BroadAmbition Posted July 23, 2018 Share Posted July 23, 2018 Some of us forumites will have been in receipt or viewed an emailed Letter that James Fraser of NYA has issued. I have been it touch with NYA and they are happy for me to reproduce it here. I have made a financial commitment to the cause. On a selfish / personal point, 'B.A' will pass under all the Broads swinging / opening bridges at normal states of high tide, so why would I want to contribute? The way I see it, the permanent loss of operational opening bridges will be the start of a slippery slope on an attack on navigational legal rights that could lead long term to all sorts of issues. Once those in authority have an opinion that their organisations can put their own financial gain above their legal commitments, - we will all suffer the more. As per the letter printed below - those of you wanting to commit to the cause are welcome to do so, you do not have to commit up the amount specified either - 'Every Little Helps' Over to you, Your choice Griff ------------------------------------------------- Good Afternoon Ladies & Gentlemen, Our Summer of discontent with regard to the opening of the Broadland Bridges continues. The Haven Bridge has finally been repaired after some 5 weeks out of service but Somerleyton & Mutford swing bridges continue to cause regular problems. The fact is that the cost of replacement is significant (circa 30 million per bridge) and the relevant authorities seem to have their head in the sand hoping the problem (we boaters) will go away. I am in communication with John Packman, CEO of the Broads Authority, who is in communications with Network Rail. However these discussions have been going on for many years. I fear we may soon be faced with a situation where one or more of the bridges fail and remain shut for months or years. In order to understand the full legal position regarding Rights of Passage and right to redress, I would like to seek Barristers opinion on the matter. This is estimated to cost in the region of £5,000 in legal fees, so I am asking for your help (well money actually). We are looking for pledges for a contribution of up to £200 maximum. Clearly the more of you who agree to help, the cheaper the cost per head will be. We do not require any money at this stage purely the confirmation that you will share the costs (to a maximum of £200 per person) when the bill comes. NYA will underwrite any shortfall beyond this amount. I cannot promise that this will solve our problems but a full understanding of the current legal position will stand us in good stead and inform you of your Navigation Rights. A full copy of the Barristers opinion will be forwarded to all donors. Please respond by email to Lou (louise@nya.co.uk) if you are happy to support us. If you would like to discuss further, please ring me. Kind Regards, JAMES FRASERNorfolk Yacht Agency Ltd - Agents for Haines ‘Custom Built Luxury’ Brundall Bay Marina Brundall Norfolk NR13 5PN Reg No. 1881755 VAT Number 106 7794 52 t: 0044 (0) 1603 713434 f: 0044 (0) 1603 713143 w: www.nya.co.uk e: louise@nya.co.uk 4 2 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Baitrunner Posted July 24, 2018 Share Posted July 24, 2018 Nice one Griff. I spoke to Lou yesterday and she said someone had asked if they could post it on a forum. For the record we have committed to the fund as well. I would like to ask that others don't use this post to start telling anyone with a boat that does not fit under the bridges to move it elsewhere or buy a lower air draft boat!! As Griff says it's about our rights to navigation. 9 1 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
eddybear Posted July 24, 2018 Share Posted July 24, 2018 Pledge made 3 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
JennyMorgan Posted July 24, 2018 Share Posted July 24, 2018 It is about our right to navigate and yours truly had problems at Somerleyton, expecting to find it being doused in river water thus able to open at the weekend, neither of which happened. Was I in a suitable boat? Yes, a 110 year old Broads sailing cruiser which I was sailing from St Olaves to Oulton Broad. Anyway, all that aside the railway bridges are subject to the Railways Act and the Lowestoft to Norwich Navigation Act whilst the Authority is subject to the Broads Act, maybe there is some sense in having a barrister confirm that. Agree with Mark, let's avoid comments about boats that don't fit under Potter Bridge, not relevant to this thread. Not to say that I don't have reservations about this one. Let me put it this way, had it come from the NSBA (which it really should) or such as the Brundall Boat Club rather than a commercial concern then I would have no such reservations, but that's just me. I am quite sure that the Broads Authority has relevant legal opinion on this one, in deed I have absolutely no doubts about that. I'm quite sure that the information is there and that a FOI request would unearth it. In an ideal world the Authority would inform relevant stakeholders. Between them, the RYA, the NSBA, the BA et al should already be on top of this one. 6 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
JennyMorgan Posted July 24, 2018 Share Posted July 24, 2018 B2P, not relevant to the topic. No need to shout. Perhaps a pm to Grendel? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
NorfolkNog Posted July 24, 2018 Share Posted July 24, 2018 Precedent  3 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Bound2Please Posted July 24, 2018 Share Posted July 24, 2018 1 minute ago, JennyMorgan said: B2P, not relevant to the topic. No need to shout. Perhaps a pm to Grendel? That was done before that posting Peter Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Bound2Please Posted July 24, 2018 Share Posted July 24, 2018 1 minute ago, NorfolkNog said: Precedent  Thank you howard yes my spelling error 1 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Meantime Posted July 24, 2018 Share Posted July 24, 2018 There appears to be some dissent in the ranks. Can I suggest as has been suggested to the members many times before that you try and resolve it by PM first. Or use the report button! 1 1 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
JennyMorgan Posted July 24, 2018 Share Posted July 24, 2018 3 minutes ago, NorfolkNog said: Precedent  I was far to polite to mention that one! Must have been the heat of the moment. 1 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
JennyMorgan Posted July 24, 2018 Share Posted July 24, 2018 4 minutes ago, Poppy said: I was 'modded' for using what was considered oversise font. Some consistency please! (Just noticed it's a 'Mod' who posted it. What's to say ? ) What's to say? Not much really! 1 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Vaughan Posted July 24, 2018 Share Posted July 24, 2018 25 minutes ago, JennyMorgan said: Not to say that I don't have reservations about this one. Let me put it this way, had it come from the NSBA (which it really should) or such as the Brundall Boat Club rather than a commercial concern then I would have no such reservations, but that's just me. I am quite sure that the Broads Authority has relevant legal opinion on this one, in deed I have absolutely no doubts about that. I'm quite sure that the information is there and that a FOI request would unearth it. In an ideal world the Authority would inform relevant stakeholders. Between them, the RYA, the NSBA, the BA et al should already be on top of this one. This is exactly how I feel about it. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
BroadAmbition Posted July 24, 2018 Author Share Posted July 24, 2018 Between them, the RYA, the NSBA, the BA et al should already be on top of this one. Shouldn't they just! Problem is that if they are then us toll payers (Inc the hire yards) are not being told as much other then the BA stating 'We are in discussions' we have been hearing that old chestnut for an age now. The BA remind me of NATO = No Action Talk Only. Once the Barrister report comes through I would kinda hope the BA are suitably embarrassed that a company and individual toll payers has had to move the issue forwards when the BA themselves should have been doing it. If the BA have indeed got their finger on the legal pulse then why not immediately inform NYA and the rest of us? save going to this trouble and expense Griff 8 1 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
BroadAmbition Posted July 24, 2018 Author Share Posted July 24, 2018 As the OP I should have requested exactly what Baitrunner requested - I was a tad slow on that one. Griff 2 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
JennyMorgan Posted July 24, 2018 Share Posted July 24, 2018 3 minutes ago, BroadAmbition said: B If the BA have indeed got their finger on the legal pulse then why not immediately inform NYA and the rest of us? save going to this trouble and expense Griff Griff, thank you for raising that issue. This is why it is so important that Lana Hempsal is elected as chairwoman of the Authority, Her determination that the BA involves and informs its stakeholders, that the detail of Peer Review is put in hand, has to be the way forward. 2 1 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Meantime Posted July 24, 2018 Share Posted July 24, 2018 As Peter has pointed out a suitably worded FOI request should unearth some answers and costs nowt. Wouldn't hurt to get the ball rolling on that one in parallel. For instance but not limited to; 1. Can you provide me with the up to date legal rights for boaters regarding the various Broadland bridges. 2. Could you provide me with the expenditure on legal fees spent investigating the legal position regarding the Broadland bridges. 3. Can you provide me with figures for the amount of man hours spent by the authority investigating the issues with the Network Rail bridges. 4. Can you provide me with details of the amount of meetings had with Network Rail over the last three years. etc. etc. that's just a few off the top of my head, but carefully worded, or reworded we should be able to ask the right questions to establish what they know regarding the current legal position, but also as importantly, how much time and effort has been spent trying to resolve the issue on our behalf. 2 2 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest Posted July 24, 2018 Share Posted July 24, 2018 Isn’t the fundamental issue here that there isn’t a single, powerful voice to represent the views of boaters? NYA are probably a lovely bunch, but cannot be a ‘leader’ because they have such a vested interest. The bridges is an issue where, contrary to the usual attitude here that “the BA should do something”, the BA might be grateful for pressure to be applied on NR by us if it was coordinated and had widespread support. Note, NR’s revenue is £6.5 billion It is quite possible they completely ignore bleating from the BA Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
vanessan Posted July 24, 2018 Share Posted July 24, 2018 28 minutes ago, EastCoastIPA said: As Peter has pointed out a suitably worded FOI request should unearth some answers and costs nowt. Wouldn't hurt to get the ball rolling on that one in parallel. For instance but not limited to; 1. Can you provide me with the up to date legal rights for boaters regarding the various Broadland bridges. 2. Could you provide me with the expenditure on legal fees spent investigating the legal position regarding the Broadland bridges. 3. Can you provide me with figures for the amount of man hours spent by the authority investigating the issues with the Network Rail bridges. 4. Can you provide me with details of the amount of meetings had with Network Rail over the last three years. etc. etc. that's just a few off the top of my head, but carefully worded, or reworded we should be able to ask the right questions to establish what they know regarding the current legal position, but also as importantly, how much time and effort has been spent trying to resolve the issue on our behalf. Rather than ‘can you’ or ‘could you’, just say ‘please provide me with’. No wriggle room! 2 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Meantime Posted July 24, 2018 Share Posted July 24, 2018 1 minute ago, vanessan said: Rather than ‘can you’ or ‘could you’, just say ‘please provide me with’. No wriggle room! Good point. I would also suggest that David Harris, the BA's solicitor would be the most appropriate person to send any request to. I have found him most approachable and helpful in the past and I'm fairly sure most FOI requests end up with him anyway. 1 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
ChrisB Posted July 24, 2018 Share Posted July 24, 2018 If you trim off the fat, you are actually talking about two Government Departments. The Broads Authority (Dept for Environment etc.) And Network Rail (Department for Transport) Network rail is in public ownership it was the DoT's response to the mess of Railtrack. Difficult. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
BroadAmbition Posted July 24, 2018 Author Share Posted July 24, 2018 Difficult. Agreed. Getting suitable legal answers with proper determination shouldn't be though Griff Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
ChrisB Posted July 24, 2018 Share Posted July 24, 2018 I was refering to "Sovereign Immunity" which in it's simplest form means you cannot take a Government Dept. To court unless it agrees you can" Lets see what a QC says. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
JawsOrca Posted July 24, 2018 Share Posted July 24, 2018 Surely bridges failing to open and thus restrict navigation (although I don't know these laws so have no idea if they are meant to open at all so won't overly comment) is a problem which should be addressed by the navigation authority of which we pay the tolls to use such waterways and of which is surly one of the main reasons that such authority is there and why tolls are charged? If so and if this authority is failing to complete this basic task then are they capable of being the authority? These are questions I have not statements. Sadly at this moment in time as I have no answers to change my thought therefore I will not be pledging as I believe I already pay via my tolls for such thing to be dealt with, neglecting the fact that my boat get's through these bridge considering I hardly get that way anyway, but I have no concern about the costs to support those that do. I will however state that it's nice to see an independent company taking this up and wish them my vocal support! (aside, it's bloody hot out there at the moment, perhaps for once beyond the design of these bridges therefore is it really worth investing in the odd year we get a summer in this country). Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest Posted July 24, 2018 Share Posted July 24, 2018 6 minutes ago, JawsOrca said: Surely bridges failing to open and thus restrict navigation (although I don't know these laws so have no idea if they are meant to open at all so won't overly comment) is a problem which should be addressed by the navigation authority of which we pay the tolls to use such waterways and of which is surly one of the main reasons that such authority is there and why tolls are charged? If so and if this authority is failing to complete this basic task then are they capable of being the authority? These are questions I have not statements. Addressed exactly how? The BA don't own the bridges, and don't pay for their maintenance. So their only course of a action is to ask/demand/force NR to fix them. In the real world NR can just do nothing and the BA can't do much either except bring pressure. If there were a clamour, with pieces in the EDP and reports on local TV that might exert some pressure on NR... Personally I don't see that clarifying the legal position is going to help, unless the BA would just say what they think it is. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
JawsOrca Posted July 24, 2018 Share Posted July 24, 2018 2 minutes ago, batrabill said: Addressed exactly how? The BA don't own the bridges, and don't pay for their maintenance. So their only course of a action is to ask/demand/force NR to fix them. In the real world NR can just do nothing and the BA can't do much either except bring pressure. If there were a clamour, with pieces in the EDP and reports on local TV that might exert some pressure on NR... Personally I don't see that clarifying the legal position is going to help, unless the BA would just say what they think it is. Batrbill, as I stated I don't know nor understand this at all. Again I thought that the BA are the authority responsible for maintaining/lobbying whatever to ensure the rivers are clear for navigation, that's my assumption, right or wrong I don't know. Whilst the BA clearly don't own a bridge (and I'm sure it would be best the bridge in the world if they did!!) surely part of the money they have which is acquired through tolls (maybe?!) from the category of "Maintaining rights of navigation" (maybe?!) allows them to give Network Rail a legal prod.. Personally I would hope that B.A and Network rail both know and understand their legal commitments without too much trouble and too much expense although who knows.. clearly I don't even know what my tolls finance! 2 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Join the conversation
You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.
Note: Your post will require moderator approval before it will be visible.