Interesting Tolls Discussion

[marshman]

What a gripping thread this is turning out to be!!! Lets all do an FOI request and we can all waste more tollpayers money!!

Somewhere in the back of my mind is the wish that some boats had moved away to more expensive pastures.....!!!

[kfurbank]

Marshman, we can all wish for lots of things, but lets keep it civil if we chose to take part in the discussion.!!!

[ZimbiIV]

You are applying for a toll/licence, there is no automatic right to that being granted, you have to agree to whatever the grantor asks for within reason or the toll/licence can be refused.

It has nothing to do with law, bylaw or ancient rites or anything like that, so long as you are not being asked to break any statute law or common law, they can insist on agreement to their terms.

I found this out when applying for a licence to sell from home via a franchise agreement.

paul

[Poppy]

7 minutes ago, addicted said:

I may be being obtuse here but each year we phone round to make sure we get the best deal.  I didn't know we were supposed to be insuring to comply with the  terms of an Act. What would constitute  not meeting the requirements?

 

 

Carole

"A policy required under section 14(2)or section 27(6)(a)
shall be issued by an insurer authorised under the Financial Services and Markets Act 2000 (c.8)
to carry on in Great Britain or in Northern Ireland insurance business of a
relevant class or who has corresponding permission under the law of another
member state of the European Community."

http://www.broads-authority.gov.uk/__data/assets/pdf_file/0006/468015/BA-Act-Compulsory-Third-Party-Insurance-nc030909.pdf

So ask your prospective (or current) insurer, or google their name.

[MauriceMynah]

Sorry, in my attempt to illustrate, I have clouded that which I had intended to make clear.

If a person without a computer, wishes to re-toll their boat via the post or telephone, how would they

1. know the details of the requirement?, and

2. find that information.?

Just wondered.

[kfurbank]

9 minutes ago, ZimbiIV said:

You are applying for a toll/licence, there is no automatic right to that being granted, you have to agree to whatever the grantor asks for within reason or the toll/licence can be refused.

It has nothing to do with law, bylaw or ancient rites or anything like that, so long as you are not being asked to break any statute law or common law, they can insist on agreement to their terms.

I found this out when applying for a licence to sell from home via a franchise agreement.

paul

Paul,

The BA do not issue a license, they collect a toll which is a charge levied by The Authority under Section 26 of the Harbours Act 1964. Interestingly enough, that charge has to be "fair". Providing the construction of the vessel meets the requirements for the waterways they cannot restrict or refuse access to a particular vessel. These are public waterways and a right to navigate exists. They do have the power to collect Tolls / charges. I am not refusing to pay such tolls or charges. They do NOT have the power under any act to make the collection of those tolls dependant upon ANY conditions other than those specified by the relevant acts of parliament.

[JennyMorgan]

1 hour ago, ChrisB said:

Then if you feel so strongly about this issue I would run it past a solicitor in the first instance. But do not be surprised if he then seeks advice from a Barrister. 

Having been down that route on a matter in 2015 it does not come cheap.

I would be surprised if the BA's legal team have not looked at all aspects of Tolls and insurance requirements.

 

The BA's team was Norfolk County Councill's in-house legal department and for many things they do and did their job well but when it comes to things relating to the Broads I'm not entirely sure that it always came within their field of experience or expertise, just my opinion. The Act was worded pretty loosely, intentionally I suspect, in order to allow for 'interpretation to suit'.  Actually I'm quite certain it was and that snippet doesn't come from an imaginary friend either. Anyway, in the case of Keith's grouse I side with Paladin's interpretation of the Broads Act in this case & suggest that Keith coughs up and goes out on the water and makes the best of his possibly last summer on the Broads! With Paladin's field of expertise I am glad that he has put recent events behind him and offered us his sound advice.

[ChrisB]

38 minutes ago, Poppy said:

As I see it, there appears to be one (at least) company selling insurance to Broads boat owners which does not   meet the requirements under the 2009 act, and the BA are not prepared to tackle this, although it has been raised with them as an issue.

Again I don't really see the problem, it is not for the BA to act, it is the responsibility of the owner. You are required to have 3rd party insurance to a figure of I think £2m. Most insurance is more than that 3rd party figure because if your vessel is the cause of a fire in a marina or if someone is badly injured £2m is not huge these days. So when insuring you boat you decide :

A. Do I pay comprehensive or 3rd party. B. Is my 3rd party liability a minimum of £2m.

If it is not below £2m you can make the declaration.

[kfurbank]

1 minute ago, MauriceMynah said:

Sorry, in my attempt to illustrate, I have clouded that which I had intended to make clear.

If a person without a computer, wishes to re-toll their boat via the post or telephone, how would they

1. know the details of the requirement?, and

2. find that information.?

Just wondered.

They wouldn't, and therein lies the issue. The BA should ask to see your insurance and check it meets their requirements, or ask who you are insured with and have a list of companies that they know meet the requirements.

I know parallels are drawn, but it's actually very hard, in fact probably impossible to find car insurance from a UK based insurance company that doesn't meet the requirements of UK car insurance. I certainly wouldn't look for a Spanish company who are not regulated in the UK to insure my car. 

[Poppy]

5 minutes ago, MauriceMynah said:

Sorry, in my attempt to illustrate, I have clouded that which I had intended to make clear.

If a person without a computer, wishes to re-toll their boat via the post or telephone, how would they

1. know the details of the requirement?, and

2. find that information.?

Just wondered.

As I said in my previous response " So ask your prospective (or current) insurer, or google their name. " Clearly with no computer one must resort to the latter .

[kfurbank]

Just now, JennyMorgan said:

The BA's team was Norfolk County Councill's in-house legal department and for many things they do and did their job well but when it comes to things relating to the Broads I'm not entirely sure that it always came within their field of experience or expertise, just my opinion. The Act was worded pretty loosely, intentionally I suspect, in order to allow for 'interpretation to suit'.  Actually I'm quite certain it was and that snippet doesn't come from an imaginary friend either. Anyway, in the case of Keith's grouse I side with Paladin's interpretation of the Broads Act in this case & suggest that Keith coughs up and goes out on the water and makes the best of his possibly last summer on the Broads! With Paladin's field of expertise I am glad that he has put recent events behind him and offered us his sound advice.

Peter, As I posted earlier in reply to Palandin,

Paladin, Isn't the toll receipt the sticky toll plaque that they no longer issue? I'm not applying for a toll receipt just trying to pay a toll. Think byelaw 20 is somewhat out of date now!!!

Taken from Interpretation, "Toll Receipt" means the document, disc, badge or mark issued to the owner of the vessel by the Authority to indicate that the appropriate toll has been paid for that vessel for the period covered by the toll receipt.

[Poppy]

3 minutes ago, JennyMorgan said:

The BA's team was Norfolk County Councill's in-house legal department and for many things they do and did their job well but when it comes to things relating to the Broads I'm not entirely sure that it always came within their field of experience or expertise, just my opinion. The Act was worded pretty loosely, intentionally I suspect, in order to allow for 'interpretation to suit'.  Actually I'm quite certain it was and that snippet doesn't come from an imaginary friend either. Anyway, in the case of Keith's grouse I side with Paladin's interpretation of the Broads Act in this case & suggest that Keith coughs up and goes out on the water and makes the best of his possibly last summer on the Broads! With Paladin's field of expertise I am glad that he has put recent events behind him and offered us his sound advice.

Indeed it was JM, apart from the situation regarding compulsory third party insurance. That's clear enough for any legal department to sort out .

They know that one insurer (at least) does not comply but appear to be unwilling to grasp that particular nettle!

[kfurbank]

2 minutes ago, ChrisB said:

Again I don't really see the problem, it is not for the BA to act, it is the responsibility of the owner. You are required to have 3rd party insurance to a figure of I think £2m. Most insurance is more than that 3rd party figure because if your vessel is the cause of a fire in a marina or if someone is badly injured £2m is not huge these days. So when insuring you boat you decide :

A. Do I pay comprehensive or 3rd party. B. Is my 3rd party liability a minimum of £2m.

If it is not below £2m you can make the declaration.

Unless your insured with a company based offshore that doesn't meet the following,

"A policy required under section 14(2)or section 27(6)(a)
shall be issued by an insurer authorised under the Financial Services and Markets Act 2000 (c.8)
to carry on in Great Britain or in Northern Ireland insurance business of a
relevant class or who has corresponding permission under the law of another
member state of the European Community."

Indeed even worse if they appear on a list of companies that the Financial Conduct Authority specifically list as being not authorised in the UK, and also appear on a similar list in Spain on their equivalent of the UK's FCA.

The BA are fully aware of this and are happy for you to self certify your way into trouble.

I fully understand they have taken a path of least resistance and least cost to the toll payer, but it is one they are not authorised to take. They should increase spot checks on the river on insurance, and or ask who you are insured with. Even revise the tolls system so that you have to attach a scanned copy of your insurance and THEY check that it meets the requirements.

In any case, collection of the tolls is not dependant on you having insurance, or a BSS. Powers to enforce these are covered in separate parts of the Broads Acts.

[JennyMorgan]

Keith, if I understand correctly a conversation I had with an affable bod in the tolls office recently the BA is not entitled to demand copies of insurance papers as part of the tolls transaction, they can only ask that you confirm that you have insurance in place, either a tick or a 'yes'. I actually think that they are playing this one by the book.

[kfurbank]

Peter, The Act actually says,

(1)On a request made by an authorised officer who produces, if requested, written evidence of his authority—

(d)the owner or master of any vessel in the navigation area or on adjacent waters shall give the authorised officer such information or document as is available to him regarding any policy of insurance in force in relation to the vessel;

The above is generally in response to a request for information as to vessels. The collection of tolls is not dependant in any way on you showing or self certifying your insurance.

You know the interesting thing, if a BA officer stopped you and asked to see your insurance, they are not legal eagles, and also wouldn't know whether your insurance met the requirements of the Act.

On this, or another forum a BA employee has said that in that case they would refer it back to Yare House. I'm not knocking them for this approach, but if they don't know, why should you self certify?

The tolls office are just doing what they have been told to do. It doesn't mean it is correct/.

 

[rightsaidfred]

Surely whatever the type of Insurance it is the responsibility of the insuree to satisfy themselves of the competency of the company they are using not the BA, their requirement is a minimum amount and class of cover.

Fred

[vanessan]

Last year whilst moored up somewhere (I can't remember where but it was at BA 24 hour moorings), a chap was going from boat to boat handing out plastic business cards for Edward William Marine Insurance. Now I know this company is based in Spain and I assume is the one mentioned earlier in this thread. If they are actually touting for business like this they are quite likely to pick up customers along the way, possibly customers who rightly or wrongly would believe their insurance was acceptable to the BA.

Very often it is only being a member of a forum that things that appeared black or white suddenly become 50 shades of grey!! (And vice versa too of course.)

• Mods, if I have written anything untoward here please edit. And I don't mean the 50 shades of grey bit! 

[kfurbank]

Popping the following link into Google Chrome with translate turned on makes interesting reading.

http://www.dgsfp.mineco.es/sector/entidadesnoautorizadas.asp

If someone was insured with one of those companies and made a declaration to The BA could be interesting. At least two members on here have communicated personally with The BA on this matter. They are aware make no mistake. 

[marshman]

Caveat Emptor - you buy any insurance at your risk. Where is the pressure to buy from them especially when most people are aware. Do the BA have wet nurse everyone?

If I employ a dodgy mechanic, whose fault is it? Ok I have a motor boat, my motor boat has to have an engine, but it is not the responsibility of the BA to check he is competent. Similarly gas engineers who install gas or indeed the BSC engineers. Do we we really need the BA to check the certificates are issued by genuine engineers?

NO!! Thats your responsibility!!

[marshman]

OOOps - BSS!!   Whats Cantley got to do with it??

[kfurbank]

I believe in relation to the Police, it is called a honey trap!!! The BA are aware that people use companies on that list. They are insisting people make a self declaration even though there is nothing in the Acts that actually gives them the power to.

The over reliance on self certification is one of the reasons they are very slack on physical spot checks on insurance. Very poor considering even if you have insurance at the time you renew your toll, it could expire very shortly afterwards. People tend to insure on the anniversary of the boat purchase, rather than the toll.

If The BA asked you to hop on one foot before they would issue you with a toll, you would rightly tell them where to go. They don't have the power under The Broads Acts, similarly with self certification.

[Polly]

Keith, I am betting you have all the right insurances, just not giving BA the satisfaction... I'd say you picked a battle that has no winners here. I am however, really, really pleased you are staying. 

[dnks34]

I eventually decided to pay my toll using the online system.  I did toy with the idea of only making a part payment but in reality my doing that wouldnt have achieved anything.  I didnt bat an eyelid at the insurance declaration, im insured so I just ticked the box,  I can understand if its something kfurbank feels strongly about but personally i think we will all have bigger worries on the horizon when we find out what the next Toll Increase will be.....  I think our energies would be better put into getting on top of whats going on with that. Pick your battles as they say. 

[Paladin]

kfurbank, I know just where you're coming from. For those who don't take a look here and scroll down to the 10th entry (the one with Unauthorised written in red) and hover your cursor over the exclamation mark. Anyone insuring with this company and making a declaration to the BA that they have the requisite insurance is, I believe, making a false declaration.

However, I still think you're on a hiding to nothing. While toll receipts are no longer issued, I think you're approaching this from the wrong direction. The self-declaration, and ability of the BA to refuse to accept payment, are covered in section 11 of the Broads Act 2009, IMO. We can argue till the cows come home whether the non-issue of a toll receipt is relevant or not, but section 11(8) also gives the BA the power to cancel a registration if any of the conditions are not met (which would include evidence of insurance or a self-declaration).

[kfurbank]

59 minutes ago, Paladin said:

kfurbank, I know just where you're coming from. For those who don't take a look here and scroll down to the 10th entry (the one with Unauthorised written in red) and hover your cursor over the exclamation mark. Anyone insuring with this company and making a declaration to the BA that they have the requisite insurance is, I believe, making a false declaration.

However, I still think you're on a hiding to nothing. While toll receipts are no longer issued, I think you're approaching this from the wrong direction. The self-declaration, and ability of the BA to refuse to accept payment, are covered in section 11 of the Broads Act 2009, IMO. We can argue till the cows come home whether the non-issue of a toll receipt is relevant or not, but section 11(8) also gives the BA the power to cancel a registration if any of the conditions are not met (which would include evidence of insurance or a self-declaration).

We will have to beg to differ, however I am not registering the vessel, or offering to pay the fee to do so. It is already registered. I am offering to pay the harbour fees / charges / toll, whichever you prefer. I believe you only register a vessel upon construction and first use on the navigation or transfer of owner? Tolls are demanded annually.

If The BA wish to cancel the registration of the vessel it would need to be on the grounds that the vessel were not insured, not on the grounds that I refuse to be held to ransom to pay the toll.

The BA are more than welcome to write to me and ask to see my insurance. They are more than welcome to stop me on the water and ask to see my insurance. They will not be getting a self declaration of insurance from me in any form prior to me paying the toll.