Parking / Mooring Meters - Is This The Thin End Of The Wedge ?

[Oddfellow]

On 9/30/2017 at 20:41, JennyMorgan said:

Vaughan has mentioned the downward turn in the fortunes of the Broads. On the other hand James Knight has suggested that a tenner to moor is not much, or words to that effect. Well, I tend to side with Vaughan on this one, and not just because I had a good fry up of marsh mushrooms today! A tenner is nothing to some folk, to others it's an hour or more of hard work. However you look at it mooring charges could add up to fifty quid to the cost of a week's holiday, on top of car parking, leccy hook-ups and pump outs. 

I agree with this comment, but find that the whole idea of making use of someone's land without recompense is ludicrous. Even down to discussing the presence or lack of facilities. There is no other revenue stream to be gained from this mooring and the mooring has to be maintained. Are the owners or the tenants supposed to do this for nothing and if that is your belief, please explain why, backing it up with how you would anticipate offering your front drive way for guaranteed parking for commuters or similar without any form of payment. Most wouldn't consider this. 

The point is understood by everyone reading this and whether you agree with it or not or hark back to times gone by, this is what is happening now and, rather than lose a mooring, someone investigating a way of keeping a much needed mooring in Horning going (yes, I know it's on the wrong side, but dinghies and/or the ferry solve this). 

To those that say the meter is an eyesore. How much more of an eyesore is it than the large white and green 24 Hour Mooring signs that adorn BA moorings? 

I don't necessarily like this idea of a mooring ticket machine but would prefer the mooring to remain and for people to decide whether they wish to pay to use it than the alternative of losing another valuable mooring. The idea that it's unenforceable is also wrong. Contract law, as applied in many parking situations (and indeed at Thorpe River Green) is quite simple to put in place which would make this highly enforceable should there be a need.

 

 

 

[marshman]

Now thats a sensible post - I fear many are just being unrealistic! By all means be like that, but do not expect ought for nought!

You readily pay to park your car so cannot spot the difference!

[TostockTimonier]

Horning moorings do fill up fast during the school hols and these moorings might well be a last chance saloon mooring, if that was the case, a tenner would be worth it IMO.

[Guest]

11 hours ago, FreedomBoatingHols said:

I agree with this comment, but find that the whole idea of making use of someone's land without recompense is ludicrous. Even down to discussing the presence or lack of facilities. There is no other revenue stream to be gained from this mooring and the mooring has to be maintained. Are the owners or the tenants supposed to do this for nothing and if that is your belief, please explain why, backing it up with how you would anticipate offering your front drive way for guaranteed parking for commuters or similar without any form of payment. Most wouldn't consider this. 

The point is understood by everyone reading this and whether you agree with it or not or hark back to times gone by, this is what is happening now and, rather than lose a mooring, someone investigating a way of keeping a much needed mooring in Horning going (yes, I know it's on the wrong side, but dinghies and/or the ferry solve this). 

To those that say the meter is an eyesore. How much more of an eyesore is it than the large white and green 24 Hour Mooring signs that adorn BA moorings? 

I don't necessarily like this idea of a mooring ticket machine but would prefer the mooring to remain and for people to decide whether they wish to pay to use it than the alternative of losing another valuable mooring. The idea that it's unenforceable is also wrong. Contract law, as applied in many parking situations (and indeed at Thorpe River Green) is quite simple to put in place which would make this highly enforceable should there be a need.

 

 

 

I understand the owner of the land also has concerns about enforce ability so is already working on the Mk 2 version of the ticket machine based on one of these.  

[JennyMorgan]

Andy, you suggest that mooring charges are enforceable under contract law. In theory you are probably right but how on earth can it be enforced? Do Herbert Woods, for example, take names and addresses of dayboat hirers? And if they do are they to be expected to pass on those addresses to the mooring owner? Perhaps a solution for this, and other moorings, is for such as Hoseasons to sponsor them for use by their customers. 

[Guest]

7 minutes ago, JennyMorgan said:

Andy, you suggest that mooring charges are enforceable under contract law. In theory you are probably right but how on earth can it be enforced? Do Herbert Woods, for example, take names and addresses of dayboat hirers? And if they do are they to be expected to pass on those addresses to the mooring owner? Perhaps a solution for this, and other moorings, is for such as Hoseasons to sponsor them for use by their customers. 

But how would you enforce "non Hoseasons" boats from mooring there?

[JennyMorgan]

2 minutes ago, Philosophical said:

But how would you enforce "non Hoseasons" boats from mooring there?

In the same way that payment is enforced, by a manual check.

[Guest]

8 minutes ago, JennyMorgan said:

In the same way that payment is enforced, by a manual check.

A manual check of what other than a "non entitled" boat is moored there, how can anyone enforce anything without the names and addresses of the "non Hoseasons" hirers/owners?

[JennyMorgan]

7 minutes ago, Philosophical said:

A manual check of what other than a "non entitled" boat is moored there, how can anyone enforce anything without the names and addresses of the "non Hoseasons" hirers/owners?

Indeed, and there lies the problem. Surely all that the mooring owner can rely on is trust?

[Guest]

18 minutes ago, JennyMorgan said:

Indeed, and there lies the problem. Surely all that the mooring owner can rely on is trust?

Unfortunately you are "spot on" and sadly in today's society there are too many people who will escape paying for something if they can, or even worse help themselves to what does not belong to them. I have no problem in paying for a mooring and would be quite happy to put "a tenner" under a rock on the mooring in the morning or put the money in a honesty box biscuit tin, but I can be pretty sure that the money would not be there there when the landowner came to collect it.

Other than have someone collect the fee in person I'm not sure how the landowner can be sure of getting paid, going back to when we were kids, the old man with the black dog collecting mooring fees on Salhouse Broad used to be part of the enjoyment.

    

[SteveO]

In my view, a tenner a night is a bit rich for a mooring with no facilities, except for a few posts to tie your boat onto. It might be OK for a bunch of lads on a once-a-year holiday, but for a couple of pensioners who spend 5-6 weeks per year afloat, you could be looking at serious money for something that, until last year, came as part of your annual toll.

unimpressed!

 

[Killamarshians]

Hi Everyone, we are not boat owners but we do hire boats and have been enthusiastic visitors to the broads since 1960. It is obvious from reading various posts that owning a boat is becoming very expensive and indeed hiring a boat isn't cheap either. As hirers we would be shocked to find parking meters on the bank sides when we visit although having to pay to moor at organised sites is only to be expected. We wouldn't mind having to pay a fee to our boat yard for mooring at a fixed amount per night just like we have to pay to park on their land. This in turn would have to be paid to the relevant authority just like they have to pay VAT to HMRC. The authorities could put camera's at strategic points on the rivers similar to number plate recognition cameras on the roads to verify that the boats are actually being used on the river when the boat yards say they are. Private boats could be charged per night when they leave their regular "paid for" mooring until they return. I guess most of them moor in boatyards where cameras could also be used. If mooring places are privately owned it should be up to the owners to collect the fees as they always have done.

It is worrying to think that hirers (not knowing any better) would rather moor at wild moorings that are dangerous and do damage to the boat and worse still the bankside and surrounding flora and fauna than pay to moor at a parking meter.

[Guest]

10 minutes ago, SteveO said:

In my view, a tenner a night is a bit rich for a mooring with no facilities, except for a few posts to tie your boat onto. It might be OK for a bunch of lads on a once-a-year holiday, but for a couple of pensioners who spend 5-6 weeks per year afloat, you could be looking at serious money for something that, until last year, came as part of your annual toll.

unimpressed!

 

"A tenner" was kind of by way of example to illustrate the point of the entire posting,  please feel free to substitute "a fiver" or "a pound" as you feel appropriate instead. 

[marshman]

The facility that they DO offer though is the space to moor and a quay heading to moor against. The £10's they collect will not even cover the cost of the rent, let alone the fund towards quay heading replacement if thats part of the lease!!

[Guest]

58 minutes ago, Killamarshians said:

Hi Everyone, we are not boat owners but we do hire boats and have been enthusiastic visitors to the broads since 1960. It is obvious from reading various posts that owning a boat is becoming very expensive and indeed hiring a boat isn't cheap either. As hirers we would be shocked to find parking meters on the bank sides when we visit although having to pay to moor at organised sites is only to be expected. We wouldn't mind having to pay a fee to our boat yard for mooring at a fixed amount per night just like we have to pay to park on their land. This in turn would have to be paid to the relevant authority just like they have to pay VAT to HMRC. The authorities could put camera's at strategic points on the rivers similar to number plate recognition cameras on the roads to verify that the boats are actually being used on the river when the boat yards say they are. Private boats could be charged per night when they leave their regular "paid for" mooring until they return. I guess most of them moor in boatyards where cameras could also be used. If mooring places are privately owned it should be up to the owners to collect the fees as they always have done.

It is worrying to think that hirers (not knowing any better) would rather moor at wild moorings that are dangerous and do damage to the boat and worse still the bankside and surrounding flora and fauna than pay to moor at a parking meter.

Parking meter, relevant authority, VAT. HMRC, recognition cameras. these are examples of what I come to the broads to escape from.

[Oddfellow]

10 hours ago, JennyMorgan said:

Andy, you suggest that mooring charges are enforceable under contract law. In theory you are probably right but how on earth can it be enforced? Do Herbert Woods, for example, take names and addresses of dayboat hirers? And if they do are they to be expected to pass on those addresses to the mooring owner? Perhaps a solution for this, and other moorings, is for such as Hoseasons to sponsor them for use by their customers. 

Of course Herbert Woods and every other day boat operator takes names and addresses of hirers - it is a requirement of insurances and, I believe, hire boat operators licenses. The practicalities of enforcement might be challenging and without a hefty penalty in the contract for non-payment, chasing anyone would be financially pointless. I doubt that this is what is planned, but it could be done with co-operation between all businesses. New data protection laws due next year would probably affect this too.

 

[Vaughan]

11 hours ago, SteveO said:

In my view, a tenner a night is a bit rich for a mooring with no facilities,

And no land access to the village either.

 

10 hours ago, marshman said:

The facility that they DO offer though is the space to moor and a quay heading to moor against

I am not sure how £10 here equates to £5 at Stracey Arms, where there is at least a shop and tearooms, with a wind pump to visit. And a temple, if you are so inclined!

When this was just an earth bank of old dredgings, people used to happily moor there. That's what your rhond hooks are for.

[rightsaidfred]

I don't have a problem paying if I choose to use a privately owned mooring and I consider the fee reasonable, however with this particular mooring the recent history should be remembered, the Cators refused to renew the lease with the BA, they then leased it to the pub who tried to use it to justify their own stern on mooring plans at the pub, when this failed they gave up the lease since when Len Funnell has taken it up presumably for his own purposes and possibly influenced by the pub coming up for auction and almost certainly for some sort of financial gain rather than just offering a  mooring facility, a totally different proposition to some one making a token charge for using their land.

Fred

[JennyMorgan]

26 minutes ago, Vaughan said:

And no land access to the village either.

 

I am not sure how £10 here equates to £5 at Stracey Arms, where there is at least a shop and tearooms, with a wind pump to visit. And a temple, if you are so inclined!

When this was just an earth bank of old dredgings, people used to happily moor there. That's what your rhond hooks are for.

Stracey versus Horning, supply & demand and location versus location.

That aside, surely folk come on a Broads holiday to get away from such fripperies as parking meters.  For me the only issue is the parking meter, nasty thing!

[Springsong]

I was trying for the first time to single hand SP. Now as some of you know I am challenged in the leg department.

I stopped for an ice cream on the Bure at Salhouse on the main river, by the time I had got off the boat the ice cream boat had disappeared on its round, I  explained to the girl my predicament but she still charged me £3.50 for a 1/4 of an hours stay., That made for a very expensive ice cream, so unless it is for a club meeting of some description on the hard at  Salhouse I will not be mooring at Salhouse other than mud weighting. I somehow doubt that Henry Cator Esq. will miss my non contribution to his bulging coffers. I have met Henry a few times as he is  Patron of the MOB (Museum of the Broads) where I am a volunteer, he is a very personable gentleman so in no way is it a personal gripe just a general rip off gripe.

[Killamarshians]

15 hours ago, Philosophical said:

Parking meter, relevant authority, VAT. HMRC, recognition cameras. these are examples of what I come to the broads to escape from.

Why would you try to escape from something that you have no reason to fear. Just trying to think of an alternative solution to parking meters. Your point is understood and agreed with though. We also like the relaxed atmosphere of the broads and all this kind of talk is against what the broads stand for, at least in our book.

[Guest]

1 hour ago, Killamarshians said:

Why would you try to escape from something that you have no reason to fear. Just trying to think of an alternative solution to parking meters. Your point is understood and agreed with though. We also like the relaxed atmosphere of the broads and all this kind of talk is against what the broads stand for, at least in our book.

Fear is probably not a good word, this better describes what I wish to escape from: everyday "normal" life, anything that could be regraded as a chore or pain in the backside, stealth taxes & Big Brother

[Cheesey]

Just a question, do the owners of the land pay for flood defence?

[Killamarshians]

4 hours ago, Philosophical said:

Fear is probably not a good word, this better describes what I wish to escape from: everyday "normal" life, anything that could be regraded as a chore or pain in the backside, stealth taxes & Big Brother

Totally with you. That is what the broads should be for.

[Oddfellow]

11 hours ago, Cheesey said:

Just a question, do the owners of the land pay for flood defence?

Flood defence of strategic areas has historically been an environment agency issue. The land in question is largely marsh and there are no defences in place for that reason. My boatyard n Thorpe floods on a very high tide and it is very much down to me to prevent that and I do so with sandbags, pumps and a lot of chanting.