Jump to content

Broadland Bridges - Lets Get Serious


Recommended Posts

I agree with Jaws here. In my opinion ensuring we have operarional swing bridges whether the BA are responsible for them or not should fall to the BA under maintaining navigation.

The way I see it is as an Authority It is for them to enforce the right of navigation.

The fact that it has got to this stage only highlights shortcomings within the BA even further. (In my opinion) 

If network rail as (a for profit company with shareholders?) dont   want to pay for repairs/upgrades/new infrastructure to protect navigation rights at all times then again in my opinion line closure should be forced upon them. 

When that happens aswell as unrestricted navigation rights Lowestoft as a town might cease to be sufficated by congestion in the way that it is. 

Taking me over an hour to travel less than a mile yesterday afternoon I feel exceptionally strongly about whats going on in this area and its about time someone (within the Authorities) grew the proverbials and did something about it!

 

  • Like 2
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Palandine is probably a better source of info on this, however, as I see it the rivers Yare and Waveney are tidal and a right to navigate exists. The Railways Clauses Act 1863 chapter 92 is probably the most relevant and I don't think has been repealed. More specifically section 15 as follows

User of Bridges.

15Where the Company constructs a Bridge with an opening Span, it shall not be lawful for the Company to detain any Vessel, Barge, or Boat at the Bridge for a longer Time that may be necessary for admitting a Carriage or Engine traversing the Railway and approaching the Bridge to cross the Bridge, and for opening the Bridge to admit the Vessel, Barge, or Boat to pass ;, and the Company shall be subject to and shall abide by such Regulations with regard to the User of the Bridge as may from Time to Time be made by the Board of Trade. If the Company detains a Vessel, Barge, or Boat longer than the Time aforesaid, or fails in any respect to abide by any such Regulation as aforesaid, they shall for every such Offence be liable to a Penalty not exceeding Twenty Pounds, without Prejudice to any Remedy against them for any Loss or Damage sustained by any Person.

 

 

 

Now a few things spring to mind from reading that.

In 1863 £20 was quite a lot of money, today it is not and I don't believe the limit has ever been increased or inflation linked.

The clause relates to the user of bridges. It is therefore for the boater to take action rather than the BA in my layman's opinion.

It could be argued that the BA should protect the interests of the navigation, and to an extent they are by negotiating with Network Rail. However unless they are being held up by a broken bridge, then they are not the affected user.

Rights of navigation can be extinguished by an act of parliament or by a river naturally silting up. It is not beyond possibility that NR could put pressure on the government to extinguish the right of navigation, or at least limit the right of navigation by means of turning the bridge into a fixed structure, by an act of parliament.

If every user inconvenienced by a broken bridge put in a claim for £20 to Network Rail, would the nuisance factor focus minds? probably not. There is a danger they simply take the hit, stop opening the bridges and just pay out any £20 claims.

When Haven bridge recently failed (this would be covered by a different act) Norfolk Council agreed to cover the expenses of the owners of the TS Nelson incurred by delaying the movement of the vessel and the towing companies expenses, rumoured to be North of 20 thousand pound! I don't know how the rights of remedy or compensation differ from the road acts to the railways act.

As much as the bridges breaking down is very annoying, I think many people would consider that the river usage was much different when the 1863 act was created, compared to today. In fact the essential use, compared to the leisure use has very much swung away from the river, to the railway.

I hate to say it, but gentle negotiation by the BA with NR is probably still the way forward, unless someone has VERY deep pockets to challenge NR in which case I wouldn't be surprised if any positive result was very soon followed by an act of parliament in favour of NR limiting navigation to some extent on the rivers.

Another outcome could be the abandonment of the line from Lowestoft to Norwich which I'm sure some would welcome, but far more locals would resent.

Please don't shoot the messenger as the whole bridge fiasco annoys me as well, but I don't think the ancient law is of much use in resolving this issue.

  • Like 4
  • Thanks 4
Link to comment
Share on other sites

As I said previously Network Rail is part of the Department of Transport. All you can really do is make representation and the best way is probably by the BA who are part of the Department for the Environment. With Public sector workers getting a decent increase, the uncertain economic future brought about by Brexit etc. These departments will get the sqeeze. I am afraid I agree with EastCoastIPA above. The inconvenience to a few boaters, is I would suggest, going to get a low priority sticker.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Unless we try, we will never know. Which is the whole purpose of the exercise.

no individual or group has bothered with an FOI request and it is apparent from all the posts no one on here has the full picture.

its voluntary and if it only gets the interest of the newspapers and MPs who knows. At worst nothing will happen I suspect and we can all forget about things ever changing.

 

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

I feel the bigger picture needs to be taken into account, it isnt only a few boaters being inconvenienced.  

There will ultimately be knock on effects to Business then Jobs then homes etc etc....

I see it as why should boaters however insignificant people think they are be inconvenienced for those wishing to use a train when there are other transport options available to people which in many cases may well prove to be cheaper and more reliable. 

The inconvenience to motorists by the same line is my biggest bug bare and closing the line would in my opinion kill 2 birds with one stone. 

I imagine its taking around 40 minutes to pass through Oulton Broad by road at the moment given the traffic is queing back to Tescos on Beccles Road, as it is almost every time i try and go that way.  

 

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

I've pledged - and the reason is simple. Nothing has been done for too long through the 'usual channels' .

To me the usual channels are the likes of the Broads Authority or indeed any organsation that may represent boaters. They may do a very good job in some areas, but at the end of the day have not got the financial muscle to act. They can lobby, meet, talk, understand and put pressure - but that is easy to ignore.

Now the NYA have a vested interest that is true, they also run their Cruising Clubs which have been increasingly frustrated with 'the bridge problem' which in turn delays other important factors such as catching the right state of tide or their arrival in another country. I think it is very fair thing to ask people to pledge money and they (NYA) underwrite the shortfall to get something started - this mind you will just be the beginning but by doing so it is far more than already has been done so far.

You are not going to get the Broads Authority pledge £5,000 of their Toll income to get some legal advice - because for everyone here who has said that is their remit, there will be hundreds more saying they never used their boats on the southern rivers and anyway, they can get under the swing bridges even if closed at the right state of tide so why spend their Toll money on this fight with Network Rail.

A group representing boaters just won't have enough members to raise all the funds required either - so what does that leave? 

Sure, NYA probably won't get enough support alone from this request to cover all the costs, but at least they do have the financial reserves to make up the shortfall and go to the trouble of getting Barristers instructed. 

So in my mind this is the best chance we have, and until someone else or another body or authority comes up with a robust action plan to tackle this issue I see what the NYA have come up as our only shot.

 

  • Like 8
Link to comment
Share on other sites

12 minutes ago, LondonRascal said:

You are not going to get the Broads Authority pledge £5,000 of their Toll income to get some legal advice -

I am sorry, but I can't resist this!

I seem to remember that there was a final figure of around £80,000, after several appeals, that was spent by the BA planners in legal fees to pursue an allegation, lasting 10 years, of abandonment of what was existing permission in order to achieve their aim of evicting "feral" people from an off-river mooring basin.

They have the money to spend on legal fees all right. When they consider it is expedient!

  • Like 6
Link to comment
Share on other sites

The planning appeals and thus relevant legal expenses come from a separate budget and not the navigation account, so whilst it may be a galling waste of money, it is not navigation money. The Defra budget which covers the other two aims of the BA also covers planning I believe. I'm sure there will be others who will point out that a percentage of the admin overheads are also borne from the navigation account, which is true, but by and large at a fair percentage to cover the navigation admin overheads. I'm not being pro or anti BA in stating that, just trying to correct some misconceptions. Different departments, different budgets, different aims.

The BA do I believe have an arrangement with a firm of solicitors as well as David Harris who is a BA employee and deals directly with much of the day to day legal matters.

Mark Baitrunner has said that no one has bothered with a FOI request, yet earlier on. on this very thread I made a few suggestions. Why don't you get together, hone those or pick totally different questions and make a FOI request. It costs nothing and in my experience having made a couple of the BA, they do respond and as far as I could tell, to the best of their ability.

  • Like 3
Link to comment
Share on other sites

5 minutes ago, ChrisB said:

But in the end one Government department cannot take another to court so it has to be by representation and negotiation and agreement.

And as I pointed out earlier, the BA are nit the user as defined in the 1863 act unless they are the one held up by the bridge not opening. It has to be remembered that the BA did not exist when that act was put together. In this case I am not to sure there is much the BA can do. A FOI request which is free, should reveal at least how hard they have tried, and how much time and expense they have expended to date, though I'm not sure how much that would help the cause either.

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

23 minutes ago, EastCoastIPA said:

Mark Baitrunner has said that no one has bothered with a FOI request, yet earlier on. on this very thread I made a few suggestions. Why don't you get together, hone those or pick totally different questions and make a FOI request. It costs nothing and in my experience having made a couple of the BA, they do respond and as far as I could tell, to the best of their ability.

Perhaps something the NBN can do maybe? Mr Chairman ;) 

  • Like 2
Link to comment
Share on other sites

9 hours ago, JawsOrca said:

clearly I don't even know what my tolls finance!

Which is another clear reason why Lana Hempsell HAS to be voted in as BA Chairperson. Her mission statement is clear, the mess that is BA finances has to be clarified, we should all know where our money goes, that we get what we pay for.

  • Like 4
Link to comment
Share on other sites

I am no wiser to the ins and outs of this situation than anyone else but reading all the comments a couple of things come to mind.

Firstly purely a question of semantics but the navigation is not closed but restricted to boats of a certain air draught, now I am not suggesting this is right but the BA are maintaining the navigation under conditions within their control, therefore as ECIPA has suggested the onus for any action is with those individuals affected and as there is no longer any commercial activity apart from boat sales affected this comes down to private individuals.

Secondly as has been stated the only action open to the BA is restricted to consultation and representation and given all the major National issues with Network Rail will probably be pretty low on the scale of things as far as NR are concerned, the one thing no one has suggested so far that might have some affect is representation to the local MPs.

Fred

  • Like 2
Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • 3 weeks later...

James Fraser of NYA recently issued a letter updating where they are as of now.  He has kindly given me permission to print it as per below.  It would help the cause if skippers both private and hire could take a note / log of any issues / holdups at any of the Broadland opening bridges and email details to his secretary Louise as per below.

Thanks, Griff

-------------------------------

Subject: Broads Bridges Update

Thank you all for your offers of support regarding our Broadland Bridges.  We have had just over 100 pledges to date.

 

I have had several interesting & informative meetings with regard to these structures and their history, including a meeting with Network Rail & the Broads Authority and other interested parties.  My impression at this stage is that the Broads Authority are taking this issue seriously and have been putting pressure on Network Rail, who accept that these structures require replacement.

There are moves afoot within Network Rail to attempt to raise the required funding for the replacement of Reedham & Somerleyton Bridges (circa. 80 million).  This process will take a long time but is a very positive step in the right direction.

I do not intend to spend any money on legal assistance at this time but will keep you abreast of developments.  In the meantime, please keep a log of any issues you encounter with the bridges and email louise@nya.co.uk.

With Kind Regards,

JAMES FRASER

Norfolk Yacht Agency Ltd - Agents for Haines ‘Custom Built Luxury’ Brundall Bay Marina Brundall

Norfolk

 

  • Thanks 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

We to have pledged support with James Frazer but feel very sad that it has to come to this. I'm properly going to get knocked for what I'm about to say but i feel very strongly about my rights. when we brought our boat we were well aware that we could not use all the Broads system. we cant get to the north Broads as we cant get under Yarmouth bridges. we like the Southern Broads as it is a lot quieter and suites our needs. however we love Oulton Broad but now cant take the risk of going there if there is a chance that we cant get back. we pay our tolls to the BA for using 100% of the Broads System, with out the north Broads we are down to about 30% of the system. now with the swing bridges as they we are down to 20% of the system. i wouldn't mind so much but the last 2 years has seen my river toll rise by 21.5% for now using just a fifth of the system. how can this be right or fair.

The BA must look into  compensating larger boat owners on their river toll because as i have said before "if you went to a garage to fill up with petrol and you only got half a tank you wouldn't pay for a full tank would you" there is no difference The BA could then claim the difference from NR as it is their fault the bridges are like they are.

What would have happened in the 70's with the coasters using the river Yare. there is a right of navigation and it must be enforced.

  • Like 2
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Looking through the minutes of the workshop that happened on the 1st Aug it is fairly obvious that nothing is going to change anytime soon. The cost of replacing both bridges has been estimated at 80 million pounds. That doesn't compare well when the budget for the next five years to maintain over 6000 structures on Network Rail is 180 million pound.

Someone also needs geography lessons as well. It was stated that it is "important to remember that the railways serve a National Park"!!

It is obvious from the minutes that NR have targets to meet and all are obviously aimed at keeping the railway open and minimising delays, rather than meeting their commitments to the navigation.

The bridges as one would expect have a number of safety interlocks and any failure of this system means the bridge will revert to a default position, which is closed. NR stated that a change in the law would be needed to alter this situation.

26 degrees seems to have been recognised as the magic number above which Somerleyton will see failures.

 

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Please forgive my naivete, but haven't we always had hot weather in summer? So has the bridge always failed to open when the weather is hot? If not, when did it start and what has changed?

Today we repair and restore steam engines and cars more than a century old. When I started as a trainee computer engineer in the 1960s I sometimes worked on complex mechanical machines from the 1890s still in daily use. Surely it is not beyond the wit of modern man capable of orbiting a satellite around the sun, or designing the Falkirk Wheel, to analyze this simple mechanical problem properly and find a solution which doesn't involve tearing the whole lot down. A £million should more than cover it.

This is either sheer laziness or an excuse for some other political decision. Let's get a sense of proportion.

  • Like 3
Link to comment
Share on other sites

14 minutes ago, High6 said:

Please forgive my naivete, but haven't we always had hot weather in summer? So has the bridge always failed to open when the weather is hot? If not, when did it start and what has changed?

 

I've lived here for an awfully long time and the extreme heat events like we enjoyed this year have been rare .... although they do seem to be becoming the norm.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

8 minutes ago, dnks34 said:

This may have already been said but I think rather than the bridge actually failing I do wonder if 26 degrees is the temperature they decide not to open it incase it causes trouble by not closing again. 

 

I suspect you may be right ..... I guess they want to avoid it being stuck open at all costs.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

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.

Guest
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Restore formatting

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.

  • Sponsors

    Norfolk Broads Network is run by volunteers - You can help us run it by making a donation

×
×
  • Create New...

Important Information

For details of our Guidelines, please take a look at the Terms of Use here.