Rangers On A Purge. ..

[MauriceMynah]

I neither support nor oppose the BA on this issue as an issue in its own right. What I disagree with is making a stand against it as a point of principle. I see this issue as trivial and therefor not worth the effort of rebelling. If or when the BA tries to enforce something I find unreasonable then I shall react differently 

You (Malanka) however, do see it as a point of principle and are prepared fight it on those grounds. Some principles are worthy of a fight others are not. It is for each person to judge when that line has been crossed.

 

[Paladin]

1 hour ago, EastCoastIPA said:

Fred, the whole point is that Griff and others HAVE complied with the byelaws. Guidance is just that guidance, it is not part of the byelaws, therefore does not have to be complied with. If the BA want you to comply with parts of the guidance, then they need to put it into the byelaws. Simple as.

No legislation is perfect, which is why lawyers make so much money. While the final interpretation is the perogative of the courts, the BA has issued guidance. This guidance does not form part of the legislation, but then the Highway Code is only guidance but contravention of it can be used in evidence to support a prosecution for some traffic offences.

It does seem that the BA will advance to prosecution as a last resort, if the bye law is deliberately flouted (see attached documents). The BA has explained why the bye laws were not strictly enforced previously, and why that policy has had to change. It is generally within the remit of an enforcement body how to prioritise enforcement. I doubt whether the vast majority of toll payers would welcome the extra expense in legal fees coming out of the tolls budget, just on a point of principle.

I don't see the point in kicking up a fuss, just because it wasn't done this way 50 years ago. 50 years ago that particular boat wasn't equipped with all the mod cons with which it is now equipped, so why does adding a few numbers make so much difference.

 

Display of Registration Marks NC-Minutes-nc170119.pdf Display-of-Registration-Marks-nc170119.pdf

[grendel]

I tend to agree with MM on one point here, by targeting the highly visible boats, they get cannot then be accused of favouritism, but on the flip side, the boat has been fine for 53 years with the numbers displayed as they are, guidelines are just guidelines, the bylaws are enforceable, the question is does the positioning of the numbers on the cabin side comply with the near the bow part of the bylaws.

then again are not the Broads Authority themselves committing an offence against the bylaws, by no longer issuing a toll plaque, they are ensuring nobody is in compliance with bylaw 22, can they in all honesty prosecute someone for contravention of the bylaws when a registration number has been clearly displayed, but they have not issued a toll plaque which should also be clearly displayed under the same bylaws.

[dnks34]

35 minutes ago, MauriceMynah said:

I see this issue as trivial and therefor not worth the effort of rebelling.

I see it as so trivial it isn't worth wasting costly Ranger time or the admin staff that will undoubtedly go along with it. 

If a boat is displaying its reg visibly in the right areas then this is a total waste of time, there are probably hundreds of boats displaying their reg number not quite to the Drs liking.

Why are the Broads Authority persistently on the look out for an excuse to alienate themselves from Toll Payers more and more......its just unbelievable!!  

Our ex boat had its stern reg visibly on the cabin step, which is exactly where it would have been staying had we got a ticket!

Not many years ago there was a Northern Hire Yard running around (some) same class of hire boats on identical reg numbers, when pointing it out an “admin” error was claimed, this is the sort of thing they should be putting there energies in to.  Avoidance!! Not lets annoy decent boat owners who most likely pay their toll on time every year.

[Meantime]

14 minutes ago, Paladin said:

It does seem that the BA will advance to prosecution as a last resort, if the bye law is deliberately flouted (see attached documents). The BA has explained why the bye laws were not strictly enforced previously, and why that policy has had to change.  

I can see that not having any or having defaced registration marks would be seen as deliberately flouting the byelaw. I fail to see how leaving the marks where they have been for the last 50 years is deliberately flouting the byelaw!

But you do raise the interesting point about why they now feel the need to change things. It is because they are deliberately flouting their own byelaw by not issuing the appropriate toll receipts that can be clearly displayed on the bow of the boat.

Pick and chose which to enforce, I don't think so! I had long discussions with David Harris about the whole procedure relating to toll receipts and whether you legally needed to apply for a toll receipt, when they were not issuing them. The application form for the toll receipt, which they don't issue anymore, includes the famous insurance declaration. David Harris tied himself up in knots trying to defend the actions of the Authority then. I had some very lengthy discussions with him about that saga. That particular year they did accept my toll payment without me making an application for a toll receipt on the prescribed form, because they finally accepted that I was not applying for a toll receipt that they were not going to issue. Ergo there was also no insurance declaration made either. That did lead to them eventually making some clarifying comments about insurance cover in The Broadsheet the following year. That point of principle DID lead to some limited positive outcome. They are now very much aware which insurance company does not meet the requirements of their byelaws.

[grendel]

I think the thing that stands out to me from this, is that compliance would have been far easier if the Rangers had chosen a better method of handling the issue, rather than just whacking an impersonal contravention notice on the boat, for the owner to find however long down the line, seems to be the wrong way to go about this. I am sure if people had been approached differently the same message could have been passed across in a much better manner, with less aggravation.

I do note that the signature on Griffs letter is that of one of the new rangers announced in the minutes linked above by Paladin, so maybe being new to the post they did not realise that just about anyone would recognise Broad Ambition anywhere. 

I am sure if Griff had been sent a letter explaining in a nice manner, things would have been dealt with accordingly.

that and the fact that the guidance leaflets that the broadcaster said would be issued with the toll reciepts dont seem to have been, would i think leave them on a sticky wicket legally, as if you have not received the guidance pamphlet, and been specifically informed before they issue a contravention notice, how were you supposed to know?

[Malanka]

I’m afraid MM, that you shoot but you miss my point entirely, this is not about registration numbers. This is about the BA interpreting their own guidance in a way which the regs do not call for. The regs are the law the BA is not permitted to make it up as it goes along, quite simple really. If you don’t want to oppose the BA making it up as they go along until they do something you personally don’t like, I can guarantee it won’t be long but by then the legal precedent will have been accepted as “ well nobody objected when we did x” .

Malanka is in full compliance with both the guidelines and the laws on reg numbers so this does not effect us in any way other than what is clearly an abuse of authority in one case at least that I am aware of. 

Not being a vindictive person I believe the matter is not being taken further by them, however the principle remains that the regs can be enforced in court, the desires of the current BA management as expressed in their published guidance document may not. 

It really is that simple. 

 

M

[dnks34]

It occurred to me has Broad Ambition been sought out here, all the boats across all of the Broads and they pick up on Broad Ambition..... hmm really??!

The thing is it will be a half hearted attempt at best.  The Broads Authority struggle to get much right.  They will show face, do 5 or 6 tickets then tick it off as job done and move on to the next method of Toll Payer persecution.....

[Malanka]

Grendel, the contravention is of the guidance document, not the relevant regulation quoted in the notice of contravention that’s the point here. 

The law is enforceable the guidance documents are not. 

My own industry has a similar system of guidance from the federal agencies FDA and enforceable laws in the CFR.( controlled by the congress)  Code of Federal Regulations.  I am constantly having to remind very senior management that the CFR is the law not the guidance document which  in the case of the FDA states at the bottom of every page that these are non enforceable guidelines. 

 

M

[Smoggy]

Mine are above rubbing strake on the superstructure moulding, does that make it on the cabin side as well?

I guess that makes me a criminal too then, hey-ho!

The daft bit is if they want to go with the bylaws I recon Griffs stern number is in contravention as it's not much of a contrast, his side ones stand out well and are nearer the bow than the stern so that makes them fine surely.

[grendel]

6 minutes ago, Malanka said:

Grendel, the contravention is of the guidance document, not the relevant regulation quoted in the notice of contravention that’s the point here. 

I agree with you there, must be my bad wording of things again, but I do stand by the fact that by not issuing toll plaques the broads Authority is contravening bylaw 22 on every boat on the broads. (the plaque being the recognised form of the tolls receipt). surely then if the penalty for non display is £1000, then the Authority owes a fair amount to itself for that non display.

[Malanka]

he he

[Smoggy]

Would the penalty go to the BA though as it would have to be handed down by a court, I would assume that would go to the treasury not the BA.

[CambridgeCabby]

Surely , before burying their heads in the sand and ignoring a contravention notice (albeit possibly issued incorrectly) the sensible thing to do would be to contact the BA explaining the historic placement of the registration numbers on these HISTORIC craft and also to highlight the BA’s apparently dubious interpretation of the regs and bylaws.

As I’m sure you know any official body / quango only get “wound up” when we choose to ignore official notices and since the receipt of said notice is now confirmed on a public forum the excuse of not receiving it is negated, whilst any appeal or dialogue in ongoing no further action can be taken by the BA .

If those who have been “ticketed” and posted historic pics on here compose a reply together and approach the BA together they may be able to get the authority to retract and address this situation amicably.

There is a reason why ignore is the stem of ignorance !!!

[Malanka]

Been done met with let us come and measure them. 

M

[Paladin]

1 hour ago, grendel said:

I agree with you there, must be my bad wording of things again, but I do stand by the fact that by not issuing toll plaques the broads Authority is contravening bylaw 22 on every boat on the broads. (the plaque being the recognised form of the tolls receipt). surely then if the penalty for non display is £1000, then the Authority owes a fair amount to itself for that non display.

That is not a fact, it is your opinion, which, in my opinion, is mistaken.

Bye Law 19 says:

No person shall moor, use or navigate a vessel on waters within the navigation area or cause or permit
a vessel to be so moored, used or navigated unless:
(1) ...
(2) any toll receipt issued by the Authority in respect of the period which includes that mooring, use or navigation of
the vessel is displayed on the vessel in such conspicuous position as the Authority shall determine.

Note the wording of 19(2), which refers to action be taken in respect of "any toll receipt issued by the Authority". It follows that, if the Authority doesn't issue such a toll receipt, that action cannot be taken. David Harris (BA solicitor) has pointed this out already and has said that in the (unlikely) event of a prosecution being mounted, there is a built-in defence. The subpara also refers to the ability of the Authority to determine where the toll receipt is to be displayed. They can, and have, determine that it is not necessary to display the toll receipt (for obvious reasons).

I can find no bye law that requires the Authority to issue a toll receipt. There is no legal requirement for anyone to issue a receipt for money received (other than VAT invoices).

[Paladin]

1 hour ago, EastCoastIPA said:

Pick and chose which to enforce, I don't think so!

I did not mean they could pick and choose on whom to enforce any rule, but they certainly do have the right to choose the priority of which rules are enforced and with what severity. That goes for any enforcement agency. They all have a certain amount of discretion.

[Paladin]

1 hour ago, dnks34 said:

It occurred to me has Broad Ambition been sought out here, all the boats across all of the Broads and they pick up on Broad Ambition..... hmm really??!

The thing is it will be a half hearted attempt at best.  The Broads Authority struggle to get much right.  They will show face, do 5 or 6 tickets then tick it off as job done and move on to the next method of Toll Payer persecution.....

Perhaps you should read the documents to which I posted links earlier.

"During the 2018/19 season Rangers issued Notices of Contravention to boat owners whose vessels were not displaying their registration marks correctly. Notices in respect of 436 vessels have been issued, almost all in private ownership."

What makes you think Broad Ambition should be treated any differently?

[JennyMorgan]

This is all just so unnecessary. As I read the guidance it says 'near the bow', whether that be on the hull or the cabin side. Near, well, how near is near? Surely Rangers are allowed to use a degree of common sense? This appears to be an illogical, unwarranted action on behalf of the Authority, perhaps by an inexperienced Ranger, a simple phone call might sort it. Regretfully it doesn't put the Authority in a good light, nothing new in that!  Being bloody minded makes few friends.

[Meantime]

28 minutes ago, Paladin said:

That is not a fact, it is your opinion, which, in my opinion, is mistaken.

Bye Law 19 says:

No person shall moor, use or navigate a vessel on waters within the navigation area or cause or permit
a vessel to be so moored, used or navigated unless:
(1) ...
(2) any toll receipt issued by the Authority in respect of the period which includes that mooring, use or navigation of
the vessel is displayed on the vessel in such conspicuous position as the Authority shall determine.

Note the wording of 19(2), which refers to action be taken in respect of "any toll receipt issued by the Authority". It follows that, if the Authority doesn't issue such a toll receipt, that action cannot be taken. David Harris (BA solicitor) has pointed this out already and has said that in the (unlikely) event of a prosecution being mounted, there is a built-in defence. The subpara also refers to the ability of the Authority to determine where the toll receipt is to be displayed. They can, and have, determine that it is not necessary to display the toll receipt (for obvious reasons).

I can find no bye law that requires the Authority to issue a toll receipt. There is no legal requirement for anyone to issue a receipt for money received (other than VAT invoices).

But, this is where it gets interesting, because if they are not going to issue a toll receipt, then why must you apply for a toll receipt? I was told you can not pay the toll unless you apply for a toll receipt on the prescribed form, the prescribed form contains the insurance declaration which is why they try and force you to apply for a toll receipt using the prescribed form even if they are not going to issue a toll receipt. They bend the byelaws to suit their own ends.

Bottom line is they don't issue toll plaques anymore which has made it harder for the rangers to quickly identify if someone has paid their toll. A problem of their own making which they are now turning into a PR disaster. As an aside, not issuing toll plaques has made the rangers job slightly harder, but has also removed one of the bigger hurdles to introducing a much fairer rolling 12 month toll renewal system, rather than everyone renewing at the same time and having to pay a full years toll if registering part way through the toll year. 

[grendel]

as islander mentioned above, they do issue receipts, he has the receipt for all 4 of his boats on one sheet, since a receipt has been issued, surely that means he should display it.

[Meantime]

8 minutes ago, grendel said:

as islander mentioned above, they do issue receipts, he has the receipt for all 4 of his boats on one sheet, since a receipt has been issued, surely that means he should display it.

The Byelaw says;

(2) any toll receipt issued by the Authority in respect of the period which includes that mooring, use or navigation of the vessel is displayed on the vessel in such conspicuous position as the Authority shall determine.
 

The BA have determined that they do not need to be displayed, therefore you do not need to display them, even if you still need to apply for them, However;

Display of Marks16 No person shall moor, use or navigate a vessel on waters within the navigation area or cause or permit a vessel to be so moored, used or navigated unless the current registration mark issued by the Authority in respect of the vessel is conspicuously displayed at all times on both sides of the vessel near the bow and on the stern of the vessel.

Is more specific about where the reg marks should be displayed. E.G near the bow. That byelaw also could very easily have said, "in such conspicuous position as the Authority shall determine" which would have given them carte blanche to have a hissy fit and determine that they need to be within 1200mm of the bow or any other such number as they saw fit for that year. Why the byelaws were written differently for the display of the two different items I don't know, but they were and it is not for the Authority to enforce something that is not in the Byelaws.

[Meantime]

I tried to edit the above post but it timed out on me and couldn't be edited,

The Byelaw says;

(2) any toll receipt issued by the Authority in respect of the period which includes that mooring, use or navigation of the vessel is displayed on the vessel in such conspicuous position as the Authority shall determine.

The BA have determined that they do not need to be displayed, therefore you do not need to display them, even if you still need to apply for them, However;

Receipts to be displayed 22(1) Except as provided in paragraph (2) the owner of a vessel shall ensure that throughout the period of validity of a toll receipt at no time shall it be obscured by covers, gear or any moveable part of the vessel.

Which taken in context with Byelaw 19(2) above would seem to indicate that they should be displayed somewhere on the vessel Byelaw 22 in a position determined by the Authority Byelaw 19(2) The Authority solicitor tied himself up in knots trying to convince people that as determined by the Authority meant it didn't have to be displayed if they so chose. I'm not convinced. If they issue a toll receipt it should be displayed on the boat somewhere. If they don't issue a toll receipt then I don't see why you have to apply for one. If you don't apply for one they won't let you pay the toll because you need to apply on the prescribed from, which contains the insurance declaration. The Authority put David Harris in the impossible position of justifying the impossible.

Display of Marks16 No person shall moor, use or navigate a vessel on waters within the navigation area or cause or permit a vessel to be so moored, used or navigated unless the current registration mark issued by the Authority in respect of the vessel is conspicuously displayed at all times on both sides of the vessel near the bow and on the stern of the vessel.

Is more specific about where the reg marks should be displayed. E.G near the bow. That byelaw also could very easily have said, "in such conspicuous position as the Authority shall determine" which would have given them carte blanche to have a hissy fit and determine that they need to be within 1200mm of the bow or any other such number as they saw fit for that year. Why the byelaws were written differently for the display of the two different items I don't know, but they were and it is not for the Authority to enforce something that is not in the Byelaws.

[rightsaidfred]

I really don't understand a whole lot of this argument, guidance notes are applied to a whole lot of things to allow you to comply with the relevant regulations or forms or whatever else this is just nit picking, as the BA are now in the wrong for not issuing toll  plaques I assume the DVLA are wrong for no longer issuing tax discs.

Also why is Broad Ambition at the centre of this it is probably just one of a number of boats who have received similar notices all are equal and no one is exempt, there are many older and truly original woodies who display the correct registration it is not difficult to comply and when Broad Ambition or any other boat comes speeding up behind me or causes other concerns it is the bow where I will look for the reg no as many boats have the same  name and its only the reg no that's relevant.

Fred 

[Meantime]

11 minutes ago, rightsaidfred said:

I really don't understand a whole lot of this argument, guidance notes are applied to a whole lot of things to allow you to comply with the relevant regulations or forms or whatever else this is just nit picking, as the BA are now in the wrong for not issuing toll  plaques I assume the DVLA are wrong for no longer issuing tax discs.

Also why is Broad Ambition at the centre of this it is probably just one of a number of boats who have received similar notices all are equal and no one is exempt, there are many older and truly original woodies who display the correct registration it is not difficult to comply and when Broad Ambition or any other boat comes speeding up behind me or causes other concerns it is the bow where I will look for the reg no as many boats have the same  name and its only the reg no that's relevant.

Fred 

Fred, you misunderstand, the BA are not in the wrong for not issuing toll plaques, they are in the wrong for using that as the reason they are clamping down on the positioning of reg marks after all these years. Because they chose not to issue them, the reg marks become more important to them. That in itself is fine, but to clamp down on boats that ALREADY comply with the byelaws, even if perhaps not the guidance is plain stupid.