I was not consulted and my boat is width constricted. As I displace more volume less water is displaced through locking so licences should be cheaper not more expensive! As a pensioner I am restricted to CPI pension increases. CRT should be equally restricted to CPI increases!
P
Phil Hood
8 years ago
Unfair system of charging
N
Neil Collins
8 years ago
The reduced amount of navigable areas and increased cost is a double blow. Also asking a large group if a minority should pay more (not them) is hardly a fair gauge and totally predictable!
M
Mo Jefferys
8 years ago
I agree that as wider boats have limited access on the rivers and canals it’s unfair to charge more
R
Rob Curry
8 years ago
Can anyone at CRT give any example of an extra expense caused by a wide beam as opposed to a narrow beam.
D
Dave Toved
8 years ago
It is CRT's go to option as has become clear, to get the most money from a captive audience. Yet ask them to consider balancing the injustices throughout the system fairly and they seem to have an endless list of excuses, to hide from actually confronting them.
A
Anonymous
8 years ago
Historically boats have always had their costs directly tied to their length which makes this new consultation seem like a blatant cash grab tactic.
The facilities used by a wider craft are the same regardless of width. In fact if anything as substantially less of the network can be accessed by wide craft their impact is further reduced.
A
Anonymous
8 years ago
I live on a wide beam 11' so incur the highest level of increase. It's not really fair as any boat wider than a narrow boat can't share locks or moor size by side. The new increase is senseless.
P
Paul Deugo
8 years ago
CRT unbelievable.... as pointed out we’re restricted & can’t use all the canal network + & what can is disgraceful.. l’m on the K&A & it’s a disgrace, they should be focusing on managing there funds more cost effectively & looking more at there poor organisation & management ...
D
Debra lane
8 years ago
I pay council tax and waterways licence! We already pay for the length and don't even move our house best. I certainly don't agree paying a penny more.
K
Kevin Millward
8 years ago
Consultation should be with widebeam owners as they are the ones affected, bottom line is a boat uses the canal beam is not the factor to base fees on
B
Brian Hart
8 years ago
We use no more of the facilities than a narrowboat and we have a restricted navigation range
T
Terence Sharrott
8 years ago
As a owner of a wide beam I feel are being charged unfairly. We already pay a lot more and yet we cannot access much of the canal system.
A
Alison
8 years ago
There is no justification for this sizeable rise in costs
A
Anonymous
8 years ago
Discrimination against the biggest licence payers, it seems
S
Sarah
8 years ago
Wide beams pay more for the privilege of not being able to access the majority of the canal system. Uh...?
S
Simon Robbins
8 years ago
Why did Canal and River Trust have to mess around with a long established concensus?
S
Stuart Jowett
8 years ago
Where did they get the sizes from? IF they are going to increase then surely it should be whole feet not inches that matter. (8ft-9ft-10ft and so on)
A
Allen Rainfotd
8 years ago
Should be done on length moored to the bank' if at all. 70 ft is 70 ft. etc etc
Fair rates for length not width
No reasioning
I was not consulted and my boat is width constricted. As I displace more volume less water is displaced through locking so licences should be cheaper not more expensive! As a pensioner I am restricted to CPI pension increases. CRT should be equally restricted to CPI increases!
Unfair system of charging
The reduced amount of navigable areas and increased cost is a double blow. Also asking a large group if a minority should pay more (not them) is hardly a fair gauge and totally predictable!
I agree that as wider boats have limited access on the rivers and canals it’s unfair to charge more
Can anyone at CRT give any example of an extra expense caused by a wide beam as opposed to a narrow beam.
It is CRT's go to option as has become clear, to get the most money from a captive audience. Yet ask them to consider balancing the injustices throughout the system fairly and they seem to have an endless list of excuses, to hide from actually confronting them.
Historically boats have always had their costs directly tied to their length which makes this new consultation seem like a blatant cash grab tactic. The facilities used by a wider craft are the same regardless of width. In fact if anything as substantially less of the network can be accessed by wide craft their impact is further reduced.
I live on a wide beam 11' so incur the highest level of increase. It's not really fair as any boat wider than a narrow boat can't share locks or moor size by side. The new increase is senseless.
CRT unbelievable.... as pointed out we’re restricted & can’t use all the canal network + & what can is disgraceful.. l’m on the K&A & it’s a disgrace, they should be focusing on managing there funds more cost effectively & looking more at there poor organisation & management ...
I pay council tax and waterways licence! We already pay for the length and don't even move our house best. I certainly don't agree paying a penny more.
Consultation should be with widebeam owners as they are the ones affected, bottom line is a boat uses the canal beam is not the factor to base fees on
We use no more of the facilities than a narrowboat and we have a restricted navigation range
As a owner of a wide beam I feel are being charged unfairly. We already pay a lot more and yet we cannot access much of the canal system.
There is no justification for this sizeable rise in costs
Discrimination against the biggest licence payers, it seems
Wide beams pay more for the privilege of not being able to access the majority of the canal system. Uh...?
Why did Canal and River Trust have to mess around with a long established concensus?
Where did they get the sizes from? IF they are going to increase then surely it should be whole feet not inches that matter. (8ft-9ft-10ft and so on)
Should be done on length moored to the bank' if at all. 70 ft is 70 ft. etc etc Fair rates for length not width