option "Licence fees calculated by actual area (Length X Beam)" which I answered 'very fair'. I think that's how it works on the Thames and IMO it's not at all fair for said 7' 4" wide boat to pay same as a wider beamed boat. 

 

PS you can see the survey here
http://www.smartsurvey.co.uk/s/CRT-Licensing-Consultation-2017

 

Edited by Midnight
Link to comment
Share on other sites

im thinking on a £900 licence

loosing 10% early payment discount  £90

5% licence rise £45

+ 25% fat boat surcharge being a fat boat £245

its a lot of money, if it was well spent on the upkeep of the canals it be great

but I’m thinking it will be flitted away on third party increases

 

col

8 minutes ago, Midnight said:

There's an area option "Licence fees calculated by actual area (Length X Beam)" which I answered 'very fair'. I think that's how it works on the Thames and IMO it's not at all fair for said 7' 4" wide boat to pay same as a wider beamed boat. 

 

PS you can see the survey here
http://www.smartsurvey.co.uk/s/CRT-Licensing-Consultation-2017

 

Thankyou for the link, I’ve been able to save and will fill in later

Link to comment
Share on other sites

2 minutes ago, Midnight said:

There's an area option "Licence fees calculated by actual area (Length X Beam)" which I answered 'very fair'. I think that's how it works on the Thames and IMO it's not at all fair for said 7' 4" wide boat to pay same as a wider beamed boat.

Not saying you are right or wrong, just wondering at you reasons for it being fair or unfair. I used to have a narrow boat, now I have a historic barge which is wide. I don't use the C&RT facilities any more than I used to, my boat still uses the same length mooring to moor up. The only difference now is that there are many areas of the network as a whole that I am no longer able to travel. It was my personal choice to buy this boat and the trade off between less access to the network and keeping some of the history of the canals alive is worth it to me.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

6 minutes ago, Sweeny Todd said:

Not saying you are right or wrong, just wondering at you reasons for it being fair or unfair. I used to have a narrow boat, now I have a historic barge which is wide. I don't use the C&RT facilities any more than I used to, my boat still uses the same length mooring to moor up. The only difference now is that there are many areas of the network as a whole that I am no longer able to travel. It was my personal choice to buy this boat and the trade off between less access to the network and keeping some of the history of the canals alive is worth it to me.

Can a typical wide lock on the canal accommodate two historic barges at the same time? 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!

Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.

Sign In Now
  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    • No registered users viewing this page.
×
×
  • Create New...

Important Information

We have placed cookies on your device to help make this website better. You can adjust your cookie settings, otherwise we'll assume you're okay to continue.