Rangers On A Purge. ..

[Paladin]

19 minutes ago, EastCoastIPA said:

Perhaps that's why the byelaw needs to be rewritten to be more specific. At that point allowances could be made for historical, or certain other categories of boat and after that everyone could be made to comply with the byelaw. I do agree that it may be an easier approach to do what the rangers ask, as long as that remains a voluntary action, and not something incorrectly forced with the threat of prosecution.

Consider this, if Griff takes his marks off and moves them to the bow, it will leave holes that need to be filled. I can see that would really upset him. Now how about this for an approach. The BA identify boats that do not satisfy it's "guidance" leaflet and then write to the owners politely and explain the problems that have been created since the abolition of the toll plaque. They enclose another set of registration marks and ask the owner whether they would mind applying the new set of marks in line with their guidance leaflet and also explaining that they have no problem with the owner leaving the existing ones in place as well. I doubt if many people would have objected to that! A right and a wrong way springs to mind. Or is that just too reasonable for this Authority?

What do you see as the necessary qualifying attributes for a vessel to be placed in the 'historical boat' category?

[Meantime]

3 minutes ago, Paladin said:

If there can be this amount of fuss created over the placement of registration numbers, I can't imagine those who own boats with mega-HP engines would bother about such guidance. After all, they have invested a large amount of cash to be able to travel a speed.

However, IF such guidance was issued, a skipper ignored it and an accident occurred, I have no doubt the guidance would be quoted when the question of liability was being determined (much as the Highway Code guidance is used).

Which does rather beg the question, what accident is likely to happen if the reg numbers are not in line with the guidance?

[MauriceMynah]

In fairness Pally's post and ECIPA's response is rather why the two issues should not be compared. They are just not comparable. It is also why I disagreed with ECIPA's comment about it setting a precedent.

[Paladin]

1 minute ago, EastCoastIPA said:

Which does rather beg the question, what accident is likely to happen if the reg numbers are not in line with the guidance?

That question is irrelevant, as I was responding to a totally different suggestion that was being put forward. My point was that guidance on legislation is very common and, while the guidance cannot be enforced, it can be, and is, used to support enforcement.

In the case of Broad Ambition, it is my view that, if the issue of the Notice of Contravention is not challenged and expunged, should a prosecution be brought at a later date, that notice could be referred to as evidence of the awareness of the owner that an alleged infringement had been committed, and that the lack of a challenge might indicate acceptance of that allegation.

If I was in that situation, I wouldn't be taking to social media, I would be taking this up directly with the Head of Ranger Services to try to come to a solution.

[Islander]

Why not place new marks on a nice hardwood plaque and use 22mm push fit pipe clips to mount on the pulpit. That way they can be easily removed for shows, photo opportunities etc. Everyone should be happy with that.

I do wonder why one of the ten most well known boats on the broads needs further marks added so the BA can recognise it.

Out of interest just where were the toll discs displayed on Broad Ambition before the BA went 'paperless'.

Colin 

[Meantime]

3 minutes ago, MauriceMynah said:

In fairness Pally's post and ECIPA's response is rather why the two issues should not be compared. They are just not comparable. It is also why I disagreed with ECIPA's comment about it setting a precedent.

That may have been an extreme example but there are many examples where the majority would be happy to comply, yet a few would not.

How about the "guidance", because I'm sure there is no byelaw covering it, that parts of a public 24hr mooring are set aside for motor boats unable to pass under a road bridge. That guidance with some modification after a lot of discussion appears to still stand.

[grendel]

I think I have figured a solution that would satisfy the bylaws to the letter at least.

[MauriceMynah]

Is that on or near?

Sorry ECIPA, I kinda nicked your line. :-)

[Meantime]

They are meant to be near the bow not on!

[Meantime]

1 minute ago, MauriceMynah said:

Is that on or near?

Sorry ECIPA, I kinda nicked your line. :-)

Off course we cannot tell the depth of field, they might be approx. 1.2 metres in front of the bow

[ExSurveyor]

The Rangers and the Authority should be spending their time and energy pursuing the many regular non toll payers who year after year flout paying. This would at least increase income.

The ability to identify a vessel has not changed,  the Authority's wish to speed up the process because they changed the issuing of the toll has.

To call the new toll system paperless is a joke.  I get two envelopes with separate receipts and two lots of additional paper in addition to the two separate reminders issued in March.

They have my email, why not use it.

[Meantime]

1 minute ago, psychicsurveyor said:

The Rangers and the Authority should be spending their time and energy pursuing the many regular non toll payers who year after year flout paying. This would at least increase income.

The ability to identify a vessel has not changed,  the Authority's wish to speed up the process because they changed the issuing of the toll has.

To call the new toll system paperless is a joke.  I get two envelopes with separate receipts and two lots of additional paper in addition to the two separate reminders issued in March.

They have my email, why not use it.

To be fair once you register for tolls online they stop sending you toll renewals through the post. I received my toll renewal by email and paid online and received nothing in the post, not even a receipt.

[KatieR]

Hmm. I’m thinking of changing my boats current ID marks to make them a tad larger- I’m worried with the guidance I may not comply. They are fine in terms of contrast colour (white marks on a navy background should suffice?), they are fine with placing on the stern and on each side near the bow, but perhaps they should be a bit bigger. I think 6 inch high marks would be better. 

Oh, and whilst I am at it I think I will put the chinese symbol for each letter and number instead of the current alpha numeric ones. 

Whhaaaaat??? They will be placed correctly and very conspicuous indeed- I doubt many would miss them..... 

Its a nonsense.

Huge numbers of us have seen Broad Ambition either on photos or some luckily up close and “in the flesh”, exactly who’s first thought has been “oh but there isn’t an ID mark exactly there where it should be to comply with guidance”? No, the vast majority think what a lovely boat, how brilliant that she has been saved and restored for the future, and what a lot of time, skill, love and money has been put into it. 

Ultimately, it will be for Broad Ambition’s owners to consider what they want to do, and this may well be to comply with guidance. It may not. Quite simply it is wholly their call but I, for one, would wholly understand either decision. 

What I do not and will never understand is BA grubbing around and making an issue when there isn’t one- there are lots of far more important issues to address. 

If grub they must for reasons only known to themselves, then ECIPA is totally correct-there are ways and ways of doing things....

[MauriceMynah]

Did the BA make an issue of this, or did we?

[ExSurveyor]

3 minutes ago, MauriceMynah said:

Did the BA make an issue of this, or did we?

Definitely BA, hence last years damage to my window.

[MauriceMynah]

Wasn't that a different issue?

[ExSurveyor]

19 minutes ago, EastCoastIPA said:

To be fair once you register for tolls online they stop sending you toll renewals through the post. I received my toll renewal by email and paid online and received nothing in the post, not even a receipt. 

If only it was that easy, I have tried twice and given up. They insist they can't email the receipts and then send them separately even though the are paid at the same time. They don't even have the ability to take one payment and ask me twice if i want paper tide tables.

I would love to know how much they spend on IT.

[marshman]

No question about historical vessels - they should be on one of the Registers run by the National Historic Ships organisation - otherwise they might be old and classic but not historic.

Thats sorted that then but you would still have to discuss it with the BA I suspect.

[marshman]

I also notice from something Pally posted way back, that this exercise started in 2018, and 436 notices of contravention were issued last year! Correct me if I am wrong but I do not recall this fuss last year - is that because some people just want to ratchet up pressure on the BA as they like poking them or was it perhaps that most were complied with without a great deal of fuss?

I also assume that those who have been affected have also spoken to the NSBA - if they are members. I have generally thought the NSBA worked pretty well on behalf of owners and indeed they have been talking to the BA about this particular subject over the winter.

You have to accept, I suspect, that such a group generally have a better chance of success than individuals pontificating their OWN views on an open Forum?

 

[Meantime]

16 minutes ago, marshman said:

You have to accept, I suspect, that such a group generally have a better chance of success than individuals pontificating their OWN views on an open Forum?

 

Marshman, to use your own parlance from earlier on in this thread, Why is it I sometimes get the impression that some people really cannot have a lot to do in their life??? other than to constantly belittle other members comments. It is after all quite a nice day outside where I am so I'm now going outside to potter around the garden.

I'll be back when politeness resumes!

[ExSurveyor]

Within the Brundall area we have,

A partially burnt boat that has been abandoned on Surlingham Broad since last summer.

A yacht left on Church Fen 24 hour moorings since before Easter, the local yoofs have taken an interest in it, i chased them off and photographed Saturday evening.

These two untolled vessels will be more expensive to refloat than they will be be tow away.

Two areas of the river still substantially obstructed by fallen trees.

A collection of boats that have obscured reg numbers and no tolls, again.

 However, these things cost money to rectify, no point in pursuing boats that are continually untolled as the costs will never be recovered, far better to spend a considerable time and effort sending rangers out to check if reg numbers are displayed in accordance with the authority's latest whim, not the bye laws but a recently interpreted 'guidance' leaflet that is now the third version in a few years.

How to win friends and influence people. NOT.

 

 

[dnks34]

5 hours ago, rightsaidfred said:

We are going round in circles you have your opinion I have mine we will have to settle for that, it just seems unreal that a few cannot accept what the vast majority are happy to comply with.

With 432 supposed contraventions plus those booked in the wetshed that brought about this thread i cant find exactly how many boats there are registered on the Broads at present but Im not sure that 432+ contraventions of the guidance means that the vast majority are complying......with the guidance.....

[grendel]

55 minutes ago, dnks34 said:

the vast majority are complying......with the guidance.....

apart from the many hire boats with the number on the rear cabin, that were ignored by the rangers.

[MauriceMynah]

I think that point has already been answered Gren

[rightsaidfred]

3 hours ago, dnks34 said:

With 432 supposed contraventions plus those booked in the wetshed that brought about this thread i cant find exactly how many boats there are registered on the Broads at present but Im not sure that 432+ contraventions of the guidance means that the vast majority are complying......with the guidance.....

I believe there are in excess of 9000 private boats registered.

Fred