Rangers On A Purge. ..

[marshman]

Did everyone go on about all of this last year when they carried out the same exercise? Or did they just get on with it and comply?? My guess is the latter!!!

[ExSurveyor]

39 minutes ago, marshman said:

Did everyone go on about all of this last year when they carried out the same exercise? Or did they just get on with it and comply?? My guess is the latter!!!

I made a big fuss, but that was based on the fact they were wrong and caused damage.

[grendel]

3 hours ago, marshman said:

Did everyone go on about all of this last year when they carried out the same exercise? Or did they just get on with it and comply?? My guess is the latter!!!

Obviously not, or there wouldn't have been any boats left to stick notices on.

[Islander]

No purge here yet. Just as well. There I was working on the foredeck and somehow managed to knock reg plate off the pulpit rail. It all happened in slow motion. Unable to catch it. It hit the water and slowly sank. Oh bother I said, I'll have to make another. At this point the weather turned so gave up working outside.

So off I toddle to BA offices to get another. Now I decided to get 2 so as to have a spare. Nice young lady asked if I wanted them sent by post but I said I'd wait.

Zzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzz. 20 mins to make 2stickers. Let's hope they don't have a rush of owners wanting to comply with contravention notices.

Colin 

p.s. Discovered the cable ties (3) had degraded. The ones on the opposite bow are fine but I think I'll replace them anyway.

[grendel]

Strangely enough I noticed that above the bridge at potter nearly every third boat had numbers placed within the regulations, but not the guidelines, one boat that just about complied with the guidelines had the numbers within 2m of the bow, about 1m from the stern of the 3m boat.

[grendel]

Maurice Mynah, while i was up at the pleasure boat yesterday I caught a miscreant defacing Nyx, yes she was cleaning the name and numbers.

[Paladin]

 

Update on the enforcement of the unenforceable non-stautory guidance

I take the enforcement of the law seriously, and the enforcement of quasi-law even more seriously.

On 1 October 2019, I submitted a formal complaint against the Broads Authority relating (among other things) to the presentation, in the Display of Registration Marks leaflet, of unenforceable guidance as if it was compulsory (by means of repeated use of the word ‘must’). If you must do something, then it is obligatory. The byelaws don’t oblige you to display registration marks of any particular shape or size, or in any specific position in relation to the bows. All that has been made up within the Broads Authority.

Without boring you with all the details (the complaint is quite lengthy), it has gone as far as a Chief Executive’s Review. I have now had a written assurance from the CEO that the wording of the guidance will be reviewed in 2020, to include ”words to make the requirements of the byelaw clearer and that the non-statutory guidance is designed to be helpful.”.

At this time, I will wait to see what the reviewed guidance is, before deciding whether to progress to the Local Government Ombudsman.

[JennyMorgan]

Thank you for keeping us updated. I'm afraid that the Authority has increasingly taken to issuing dictates in the manner that you have illustrated. I just hope that in the future the BA becomes abundently clear as to what is and what isn't statutory. To that end perhaps some sort of reference to the relevant Act/Byelaw/paragraph/section be included at least as the small print. 

[Paul]

Thank you for your update Paladin. Through out the life of this thread I have been reading it with interest, wondering under what legislation the Authority are making this dictate as I can find nothing in the bylaws to back it up. Does the authority have the authority to create rules and regulations of this kind by any power given to it by the Broads Bill?

[Paladin]

33 minutes ago, Paul said:

Thank you for your update Paladin. Through out the life of this thread I have been reading it with interest, wondering under what legislation the Authority are making this dictate as I can find nothing in the bylaws to back it up. Does the authority have the authority to create rules and regulations of this kind by any power given to it by the Broads Bill?

The Broads Acts give the BA the power to make byelaws, which they have done. As an enforcement authority, they may also decide on an enforcement policy, much as the Police can decide to only prosecute drivers if they drive at a speed greater than 10% + 2mph over the speed limit (which is the current advice). What they must not do, and what they are currently doing, is to present that policy as law. The leaflet Display of Registration Marks makes no clear distinction between what is required by the enforceable byelaws and what is their unenforceable advice on how they would like the byelaws to be interpreted. Ultimately, such interpretation is for a court to decide, not the BA.

It is very evident, by the report given to the Navigation Committee by the Head of Ranger Services in January this year, the statement regarding enforcement of the guidance issued in two separate Broadsheets (2018 and 2019) and the actions of a certain ranger (while under the supervision of a senior ranger), that the intention is to enforce compliance with the unenforceable guidance.

[Vaughan]

I agree with your stance on this.

In all sorts of regulations and EC directives, there is a big difference between the words "must" and "should". The former is an obligation but the second is a recommendation.

[Paladin]

53 minutes ago, Vaughan said:

I agree with your stance on this.

In all sorts of regulations and EC directives, there is a big difference between the words "must" and "should". The former is an obligation but the second is a recommendation.

Thank you, Vaughan. You have hit the nail right on the head. The guidance leaflet uses the word "must" several times and purports to impose a legal obligation on boat owners to comply with the BA's interpretation of the size of the reg. marks and their placement etc., when such an obligation doesn't actually exist.  "Must" is the only word recognised in law to impose an absolute legal obligation. The words "should" or "may" suggest that discretion can be used.

[BroadAmbition]

Paladin - I'm grateful you are here, even more so with your knowledge and updates - Tks

Griff