Jump to content

Tolls


Aboattime

Recommended Posts

I paid my toll by phone this morning. I would have preferred to have paid on line by BACS, but is appeared thet The Blessed Authority insist that people 'register an account' before doing so.  I can think of no other organisation where I have to do this.

When will their IT department move into the 21st century?

  • Like 2
Link to comment
Share on other sites

To ECIPA,

It occurs to me that if a system exists that saves the boater money, then whether or not it's fairer, it  still means that the BA lose money. If the BA lose money from toll payers, it will recoup it by a toll increase.

If you want to hand the BA a genuine excuse for a raising the tolls rate, that's all fine and dandy, but it seems to me that the overall cost to those who suffer from this "unfairness" will be lower than those who will have to pay for it's removal.

You tell me that there are things called 'computers' which could handle such a change. Might I make so bold as to suggest that there are things that will find ways to abuse such changes. They're called 'People'.   :-)  

Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 hour ago, MauriceMynah said:

To ECIPA,

It occurs to me that if a system exists that saves the boater money, then whether or not it's fairer, it  still means that the BA lose money. If the BA lose money from toll payers, it will recoup it by a toll increase.

If you want to hand the BA a genuine excuse for a raising the tolls rate, that's all fine and dandy, but it seems to me that the overall cost to those who suffer from this "unfairness" will be lower than those who will have to pay for it's removal.

You tell me that there are things called 'computers' which could handle such a change. Might I make so bold as to suggest that there are things that will find ways to abuse such changes. They're called 'People'.   :-)  

Sorry MM quite often I read your posts and think he's talking a lot of sense there, however the above isn't one of them. The system is unfair, but only to the few that launch or purchase a boat part way through the season. If correcting this robbery meant a slight loss of income to the BA that had to be raised from all toll payers, the increase would be extremely minimal. You are as guilty as Marshman of trying to use "scare" tactics, be AWARE the BA will use any excuse to take more money from you, don't rock the boat etc. That is wrong, if there is an injustice, it needs to be sorted. We shouldn't be scared to raise our point for fear of the BA using it as a way to fleece more money from us.

I would argue two further points, if a minimal increase was needed from everyone to make the system fairer for everyone then so be it. However, the whole tolls system is a lot more computerised, automatic and streamlined than it was 15 years ago when paper toll plaques were being printed and posted and payments weren't made online. In which case there is a definite argument that the tolls should have been reduced for everyone to reflect those savings in overall administration and overheads. Those savings more than adequately cover any minimal loss of toll revenue to the BA by them making the system fairer.

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Also if the Blessed Authority are really that tight on funding, why do they blatantly waste so much of it on projects well outside their remit?

Just one example £30'000, yes that's right Thirty Thousand beer chits on changing signage all over the parish just to push out a lie

Griff

  • Like 4
Link to comment
Share on other sites

ECIPA, It was not my intent to use "scare tactics" but to put a point as I saw it. However, that aside, I think my problem with a change of this nature is best sized up with the expression "The devil is in the detail." Whether any toll price rise would fairly reflect any loss in revenue would be a different issue. Perhaps we could look at history to help form an opinion on that.

So often these days, changes are made to regulations somewhere, only to find that those changes had unintended results. It is very rare for such a change, if it is going to address a problem, not to create other problems especially when there are people about ready to capitalise on any opportunity.

Nope, sorry ECIPA, we will have to agree to disagree on this one.

As to Griff's point about what the BA spends money on, that is an entirely different argument 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

ECIPA - how do you know the BA hasn't already reduced, and taken into account, the reduced costs that the more modern system has resulted in?

And MM and me introduce "scare tactics"? More likely a dose of healthy reality!!!

The BA use some temporary help to help cope with the rush at this time of year - now perhaps everyone else would like all these fancy amendments to the rules to be introduced so as to allow these temporary staff to become full time, but its hardly a scare tactic!

Like the most of us, we both are quite happy at this arrangement, it works well and I for one, cannot see any reason to change it. Others are entitled to their view.

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

4 minutes ago, marshman said:

ECIPA - how do you know the BA hasn't already reduced, and taken into account, the reduced costs that the more modern system has resulted in?

And MM and me introduce "scare tactics"? More likely a dose of healthy reality!!!

The BA use some temporary help to help cope with the rush at this time of year - now perhaps everyone else would like all these fancy amendments to the rules to be introduced so as to allow these temporary staff to become full time, but its hardly a scare tactic!

Like the most of us, we both are quite happy at this arrangement, it works well and I for one, cannot see any reason to change it. Others are entitled to their view.

 

Marshman, How do you know the temporary staff would need to become full time if a fairer system was introduced? Surely if the toll renewals were spread throughout the course of the year, rather than a huge spike each year around March / April, the existing BA staff would be able to cope with the toll renewal processing without bringing in any temporary staff, thus leading to a cost saving.

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

As I said you are entitled to your view - this system has worked well for as long as I can remember, so why change it? Oh yes I know, a minority think it would be better but how often does a new system and process result in reduce costs? I remain to be convinced and I guess, so do the BA.

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Also think that some people might need that temporary employment at that time in the year, Norfolk probably has a large amount of seasonal work, even within the boating industry there are many, from the cleaners who only work while boats are being hired, to the ba rangers who man the yacht stations, so out of season these people will require employment.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 hour ago, EastCoastIPA said:

Marshman, How do you know the temporary staff would need to become full time if a fairer system was introduced? Surely if the toll renewals were spread throughout the course of the year, rather than a huge spike each year around March / April, the existing BA staff would be able to cope with the toll renewal processing without bringing in any temporary staff, thus leading to a cost saving.

You must remember that if they move to a new system with yearly registration from the first date of registration, I guess, possibly 95%?? maybe 99%, will be on the current date, and will only very slowly change over time. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

On 17/04/2019 at 22:13, Smoggy said:

No different if you buy a boat from another waterway, I had to toll mine in september for a full year when I got it.

Just because other waterways do it doesn't make it fair!

I recently took on Waveney District Council (and won) for them trying to make me pay council tax on a property I no longer lived in.  I knew full well the period they were charging me for had been paid up by someone else.  Had i just paid they would have happily gone along with being paid for the same property twice.  I suspect they do this type of thing quite a lot.

That Isn't exactly Toll related but my point is why should anyone pay in part or full for any type of service they haven't actually been able to receive or avail themselves of?! 

  • Thanks 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

7 minutes ago, dnks34 said:

That Isn't exactly Toll related but my point is why should anyone pay in part or full for any type of service they haven't actually been able to receive or avail themselves of?! 

Because that is the basis for nearly every type of taxation? 

You and I both pay for roads we will never drive on, services we won't ever use, schools we will never know exist and right now we are saving the life off a 1000 people we will never know even existed.

There are always winners and losers in any taxation system.

  • Like 3
Link to comment
Share on other sites

I would have thought that with an annual toll date the rangers don’t need to check for tolls all year round- they must know the boats on their patch and once they know they have been rolled they don’t need to check again until next April.


Sent from my iPhone using Norfolk Broads Network

Link to comment
Share on other sites

You cannot compare tolls to the so called road fund licence, one is a tax that goes into the general government coffers the other provides the budget for the upkeep of the navigation and as such you need to know your minimum income before you spend it.

While I am not totally happy with the executive you cannot compare the BA to CART, the EA or anyone else they all have different remits.

Fred

  • Like 2
Link to comment
Share on other sites

In principle and in its basic form the tolls have evolved over time and the system that we have is probably about right. Where it slips up is in the politics, it is seemingly an unaccountable tax which is without adequate representation. That JP was able to considerably up the toll to compensate for a reduction in the DEFRA grant just about encapsulates the whole downside of the present system. Beyond that we should get what we pay for and get what we expect. Grubby fingers should stay outside of the tolls honeypot.

  • Like 2
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Accepting there was a DEFRA grant reduction to make up what deeply bothers me is how much money was wasted on the Jenners Basin fight that many if not most boat owners / hirers would have wanted no part in.  What about the other crackpot projects (acle) that occasionally come to light that again some folk want no part in and do not want to see any of BA funds frivolously wasted on.  If they have got spare cash for ridiculous projects stop putting up the Tolls i cant think of a word to adequately convey my distaste for it, its just obscene. 

Each time this happens Toll payers pockets get dipped in to to recover the loses.  I certainly want no part in that and until there is accountability I no longer want to be a Toll Payer.  Its really not right. 

  • Like 3
Link to comment
Share on other sites

21 hours ago, JennyMorgan said:

it is seemingly an unaccountable tax which is without adequate representation.

This sentence sums it up really, but I suspect not in the way you might have hoped. There are strong arguments to support the view that those who use the Broads the most should pay the greatest, while there are others who would maintain that all boaters should pay the same irrespective of size or power source of the boat.

I won't try to list all the options, but I would imagine there could be half a dozen or so, each having a further half a dozen versions. Each and every one will be called "unfair" by supporters of the others.

It would be unreasonable to bounce between some or all of them from year to year so one has to be selected. One has been. It's the one we have. 

Now for the "representation". This sounds very much like another call for the BA to be an elected body. For reasons stated in the past, this cannot happen, mainly because nobody can actually come up with who the electorate should be, or to put it another way, who does the BA represent?

Equally, it might be said that the BA is already an elected body, in as much as it is a government formed quango, and that the government is an elected body, thus it must be representative... well of something even if nobody has any idea of just what!

Taking the road fund licence and other forms of tax, nothing is really comparable with anything else. The only things they all have in common is that they're all unfair and everybody pays for things they never use. For an example, see "Boat tolls" .

Finally (well on this post anyway) the "Toll from anniversary" concept. I for one see nothing obviously wrong or unfair with that, but maybe the BA does, so maybe there is a good reason why the BA keeps it as it is. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

30 minutes ago, MauriceMynah said:

Equally, it might be said that the BA is already an elected body, in as much as it is a government formed quango, and that the government is an elected body, thus it must be representative... well of something even if nobody has any idea of just what!

 

Without wishing to delve into politics, that is untrue of the current Government !

 

  • Haha 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

John, MM, I don't think that there can ever be fully inclusive elections at the Authority but there can be elections, even it is only for toll payer representation since over half their income comes from us. At the moment JP appears intent in removing County Council & Parish Council representation so even that voice is under threat. Anyway, representation for those of us who live here is also perfectly feasible and since planning is a function of the Authority then that is surely desirable. I know that I am far from being alone in these thoughts so we shall just have to wait and see. JP brought this one down on himself when he attempted to disband the Navigation Committee, a situation compounded when he actively encouraged the Broads Forum to become moribund. I personally see elections at the Authority as being a probability rather than just a possibility, in large part thanks to JP, 'tis he who created the need.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

6 minutes ago, Poppy said:

Without wishing to delve into politics, that is untrue of the current Government !

 

A situation not helped when just one person takes it on herself to set and drive policy, rather as a well known Broads based CEO does. Neither situation is desirable nor, would it seem, tenable either.

  • Like 1
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.

×
×
  • Create New...

Important Information

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