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.

Hello, after a long break

So I've just come back here after a long time away.

Not anything really new to say. In some ways CRT seem to be keeping their heads down a bit on the boating front. Or maybe they are just being more surreptitious! That and I'm not on the case in the way I used to be in the past, which is certainly making me happy.

As a "customer" its just more of the same. Poor responses to repairs and maintainance issues versus huge hikes in mooring fees.

Anyway, I am well in spite of them! Hoping you are too!

Happy New Year boaters

It may be a bit late but I'm going to suggest that CRT needs to make a New Years resolution: Be nicer to boaters. (Now stop laughing in the back!) Seriously, how are things going to be between boaters and CRT in 2018?

We wait with baited breathe CRT's decisions following the national Boat Licencing consultation. For me at least the whole exercise says a lot: CRT have spent tens of thousands of pounds fiddling around with talk about changing something which it appears to most of us wasn't broken in the first place. In so doing they have of course re-opened a can of worms that they have looked into so many times before. It seems either that they have forgotten from the last time that all that is in the can is worms, or maybe they are just opening it again on purpose?

If nothing else what we have seen from all the om-line comment on the consultation is pretty much any change CRT choose to make is going to make someone unhappy. Why oh why did they go there in the first case?

Of course the favourite theory is they want to have yet another go at increasing licence charges for continuous cruisers despite the fact that the usual suspects like NABO and NBTA keep pointing out that this would most likely be ultra vires.

So why do CRT persist in this repeated self flagellation exercise?

What to say?

I'm not writing here half as often as I used to. I made a very conscious decision to be less involved in the politics a while ago At the risk of sounding a bit bitter and twisted, one gets worn out by the battering of broken promises and obfuscation from CRT.

On the other hand CRT seem to be acting a bit more cautiously about making changes on the boating front during the last year or so. Don't take that the wrong way! It's not that they are doing better; they are just messing up less often. Not sure if that counts as progress or not? Cos the problem is still that even when they do get round to doing things, on whole it doesn't seem to be done any more effectively than it ever was.

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!

CRT's admits that its (latest!) Boat Licencing Consultation is based on hearsay

Many of us have said over the years that it is BW, and now CRT, policy to create problems where none exist.

I was therefore particularly struck by a Facebook thread from a boater with a long term mooring who was uncertain about the terms and conditions on which they could take their boat out cruising and was worried about getting ticketed by a patrol officer or even getting a restricted licence. Other postings in that thread quickly clarified things but it says a lot about how confused matters are getting when this sort of thing comes up, when a boating customer is so baffled by the bullshit that they are afraid to take their boat out.

I suppose someone in CRT thinks this is a good thing; Those bloody boaters, taking their boat out on the canal and sailing them up and down! Such a nuisance!

Anyway just to confuse thing a little more, as most people are aware, CRT are undertaking yet another licencing review and one has the feeling that this also fits into the 'lets look like we are doing something' modus operandi.

Lost in their own Bulshxxx

Just a short observation on the stupidity of CRT's PR and a sort of related follow on to some of what I said in the last post. I was just looking at one of their press releases reproduced on Facebook. It was clearly a full cut and paste from the original. What's funny about that?

The Press release was from Fran Read, who's CRT's National Press Officer. If you read the footers on the message you find the following: In particular I like the bit at the end (which I've highlighted in red) which suggest that CRT's National Press Officer is not necessarily trusted to speak on behalf of CRT!

Fran Read
National Press Officer

M 07796 610 427
Canal & River Trust, Toll House, Delamere Terrace, London, W2 6ND
Twitter: @CRTComms

This email and its attachments are intended solely for the use of the intended recipient. If you are not the intended recipient of this email and its attachments, you must take no action based upon them; please delete without copying or forwarding and inform the sender that you received them in error. Any views or opinions expressed are solely those of the author and do not necessarily represent those of The Canal & River Trust.

I'd also love to know what the Data Commissioner's Office would make of the preceding warnings to an unintended recipient: Do CRT regularly send stuff to the wrong recipients?

PS : How do you know if you are not the intended recipient if they have sent it to you in the first place?

This is better than made up!

CRT still means Can't Really Trust'em?

Happy 2017 everyone.

Not been here for some time and that sort of reflects my general plan over the last year or two to stand back from Waterways politics a bit. On the NABO front I am now proud to be no more than another paid-up member.

I guess if you read this, you already get it, but the fact is most waterways reps are volunteers, doing stuff in their own time and often at their own expense too. The truth is you get little thanks and often lots of hostility when you try to get involved, especially from the armchair trolls and the like. Eventually the 'why do I bother' voice wins out?

Well it's not just that. The forum trolls and the like generally get called out. A much more serious problem  is that in my experience CRT are too often no less incompetent, just as evasive, argumentative and down right difficult to deal with as the old BW, and I think for many of us that is what eventually wears you down.

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?)

So it was 'charitisation'?

Hello everyone. Still here but not had much to say recently. Not sure if it means CRT are drawing their horns in or if they are just getting better at keeping what they are up to a bit quieter?

One thing has caught my eye and it goes to the bigger picture stuff: A few years back I wrote a piece saying that the transfer of British Waterways to Canal and River Trust was akin to a privatisation as many of us remember that term being applied in the 1980's and 1990's. This article in the Guardian recently informs me that the correct word now is "charitisation".

(I'm pleased to note that the spell check here does not recognise charitisation as being a real word!)

Shock news - It's official: Boaters are Customers!

Last week CRT announced the latest customer survey for boat owners. The press release I saw was headed, 'Revamped Boat Owners' views survey has customer focus'. 

I have only just stopped laughing. One has to wonder what the PR people in CRT do all day to let this one slip through? You mean the previous boaters' surveys weren't customer focused?

Couldn't make it up!

(PS - apparently, strawberry jam contains strawberries - you have been warned!)

How CRT looks for volunteers

Happy New Year by the way.

It looked to me like CRT bolloxed up their Council elections before the voting even closed. It was only NBTA's vigilance that has prevented the complete disenfranchisement of several hundred boaters with restricted licences.

Simultaneously CRT were advertising for another set of volunteers - new Trustees.

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!

NABO, BW/CRT and legal stuff - some personal retrospective!

I don't look at Canalworld Forum that much cos frankly I find that there is a lot of junk verging on personal abuse in there which is not constructive. However NBW's article highlighting that the CRT vs Wingfield transcript is now in wider hands prompted me to look.

Sterling work from my old mucker Nigel Moore and others here and I believe more valuable insights now (and to follow no doubt) into what I previously wrote about as the double edged sword.

Out of all that there were some comments about NABO and its 'legal activities'. I wrote about this a while back and it is notable to me that the 2013 post is one of the most read  on ths blog. I have felt moved to write some more now, albeit largely about past matters, which is now up on CWF and which I reproduce here for your consideration.

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!