Offical announcement! Back on land after 30 years or so.

Hi everyone. Most people who need to know this, but I am no longer a boat dweller.

Sold my boat on back in Novemember and for better or worse I am glad to have moved on. 

It would be easy to write a proper 'bitter and twisted' piece about it all, mostly about the puinishing rent increasees CRT are imposing on London Moorers. About all the lets call it what it is, crap, I and others have suffered at the hands of CRT...

Anyhow I'm glad that the mooring has passed on to other established boaters and hopefully my contributions to the debate about how poorly CRT has performed still hold.

But apart from CRT I see a scary future for inland boating so my love and respect to all those continuing to campaign to defend it all.

Quiet before the storm 2017

Still here but not had a lot to say. Given the failure to communicate, anyone would think I was undertaking a licence consultation!

Like many I await the next stage of CRT's boat licence consultation exercise with a mixture of suspicion and resignation. It seems not even CRT's Navigation Advisory Committee are sure what is coming! (See answer to q3 in this FOI request). As indicated in the last post no-one seems quite sure what is wrong or why CRT are doing this exercise. NBTA has written an excoriating critique of the process so far which makes for good sport! And no-one really believes that CRT are going to spend all that time and effort for a "revenue neutral" review when they are struggling for funds.

True to form CRT have also imposed a major change to licence structure, while the consultation is going on; They have introduced a new licence for private renting boats with a particularly tight restriction on having a residential mooring, all apparently with no consultation. Again true to form they have had a reasonable idea and then executed it with all the subtlety of a Donald Trump tweet!

Canal and River Trust continue running pixx-up in brewery.

Same old shxte down the mooring; repairs by the complaints process.

How may complaints does it take for CRT to acknowledge that their contractors are defrauding them? And yes I don't mind using the word fraud when CRT have admitted in writing to me that that their contractors have been making claims for payment for work that never happened.

So thanks to my persistence in insisting that I am not mad, mistaken or paranoid and that in fact the contractors have not done the work they are supposed to for many months, finally CRT checked their own records properly. It took several attempt to get CRT to check thoroughly (and as is too often the case, its seems I am more familiar with their administrative procedures than recently joined staff are!)

Hence after many months we've proved to CRT that the pest control works they have been paying contractors to do all year have not been happening. The fact that they have been pulled up twice in the past by the Ombudsman for letting the service lapse adds to the injury. But I should not be surprised that CRT have forgotten.

I suspect they will find something similar if they decide to look back at the grounds maintenance contract as a whole. It 's amazing how the contractor suddenly turned up and did the work only after we complained!

CRT did get the main entrance gate repainted this summer - only three year late, which is quite good by their standards.

Phoney Peace?

Haven't been here for a while partly because of a bereavement of a very close friend and therefore having more important things to do.

The towpath tom toms I hear are a little distant and that's what I deteremined should happen a few years ago because one gets fed up with dealing with CRT directly. In any event during the summer months people are out boating and CRT managers are taking holidays. For many years I have observed that there is an annual cycle in CRT and BW politics and I predict various things will kick off again in the Autumn.

I do say phony peace because as far as I know bubbling under are various Court cases. Non-one is reporting very much  but I understand there are some hearings coming up in the autumn, in particular Leigh Raenscroft's case which from what I have seen of the papers has potential to be very significant. The particulars of claim I have seen suggest that the case is potentially going to put many aspects of the s8 process to the test if the Court allows that.

s8 course is of course the legislation which CRT rely on to require owners to remove their boats from CRT waters or face seizure and it seems Leigh's case if heard in detail is going to go to the heart of when and the extent that can be applied.

Let's just say for me at least it has echoes of what happened with Nigel Moore.

So hope everyone is enjoying the Summer and back here with more substance before long!

Rumours of common sense being applied to Canal and River Trust mooring policy may have been premature

I was clearly being far too optimistic when I suggested an outbreak of common sense at CRT when it came to visitor moorings policy. As usual, although the intentions were doubtless genuine, the execution was....

CRT attempted another consultation on restricting visitor mooring times in the South East region earlier this year, but a few days after they started, they admitted that they had provided incorrect data for one of the sites so they withdrew that part of the consultation. In their own words:

"...the current mooring stay time information for Batchworth provided in the visitor mooring report to the sub group in November, and subsequently transferred into the consultation was incorrect. This error was highlighted to me today, so I have taken action to withdrawal the Batchworth proposal from the consultation information on the web page replacing it with a correction and apology..."

After that false start Mark Tizzard of NABO pointed out a slightly more serious flaw in the methodology when it came to the data used to justify the consultation as a whole:

It would appear that the volunteers who did the boat logging were not asked to record whether there was any available mooring space so it is not clear whether over the suggested period there was a consistent shortage of available mooring space or not.

So basically the consultation was not based on any evidence of the lack of availability of space, because CRT did not get its  foot soldiers to check for that

(I suppose trying to introduce restrictions with the wrong evidence is a step forward from trying to do it with no evidence whatsoever?)

CRT Trustee nails some old myths

In his recent speech at the London Waterways Museum, CRT Trustee John Dodwell, among other things has acknowledged some things I and and others have been complaining about for some time. In the notes from his presentation John says:

"Just a word about overstayers. If you see a boat staying too long at a visitor mooring, don’t assume it is a continuous cruiser who’s not moved on. It could be someone with a home mooring who’s left it there for too long whilst the owner has gone home."

For me this suggests a move forward in CRT thinking and perhaps a move away from the old mantra that Continuous Cruisers are the root of all evil , a view falsely promulgated by the previous regime.

Does it mean that all is well yet - of course not.

An outbreak of common sense in CRT?

Saying something positive about CRT? Well yes. It seems that what many have said about the futility of tinkering with visitor mooring durations, so beloved of Sally Ash and some others, if not to stop, will at least now only be attempted on a rational basis. Last week CRT announced its Short Term Mooring Framework.

The policy sets out detailed rational criteria that must be considered before imposing changes on visitor mooring durations. It acknowledges a clear distinction between formal visitor moorings and casual mooring and sets some basic standards of maintenance for visitor moorings. The only notable absence is anything about dredging and depth of water. Most importantly it sets out a national framework. It seems that someone has realised the futility of different things going on in different regions, confusing boaters and frontline staff alike!

The policy also included what is supposed to be a comprehensive consultation framework and makes piloting future changes all but mandatory.

The ghost of Sally Ash returns to haunt CRT

Following reports that CRT's General Towpath Mooring Permit may have been 'illegal', we are receiving reports that a number of PPI claims firms are looking at this new line of business. Consequently some boaters should expect to receive the following communication shortly:

"This is an important message. Have you been mis-sold a mooring permit? Your mooring authority has set aside thousands of pounds. We at Grasping and Shyster have many years experience helping consumers..."

These permits were of course promoted by Sally Ash and my old friend Dr Milkem Drie. The permits were of course thinly disguised and rebranded Roving Mooring Permits and as I said at the time, Buyer Beware! Reports that Dr Drie has an interest in Grasping and Shyster have been denied.

Sally Ash has of course since been awarded an MBE for her services to the waterways as part of a tradition that those familar with the banking sector will be aware of. Oops!

Engineers Wharf.... again!

Yeah I am going to bang on about this again. As of today there are still six vacant berths up for auction, again at £4704 reserves. I've said the things about how CRT claiming to charge Market Rents is self evidently a farce, how CRT are more worried about losing face than the huge void losses they are incurring. I've said it again and again: so a couple of different thoughts today.

How about offering the vacant berths here as Winter moorings? Three or four months rent in a year has to be better than none?

How about keeping a pontoon clear as a service point for the wider community? The Better Relationships Group and boaters in general have been pressing CRT for more facilities for cruising boats for months and years. Here is a ready made opportunity to improve access to facilities in West London?

Come on CRT; dare you to think out of the box?

All quiet?

Mid August is usually a lull in the storm of CRT issues and one the whole much the same with me. If this year is true to form around about the beginning of September a load of things will kick off again.

Me; had a short dialogue with Richard Parry about the disappointing experience as a long term mooring customer. Ironically a few days after that conversation, CRT contractors turned up as planned to change our Service bollards over. A few hours in, one of my neighbours knocked on the boat to alert me to the fact that the new bollards did not have pairs of taps on them.

It seems CRT have unilaterally decided that having had a tap per berth for the last fifteen years or so we now have to go over to sharing. So much to being a valued customer!

Engineers Wharf conspiracy theory...

Maybe someone at CRT has taken my last post on this to heart? Vacancies at Engineers Wharf are  advertised for auction today with a reserve down to £4704? Though not as low a £4324 reserve in 2012... Still taking the pixx in my view...

Still fixing mooring prices?

I've highlighted for several years the moorings at Engineers Wharf in West London, and more importantly, given CRT's inability to keep the moorings fully let, the apparently inflated reserve prices that had been maintained, one suspects to help justify keeping prices up for other moorers locally.

It is more than three years since I first highlighted this, and for much longer than that, there have been persistent vacant berths (and lost income) at Engineers Wharf.  (Link to 83 no. closed vacancies/adverts and prices at Engineers Wharf since 2010! )

Well as of today there are no less than seven berths advertised as Buy It Now vacancies and the price for a 70' berth has been set at £5880 (up from £5292 as the reserve this time last year.)

Curious too that in the interim similar berths were the offered only three months ago with a reserve of £4998? So if you want, you can buy it now for £900 more than the reserve price when it was last auctioned - Any takers?!

What the heck is going on here!?

It seems that despite the good intentions set out  in the outcomes of the Moorings Sales Consultation, CRT are still in this case setting prices at pretty much at random. If anyone can make sense of these price variations, do let me know!

And of course it remains to be seen if the current vacancies will let. 

Boat teleport trials announced to address new Canal and River Trust cruising rules

In response to the latest boating rules from Canal and River Trust, Dr Milkem Drie in association with Professer Denzil Dexter will today start public trials of their new boat teleport system. Dr Drie says:

Our new teleport system is designed to assist boaters deal with the new rules from CRT. Not only does it means you can move your boat to another part of the country at short notice, thereby complying almost instantly with the new requirements for a minimum movement range during each licence period, but this complex system also provides infallible location data down to the nearest molecule. 

Accurate space time location data is an essential part of our design and is available at all times when the unit is active. This data can of course can be provided to CRT should the need arise.

Canal and River Trust extends policy of not trusting its boating customers

I have frequently said that CRT stands for Can't Really Trust'em. 

It seems the feeling is mutual. CRT don't trust the boaters either as reflected not only in the latest moves on Continuous Cruising but also in the parallel terms and conditions changes for boaters with home moorings.

According to CRT, from now on, whenever you move your boat, you have to gather enough evidence to prove to them that you are moving and show how far. If you fail to have such evidence available when challenged you could ultimately have your licence removed.

It's a sad state of affairs that CRT's relationship with it's boating customers has descended to the point where we are all suspect, where we all have to worry about proving that we are not liars, when we are almost routinely assumed guilty unless we prove otherwise every time we move our boats? No wonder that trust between boaters and CRT is all but dead.

Has anyone stood back long enough to think how completely mad this all is?

A case study in how to alienate your customers?

Many people's hopes (including mine) that changes in the Canal and River Trust would lead to better relationships with boaters have been dashed by recent events. Reflecting on CRT's recent attempts to take stronger action against Continuous Cruisers who don't move very far, NABO's open letter to CRT sums up the problems pretty well.

It is difficult to understate how big a failure this episode represents. I think I give no secrets away when I say that colleagues in NABO who have come to Council recently were genuinely determined to try to build bridges with CRT. The presence of new blood, in whom I have great confidence, was a major factor in my feeling able to stand down. Again it is no secret when I suggest that they feel they have been well and truly slapped in the face for their recent efforts.

As a former NABO national officer, the narrative in the open letter comes as no surprise: One sits down in one's own time with CRT/BW, tries to give them constructive advice and feedback on how to implement something difficult and sensitive, taking into account your experience and knowledge of boating and they then do something different, omitting key parts of what you thought you'd just agreed. Seems that the change from BW to CRT has not changed that?

Canal and River Trust's new Continuous Cruising Policy

So the battle lines are being (re-)drawn on the issue of Continuous Cruising. Only time will tell what the full impact of what CRT are proposing will be. But having reflected on these matters for a few days since my last post, things seem to be getting murkier not clearer.

I was struck by the latest from Victor Swift on NBW, suggesting that the NBTA have scored an own goal with the 'admission' that there are many living on boats who are indeed tied to a small area for work, health and/or family commitments. That is not news; As I said in a previous post, British Waterways largely created the present situation by waiving the bye-law limitations on living on boats many years ago.  

However despite the, some would say acerbic, criticism of NBTA from Victor, he then goes on to say something that is much more acute:

Mind you, as I have stated before, if those at CaRT pulled their fingers out and actually stated a distance that must be travelled to avoid having to pay for a permanent mooring, at least the continuous cruisers would know what the rules are.

At the moment, with those at CaRT unable to make a decision one way or t'other, no one knows.

That of course is the elephant in the room, still sat there watching us all! 

Mutton dressed up as lamb

Some of us vainly hoped that Sally Ash's departure might lead to CRT adopting some genuine blue skies thinking about their boating business.

One hope was that CRT might finally abandon the almost annual tinkering ritual when it comes to Boat Licence Terms and Conditions: but apparently not. This time it seems that they are not even bothering with the pretence of doing consultation but are just planning to impose the changes from April come what may (see NABO article, which also links on to a document from CRT on the changes). After due consideration, NABO have described the proposed changes as adopting "an unnecessarily aggressive tone".

Subsequently we also have an old favourite back in the fore with the latest CRT pronouncements on continuous cruising. The nub of this seems to be to formalise a policy of trying to force people to take long term moorings. I suppose at least they are now saying so openly!

Is Canal and River Trust a 'housing authority'?

It is to say the least ironic that many of those presently living on boats owe their 'right' to do so to the same person that many of them (with more than a little good cause) saw as their principle persecutor in recent times! The start of the 'trouble' was one of Sally Ash's first decisions when she was put in charge of boating, to remove the general Licence requirement not to use your boat as a dwelling. That in effect gave blanket permission to all licence holders to live on their boats; Unsurprisingly many have taken up the offer.

When we get into the nitty gritty of residential boating issues, the 'excuse' for in-action frequently wheeled out by BW (and which CRT seem to have adopted), is: 'We are not a housing authority'. The problem is that by waiving one of the byelaws twenty years ago Sally Ash made you so!

It seems to me that many of the subsequent disputes between BW and now CRT and boaters have flowed from that and from Sally's and others' attempts to get that cat back in the bag.

Book Barge row - missing the point?

It's interesting how the media furore around the 'book barge', Word on the Water, has developed. On social media and elsewhere there is much about the 'unfairness' of a higher bidder getting the long term mooring in Paddington. Make of that what you will but given the background to my recent petition to CRT, and the way the allocation of CRT moorings is decided generally, the outcome in this case should come as no big surprise.

Narrowboatworld, never a gentle critic of CRT, acknowledges in its article that the boat has a roving trading permit (clue in the name) and that the current occupation of a berth in Paddington was a temporary arrangement. So it seems inevitable to me that CRT would ask Word on the Water to move on if they didn't make the highest bid.

However more worryingly many of those complaining seem to me to have missed the bigger point. The idea of having a commercial mooring or two in the Paddington area was consulted on with local canal users through the Better Relationships Group (BRG) and CRT have as usual ignored what was said in the consultation process and gone another way.

Petition sent to Canal and River Trust trustees

Just to say thanks to those who have signed the petition so far; As I said to supporters through 38 degrees,  

I am planning to leave the petition open at least until CRT issues its response, so if you have friends or contacts who you think have not signed yet and who would still offer their support please encourage them to do so even though the formal consultation period is over. Any additional pressure we can keep on them to think again in advance of them deciding what to do next must be a good thing.

I have just sent the petition with 442 signatures to CRT with the covering letter reproduced below.

Given what they have said so far and given their general track record when it comes to acting on what boating customers say, I will not hold my breathe about them changing their minds. CRT knows best children.

PS. Spell check just offered the following option for the first time: Cabal and River Trust. I know Google is quite smart at discrening user preferences and learning stuff about you but....!