kfurbank

What is better? paying slightly more for all inclusive fuel or paying over inflated prices for the portion of the tank that you do use? Why does the largest yard on The Broads have some of the most expensive diesel prices? AND the biggest turnover of fuel? with perhaps the exception of Brooms, and even then I'm not convinced they sell more than Rickos. Let's be clear, this new setup isn't giving away free fuel, it is built into the price somewhere, but hopefully at cost price, rather than the inflated price other yards use. On the downside, lets just hope that some don't abuse the all inclusive fuel by going flat out everywhere. Then again, there's probably little evidence to suggest that paying for the fuel on return makes any difference.

The Broads Boating Company have just started hiring their first two boats. Price looks good AND it includes the waiver, a full tank of fuel and bridge pilot fees. The price you see, is the price you pay. They could either be in for a bumpy ride from the other operators who would do well to learn from them, or they could be very successful. I for one hope it's the latter. https://www.facebook.com/Thebroadsboatingco/?fref=ts

As parish moorings it would be down to the council, not the BA to take action over anyone over staying and possibly the drafting of some local byelaw prohibiting over staying. I suspect they have been leased to the BA at a preferential rate and this allows the BA as leaseholder to deal with any over stayers under the existing BA byelaws. If so a sensible solution.

The Q, whilst you are largely right, you are also in danger of creating a sense of paranoia for people who use public toilets, or changing rooms in stores. The law states that you must notify people if they are being recorded. https://www.gov.uk/data-protection-your-business/using-cctv

TheQ is mostly right in what he has said, BUT there is a legal requirement to ensure the camera's are as un-intrusive as possible and the public MUST be informed normally by prominent signage. Below is an extract of advice taken from Ben Jones, a qualified UK lawyer. "Generally, it is legal to have CCTV in areas where one would normally expect privacy, such as toilets or changing rooms. However, guidance from the Information Commissioner's Office states that this should only occur in exceptional circumstances and should only be used to deal with very serious concerns. For example, if there have been a spate of attacks, incidents of drug dealing or criminal damage in the past, this could be a justifiable reason. If you believe the reasons are justifiable then you must ensure that their position means they are as little intrusive as possible and that there are prominent signs advising their users that there are cameras in use."

There was a little ice left at AYB in the corners today and some when we first arrived at the WRC but after a couple of hours lunch in the inn even that had gone. Beccles is all clear and I'd be surprised if there is anything left in Oulton Broad but will update tomorrow as that is our port of call on the way back.

Maurice posted whilst I was and raised some interesting points, however whether we believe CCTV and secret filming is ethical or should be allowed, is different to whether it is currently legal? There are many things that are legal which we may not like or want, or believe to be ethical.

Happy, Alan, asked for advice, rather than opinions, so I'll keep it to advice. You state they may be filmed without their knowledge, but this is not strictly true as they have been warned that mystery shoppers are being introduced and they will be filming, it's just not known where or when, which is much the same as most CCTV systems. I believe the law on secret filming is much the same as that for CCTV. Google have recently released a set of glasses that allow the user to record what they see. Anyone wearing a pair can record what they see for their own use, however much like secret filming if the recordings are to be used in the public domain then you have to let the person know and get their permission to use the recording. The mystery shoppers are effectively filming in a public place, that is assuming they don't have access to rest rooms or canteens where staff on rest breaks can expect a certain amount of privacy, therefore any filming in a public place would be legal for personal use, providing the footage didn't make it on to TV etc. If the company has warned that there is a possibility of filming taking place and how that footage could be used then it isn't breaching the law, even if it doesn't warn of the exact time, place and location. A company with CCTV should inform staff that it uses CCTV and that it could be active at any time and may be used for disciplinary reasons. They do not have to state which cameras are active, where the cameras are, and how they are reviewed.

Helen, It looks like Royale Emblem should be able to pass the bridges at Thorpe at all but high tide. I would consider mooring at Thorpe and either walking or taking the bus into Norwich. You then don't have to rush to move the boat and could spend longer in Norwich in the evening. Thorpe mooring is still near a busy road, but doesn't suffer with the clubbers and drunks late at night, like the yacht station.

Genuine question? Are both those apartments and the ones in Loddon built on land that used to belong to Aston's? If so its more than likely they were designed by the same architect? They do look similar, although the ones in Loddon have some three story houses in the terrace.

It's a long way to go though as Paul is in Beccles, not Loddon The apartments do look very similar to the ones in Loddon.

As an example, do a search for broadland boat builders. You might be surprised but none of the current big boys in Norfolk appear within the first page of search results. Top of my list is a small outfit who took over the old Alphacraft yard in St Olaves. Their name says all you need to know about what they do and will continue to see them at the top of the search lists with very little effort. www.broadlandboatbuilders.co.uk

My guess would be they are looking to catch customers new to boating searching for their first broads holiday. If doing a Googly search for boat hire, Broads and boating are likely search words people will use when searching for Broads boat hire. In that case they should be near the top of the search results, as both are in their name. Looking forward to visiting later this year and seeing how the other facilities take shape. Whilst The Bridge Inn has a lot to offer, it can and does get very busy in high season. The alternatives are quite some stroll away and to be honest apart from The Spanish Tapas Acle centre doesn't have a lot to offer. No idea what Grumpys is now, but it seems to change on a regular basis. Ate at The Kings Head last year and whilst there was nothing to complain about, it didn't stand out.

With regards the use of the name. I may have missed it, but I'm sure they are only using the name The Broads Boating Company which is perfectly legitimate providing they don't start to initialise it as many on this forum have already done!!! We could be doing them a disservice by not using their correct name. Lets face it Barnes Brink Craft have never had any problems.

Since Richardsons have merged the boats from Acle into the Stalham fleet it is more than possible that they don't have enough space to comfortably operate all of them from there and therefore were looking to dispose of some anyway. The same is true of Herbert Woods who way back from they purchased the Le Boat fleet said they would be selling off older boats to make space for all their boats, and they haven't stopped building new ones either. I also think it is not unusual for larger hire yards to lease boats to smaller yards. I believe this was largely the model used for DRL? I'm sure Richardsons provided some support originally before it all went sour. People are assuming that the boats are being purchased, which of course they might be, but they could also be leased, which would allow the establishment of a medium sized fleet quite quickly with less initial capital expenditure. Potentially this is a win win for Richardsons who get rental income from the property at Acle, maybe a guaranteed lease rental income on some of the older boats and as important the yard still stays open for their visiting hire boats during the season. It is pointless having the biggest yard on the system if those hirers have little choice of where they moor when leaving the yard.

Just a thought, but would sponsoring a bench somewhere like Wroxham Bridge, Potter Bridge or Ranworth be an idea?

Not sure how that would work A lot of the mooring is owned by the RSPB, then there is The BA free mooring with the remainder belonging to The Berney Arms. Any attempt to charge for mooring there would only drive the boats along the mooring away from the pub and café Good to see someone having a go at making the café work though. Be good to see more activity along there again. Will definitely pop in when in the area. See you soon.

Here's the thing, I really don't begrudge anyone who runs their own business, who provides local employment for LOCAL people, the trappings of their success. It's when they start pleading poverty and expecting special help in whatever form it takes, whilst their business expansion and company accounts tell a different story that I totally loose respect. Companies House shows that none of the big hire yards are in trouble. Far from it.

Peter, It was very much a tongue in cheek comment based upon how badly the hire industry is supposedly struggling. Off course Barnes are not wasting their money, they are just laughing very loudly at the BA for falling for last years hard luck story.

And there was me thinking that the hire boat yards were skint and struggling, at least that's what they fed the BA when it came to the tolls review. Obviously Barnes like throwing money away, or is there a longer game plan here? Wait until there is only three big hire yards left and then they can tell the BA what they are going to pay each year, rather than the other way round.

To be fair Maurice, this is said a lot on similar threads as this, however your fridge is probably a domestic one and opened 2 or 3% of the time a fridge in a commercial kitchen is during the course of a working day. You also probably have a pretty good idea of what is in the fridge and when you intend to use it. A commercial kitchen can have multiple shifts making keeping track of what needs using first more difficult unless proper records and rotations methods are used. That stock made and put on the shelf by one chef may still be there when he is back on shift in three days time, without proper hand over and records.

I think eating out is always a little like Russian roulette. It depends on the staff on any given day, how experienced they are, how well trained, how busy they are etc. Going to a place that gets 5 stars gives you far better odds of not getting something nasty than a zero rated place. It also needs to be remembered that not everyone's constitution and immune system is the same. The very young and elderly, those recovering from major illness, pregnant women etc, may well have a far greater chance of catching something nasty. Is it worth the gamble? but more to the point what does it say about the business that they are not striving for better? If they don't care about your health, why should you care about their business by giving them custom. I often stop at a chippy in Beccles the one in Bungay or one in Eye on the way home from the boat. The one in Ravensmere Beccles fares slightly better at a score of 1. The one in Eye scores 5. Guess which ones are of the list until the scores improve?. I have to be fair and say none have made me ill, but as they all taste as good as each other, and I have the choice of using any of the three, why would I take the chance?

That would be the Astronomical Winter then The Metrological one started on the 1st December

Today is the shortest day at 7hrs49mins for London. The solstice happens today at 10:44am, which is why The Locks are celebrating it then. It is the point where the Sun is at its furthest from the "celestial equator" The projection of the Earths equator onto the sky.

Andy, and to be honest I fully understand and don't blame you. You cannot be expected to know if what you have been handed is genuine or meets the requirements of The BA requirements. However we now know that the rangers will refer the matter back to Yare House, where the tolls office will probably say it's ok, based upon Franks experience, and when questioned specifically The Head of Safety Management will put the onus back on the boat owner. So who ultimately is responsible for deciding whether your insurance meets the requirements of The BA? Surely it can ONLY be the authority who crafted and required the legislation in the first place? which was The BA in the first place. Frank, despite your protestations of how wonderful Edward William are, you have still failed to explain how they meet the requirements of the declaration that you make each year to The BA. Whilst Edward William may have met some small claims, there are enough horror stories around the web, that suggest when it comes to a big claim they do not meet their obligations. I have no knowledge either way, but most people know there was a major incident in Oulton Broad earlier this year. We can all hope they were insured with a company who are properly regulated, for all concerned. By the way, it may not be just Edward William who DO NOT meet The BA requirements, but it's the one that I know about, which is why I mention them. I'm not particularly having a pop at Edward William, but at The authority (not the troops) who are responsible for enforcing the byelaw, and are failing in that duty. I think we have probably gone as far as we can with this subject, but at least no one can say they were not warned, and that is aimed specifically at the body who pushed the legislation through parliament.