Electricity At Moorings

[Poppy]

4 minutes ago, dnks34 said:

Cant really agree with this.  

Electricity isnt necessarily green there is pollution involved in its production so an electric boater shouldnt really expect or be entitled to anything for free!

The Broads Authority has form on wasting money on very pointless things yet clawing back every last penny of the cost of supplying electricity to an end user is of importance to them, priorities in order springs to mind. 

Costs do need to be covered but the Broads Authority are there to provide a service.........to amongst other groups BOATERS. 

What happens to all the cash they get from central government nevermind the toll money the get from us.

Has anyone told them this money is for spending on their remit not just on salaries pensions and research after research after pointless consultation.  

Are they that incapable of making a decision without it first costing £££££!!! 

In saying that I dont think the current charges for electricity are excessive and its a valuable facility most of us can only wish to see more of.

If we keep on complaining they will eventually find ways to charge  us for the other thing they are there to provide..........lets pick our battles.........carefully! 

I certainly do not believe that ' electric boaters' should get their fuel for propulsion at no cost. It's the boater who chooses to have all the domestic electrical mod cons and entertainment aboard .  Is it reasonable that  the cost  is shared across ALL toll payers ? I for one object strongly to any such suggestion!

[Poppy]

36 minutes ago, JennyMorgan said:

Theoretically quite true but how many boat owners would admit to using mains electricity? It might be against the rules but I really do think that the BA has adopted the best option available to them, unless someone can come up with a better option. If the addition to the tolls route is forced upon the rest of us then hopefully it will only apply to motor craft with enclosed accommodation. I wonder what Ofgem would say if a blanket charge was made to all boat owners, irrespective of whether they use the stuff or not.

They wouldn't have to 'admit' to anything! My latest BSS certificate has a box for the examiner to tick for 12 volt and 240volt electrics if installed. It would become a simple task to identify  the domestic supply installation.

[JennyMorgan]

12 minutes ago, dnks34 said:

In saying that I dont think the current charges for electricity are excessive and its a valuable facility most of us can only wish to see more of.

I'm not convinced that 'most of us' can only wish to see more of. Judging by comments on the web it does seem that an awful lot of anger results from the supply of electricity, one way or another. On top of that what proportion of boats use the facility? I suspect that rather less than half do.

[dnks34]

I think I have partly misunderstood your post poppy but I do agree that where the cost for electricity comes from should be fair.

During the season to me electricity supplies usually appear to be in high demand hence my saying its a facility most might want to see more of.  

Personally I have no problem with costs being covered by those using the supplies.

[JennyMorgan]

10 minutes ago, Poppy said:

I certainly do not believe that ' electric boaters' should get their fuel for propulsion at no cost. It's the boater who chooses to have all the domestic electrical mod cons and entertainment aboard .  Is it reasonable that  the cost  is shared across ALL toll payers ? I for one object strongly to any such suggestion!

Those who want and use the stuff should be the ones to pay for it, plain and simple. 

[kfurbank]

1 minute ago, Poppy said:

I certainly do not believe that ' electric boaters' should get their fuel for propulsion at no cost. It's the boater who chooses to have all the domestic electrical mod cons and entertainment aboard .  Is it reasonable that  the cost  is shared across ALL toll payers ? I for one object strongly to any such suggestion!

Some issues are worthy of protest.....

The issue is that The BA are tied by OFGEM rules into only charging for the cost of electricity plus the standing charge. The cost of the posts, yearly maintenance, cards for top up, new post installations etc etc has to come from elsewhere. As a landlord it would be as a part the rent you charge your tenant, so ultimately the tenant pays, just not through their meter, where they get the electric at cost. This is to stop profiteering through the resale of electricity.

The BA can only reclaim its other costs through the toll account, which in turn means all boaters pay whether they use the facility or not.

I made the point elsewhere, I wonder what criteria The BA use for deciding to spend money on a facility, that whilst available to all boaters, a good percentage may choose not to use. Would the money spent of providing the electric posts be better spent on providing more refuse points? or purchasing an additional mooring or two?

I am still awaiting the results of a FOI request to find out how much this recent upgrade of the posts has cost, and which budget it has come from. As it can not be reclaimed through increasing the unit cost, it has to come from another budget. I can only think of the toll account, or Defra grant.

Some issues are worthy of protest.....

[JennyMorgan]

Just now, kfurbank said:

Some issues are worthy of protest.....

And protest I would if I were asked to subsidise other people's electricity usage. 

[kfurbank]

Just now, JennyMorgan said:

And protest I would if I were asked to subsidise other people's electricity usage. 

You are!!!!!!

[kfurbank]

I don't like cross posting, but I have just lifted a post of mine from elsewhere,

Going to go off at a slight tangent here, I read the OFGEM rules the same as Palandine, but this means that the costs if not recovered through the card, are covered from the toll budget, which means that all toll payers are paying for a facility which whilst it may be available to all toll payers, a good percentage won't use. So I wonder what criteria is used when selecting and paying for facilities that all toll payers contribute towards, but a good percentage may not use?

Whilst the electric post network is a nice to have, not everyone uses it. How many people might consider the cost of that infrastructure better spent on a few more refuse facilities around the network that benefit all boaters? or even the purchase of an additional mooring or two?

Whilst nice to have, the electric posts are not essential, and I don't subscribe to it stops the running of engines at moorings idea, because if you plan your day, and equip your boat properly you don't need to run your engine at moorings. I have used £5 of cards in the last three years and do not run my engine at moorings. Have recently spent 10 days afloat and some days did no more than 90 mins cruising. Never run an engine at a mooring. Have just recently purchased a 24V coffee maker and even that additional battery usage was replenished each day. 

[Paladin]

This is a bit like the private v hire boat tolls debate. Should the hire boats pay more because they use the facilities more? The usual answer has been that it is up to the private owners how much they use their boats.

The same applies here, IMO. The BA provides a facility and it is up to the individual boater to decide whether, or how much, to use it. BUT, in providing that facility, the BA must comply with any rules and regulations, which it is clearly not doing regarding the charging for electricity.

I rarely use BA 24hr moorings when I'm out and about, so why should I subsidise them? They cost a greater proportion of my tolls than does the electrical supply system.

[JennyMorgan]

Perhaps the BA should quite simply pull the plug on this and be done with it, leaving it to commercial interests to take onboard. 

[dnks34]

In my opinion providing a number of electric posts for river users is within the BA's remit and if it isnt it should be.   

No offence intended JM but should we switch them all off because there are a number of folk who dont want them?!!!

[Poppy]

2 minutes ago, dnks34 said:

In my opinion providing a number of electric posts for river users is within the BA's remit and if it isnt it should be.   

No offence intended JM but should we switch them all off because there are a number of folk who dont want them?!!!

Not switched off, but entirely paid for by those who choose to use them !

[Islander]

My toll pays for maintenance of areas I can never go to in my boat. i.e. Up river of Wroxham and Potter bridges  So if you can deduct those costs from my toll then I will pay a supplement for EXCLUSIVE use of electric points!

Lets be honest, the whole tolls system is a disaster so the electricity charges are no surprise. Presuming the BA are in the wrong then they will either end up with some form of exemption or it will be added to all our tolls next year.

The biggest problem I see is finding a mooring with an available post or come to that, finding a mooring.

Colin

[Poppy]

Just now, Islander said:

My toll pays for maintenance of areas I can never go to in my boat. i.e. Up river of Wroxham and Potter bridges  So if you can deduct those costs from my toll then I will pay a supplement for EXCLUSIVE use of electric points!

 

Colin

Wrong boat for the Broads perhaps ?

[Paladin]

9 minutes ago, Poppy said:

Not switched off, but entirely paid for by those who choose to use them !

Perhaps de-masting moorings should be entirely paid for by those who choose to use them, particularly as the majority of boats are actually prohibited from using them 

[Islander]

Hi Poppy. Built on the broads as a hire boat. Right boat for me, not a draughty sliding top thing or cramped flappy stick thing I couldn't standup in. The broads would be far less interesting if we all had the same boat. If they all went under the bridges then the other reaches would be a lot busier. Imagine hickling with 50 hire boats arriving Friday afternoon.

Colin

[dnks34]

Good analogy Islander and on the basis of your post I also want a portion of my toll deducted for the parts of the Broads I cant access and if there are any electric posts at the locations i cant get to Im not paying anything toward them either!!

[JennyMorgan]

46 minutes ago, dnks34 said:

In my opinion providing a number of electric posts for river users is within the BA's remit and if it isnt it should be.   

No offence intended JM but should we switch them all off because there are a number of folk who dont want them?!!!

Actually I don't believe that there is any call to provide electric posts within the Broads Act. An opinion that might not please you all, for that I apologize, but it is the harsh reality:

It is the duty of the Authority to manage the Broads for the purposes of: 

• Conserving and enhancing the natural beauty, wildlife and cultural heritage of the Broads
• Promoting opportunities for understanding and enjoyment of the special qualities of the Broads by the public
• Protecting the interests of navigation.

Sorry, but no mention of electricity. The BA doesn't sell diesel so why should it sell electricity? If an overall charge is foisted onto the general toll payer then I can honestly see very good reason to object and to do so with some passion. 

If people are not prepared to pay for the provision of electricity, and no one else is prepared to pick up the tab, then what option does the Authority have but to turn it off?  It is debatable as to whether they should ever be supplying electricity anyway, it is hardly a navigational requirement.

 

[dnks34]

I see the electric points as a positive thing to have available. 

I accept that there is nothing stating they must supply any at all but I also ask you is there anything stating they must provide "free" 24hr moorings for river users? 

[JennyMorgan]

Just now, dnks34 said:

I see the electric points as a positive thing to have available. 

I accept that there is nothing stating they must supply any at all but I also ask you is there anything stating they must provide "free" 24hr moorings for river users? 

Moorings are a navigational requirement, something that we all benefit from, imagine if there were none available. 

I don't deny that electric points are a positive but are they really a necessity? Moorings we have to have.

[dnks34]

I agree electric is not a necessity but I dont think in the modern day they are anything unreasonable to expect or are out of the ordinary either.  

I also want free 24 hr moorings but my point was do these moorings being a navigational requirment have to be free? 

How long before pay and display machines are installed because we are all complaining about 35p on an electric card, after all they already have the electricity to power them in most places it seems!!

[JennyMorgan]

Just for the record the BA has tried voluntary payment at 24hr moorings, I doubt very much whether the income received actually covered the cost of the posts or the cost of replacing the ones that were nicked? A member of Broads Beat told me just how many were stolen last summer, it was more than only one or two! Anyway, are 24hr moorings truly free?

[dnks34]

As Toll payers I suppose no the moorings are not free!

I also suspect as Kfurbank says that all Toll payers in one way or another have contributed to the initial install costs of the electric posts and also these latest meter upgrades and the cost of new cards whether they use them or not!

If it did come to light that the Broads Authority are charging a proportion on the sale of these cards to recover other costs I think it could open a can of worms we will all inevitably end up paying for.

Sometimes its could be better to let sleeping dogs lie! 

[JennyMorgan]

2 minutes ago, dnks34 said:

Sometimes its could be better to let sleeping dogs lie! 

We can both agree on that!

By the way, a large part of the original installation was met by one of the power companies although I don't remember the details.