Mooring Fees

[ExSurveyor]

People may think they are being charged too much, it doesn't mean they are.

My tenants probably moan when I put up their rents but my costs rise each year as well. If they want a safe and sound property to live in they will pay or they can move out. The fact all my tenants stay for years tells me I am doing it the right way.

I am a business not a charity, therefore I will endeavor to make a profit, that is the way of the world we live in.

If I don't make a profit I would sell the properties and they would have to find somewhere else to live, it is the same with moorings.

[MauriceMynah]

I'm pretty much with you there Mark (Psychic Surveyor). I often wonder at people who say that boatyards "load" the high season prices rather than make the observation that out of season and lower season prices are discounted. The "glass half empty" syndrome

Now, imagine you owned a set of stern on moorings. (not just you Mark, everybody!) and you were letting them. Would you charge by the foot (and be accused of profiteering by disadvantaging longer boats) or would you charge a flat rate (and be accused of profiteering by disadvantaging shorter boats. Mooring posts would have to be set at a regular distance so charging by "beam footage" really isn't viable.)

 

[Vaughan]

I agree with both Mark and MM on this, where boatyard and mooring businesses are concerned. I think it is accepted, world-wide, that marina moorings are charged by the foot length.

What irks me, is when you get a non - boatyard business that decides to charge people for mooring on land which abuts the river bank. I refer of course to certain farmers, who did very nicely thank you out of all the flood protection provided for them by the EA and others and then thought that the "camp shedding" put there to protect their fields looked like a nice mooring so they thought what a good idea to charge for it, where it had otherwise been an accepted wild mooring for decades.

I am also, and always will be, totally against pubs charging for moorings and thus biting the hand that feeds them.

[Oddfellow]

7 hours ago, Upcycler said:

It basically boils down to the fact that people think you are charging far too much for what you give. When you see that series that when landlords left their luxury cars and houses to live the life of one of their tenants, you might understand their perspective! 

Really? How do you people think that many people with wealth achieve it? By sitting back on their posteriors bitching about people that have gotten off of theirs and done something to improve their situations? 

I am a landlord and I drive around in a 200,000 mile 10 year-old entry-level Volvo s40. Not everyone is the same.

Sorry, but I will never understand the perspective of people who bitch about the cost of mooring and other running costs of their luxury items.

[dnks34]

7 hours ago, psychicsurveyor said:

People may think they are being charged too much, it doesn't mean they are.

My tenants probably moan when I put up their rents but my costs rise each year as well. If they want a safe and sound property to live in they will pay or they can move out. The fact all my tenants stay for years tells me I am doing it the right way.

I am a business not a charity, therefore I will endeavor to make a profit, that is the way of the world we live in.

If I don't make a profit I would sell the properties and they would have to find somewhere else to live, it is the same with moorings.

There is every chance your Tenants yearly income remains the same yet they become poorer each year through you putting their rent up.  They may well have every right to moan. 

This thread is beginning to leave a sour taste. 

[floydraser]

1 minute ago, dnks34 said:

This thread is beginning to leave a sour taste. 

Yep, that's two threads we've got going at the moment with nothing more to discuss and no productive debate to be had. Can we leave them to drop off the popular list please?

[ExSurveyor]

18 minutes ago, dnks34 said:

There is every chance your Tenants yearly income remains the same yet they become poorer each year through you putting their rent up.  They may well have every right to moan. 

On that basis I would also become poorer each year, but multiplied by the number of units I have.

 

 

 

[Vaughan]

20 minutes ago, floydraser said:

Yep, that's two threads we've got going at the moment with nothing more to discuss and no productive debate to be had.

Oh? Which is the other one, in your view?

I see nothing at all wrong with debating this, on a forum, as views from all sides can be discussed democratically. It might result in both sides of the argument understanding each other better.

Is that what a forum is for?  It certainly was for the Romans . . . 

[Poppy]

10 minutes ago, Vaughan said:

Oh? Which is the other one, in your view?

I see nothing at all wrong with debating this, on a forum, as views from all sides can be discussed democratically. It might result in both sides of the argument understanding each other better.

Is that what a forum is for?  It certainly was for the Romans . . . 

But when some people don't like your opinion......

[Tempest]

In my opinion it's all down to market forces

Supply and demand

If the demand wasn't there, prices would fall and when demand is high prices rise

My son will soon be leaving his home for 28 years (at last!!!) as he has bought a new house from belway homes at a whopping 197K!

The property is called "Lambeth"

My first house was 14K!

But all future Lambeths on the same estate are now priced at 220K

Why? The first Lambeths on the estate have been snapped up and belway have "re-evaluated" the pricing structure and up the prices have gone, whilst some other properties have dropped slightly as one product offsets the other

That's good business in my opinion and ensures that the estate continues to grow and the company is able to prosper 

I don't see any difference to a boat yard balancing the books and maximising the income from the products or services they have at their disposal

[Poppy]

2 minutes ago, Tempest said:

In my opinion it's all down to market forces

Supply and demand

If the demand wasn't there, prices would fall and when demand is high prices rise

My son will soon be leaving his home for 28 years (at last!!!) as he has bought a new house from belway homes at a whopping 197K!

The property is called "Lambeth"

My first house was 14K!

But all future Lambeths on the same estate are now priced at 220K

Why? The first Lambeths on the estate have been snapped up and belway have "re-evaluated" the pricing structure and up the prices have gone, whilst some other properties have dropped slightly as one product offsets the other

That's good business in my opinion and ensures that the estate continues to grow and the company is able to prosper 

I don't see any difference to a boat yard balancing the books and maximising the income from the products or services they have at their disposal

And how many of those 'Lambeths' have been bought by landlords for private lets at rents in excess of the cost of a mortgage ?

It's a Catch 22 for so many. Can't save to buy because rents are too high !

[floydraser]

18 minutes ago, Vaughan said:

Oh? Which is the other one, in your view?

I see nothing at all wrong with debating this, on a forum, as views from all sides can be discussed democratically. It might result in both sides of the argument understanding each other better.

Is that what a forum is for?  It certainly was for the Romans . . . 

Good point. Someone said it was turning sour and it was. I was thinking more about guests who may be reading this seeing pointless discussion and wondering whether to join the forum. Like, is this a good advert?

The other one is the news/non news story.

Just the ex-chairperson in me coming out; I would have said this had been discussed enough, everyone has just about made their points, time for a vote or next item.

[JennyMorgan]

2 hours ago, floydraser said:

Just the ex-chairperson in me coming out; I would have said this had been discussed enough, everyone has just about made their points, time for a vote or next item.

Unlike a committee meeting a forum attracts new, often uninformed members at totally random times. This means that there are people, often wishing to become involved, who often know little or nothing of the events or history behind the topic or debate. Does that sound familiar? This clearly applies to some people more than others. Granted that we can't all have a lifetimes experience of the Broads, or decades of experience of the Broads Authority, but that's life. As an ex-chairperson myself, several times,  I really don't see a valid comparison between forums and committee meetings,  two very different animals albeit with both having members who would benefit from some in-depth research and experience of what they have chosen to debate or even argue over. 

[floydraser]

26 minutes ago, JennyMorgan said:

Unlike a committee meeting a forum attracts new, often uninformed members at totally random times. This means that there are people, often wishing to become involved, who often know little or nothing of the events or history behind the topic or debate. Does that sound familiar? This clearly applies to some people more than others. Granted that we can't all have a lifetimes experience of the Broads, or decades of experience of the Broads Authority, but that's life. As an ex-chairperson myself, several times,  I really don't see a valid comparison between forums and committee meetings,  two very different animals albeit with both having members who would benefit from some in-depth research and experience of what they have chosen to debate or even argue over. 

Not the point at all. 

[Poppy]

I find it irritating when folk post tha 'we shouldn't be talking about that '. It's a forum.  If you dislike something, scroll on until you find something of interest to you.  I do it all the time .

[floydraser]

1 minute ago, Poppy said:

I find it irritating when folk post tha 'we shouldn't be talking about that '. It's a forum.  If you dislike something, scroll on until you find something of interest to you.  I do it all the time .

I think you and JM are missing the point. Post what you like, fill your boots, knock yourself out. The point was about what the forum looks like. Yes forums are forums just like clothes are just clothes but you wouldn't go out looking scruffy. Oops there's another tangent for someone to go off on! 

[Malanka]

At last a topic concerning length and width  that has no other references than cost. He he tin hat time. 
 

At the end of the day it’s a very simple matter of English common law. Offer and Acceptance. Simple as... 

What’s  that old adage. You pays your money and makes your choice. 
 

no foul.... 

 

 

[JennyMorgan]

3 hours ago, floydraser said:

. . . . . . . . you wouldn't go out looking scruffy. Oops there's another tangent for someone to go off on! 

You obviously haven't seen Poppy when he's out sailing!

[Poppy]

1 hour ago, JennyMorgan said:

You obviously haven't seen Poppy when he's out sailing!

There's nothing wrong with my reefer jacket and gold braided yachtsmans cap - and it didn't come from La'Thams I'll have you know !

[JennyMorgan]

1 minute ago, Poppy said:

There's nothing wrong with my reefer jacket and gold braided yachtsmans cap - and it didn't come from La'Thams I'll have you know !

Apart from the fag ash and dribbled food stains (patina) down the front of the jacket!!

[Poppy]

5 minutes ago, JennyMorgan said:

Apart from the fag ash and dribbled food stains (patina) down the front of the jacket!!

The 'patina' has been lovingly formed from a weathered combination of Woodfords and Adnams finest. I insist on my pint's being brim full and spillage is inevitable

The fag ash hasn't been added to since early 2003 !

[NorfolkNog]

1 hour ago, Poppy said:

I insist on my pint's being brim full

A man after my own heart. 

One of the many reasons that I love drinking in Norfolk!! 

[JennyMorgan]

49 minutes ago, NorfolkNog said:

A man after my own heart. 

Do you also have a well run-in, disreputable reefer jacket then?

[Chelsea14Ian]

It is surely,  you pay your money  and take your chance. We've moored at Cove for five years.Very happy we are too. Its not the cheapest, nor the dearest .Since owing boats,now 10 years we have been moored at Eastwood and Cove,Brundall both very good. Not so happy when Eastwoods changed hands,then Greenway Chedgrave. Liked it there but moved back to Brundall, due to Marinas Arthritis making it hard on and off the stern all the time. You can of course moor is some spots cheaply with little or no services. Again pick a moorings that suits you and your pocket. 

[Oddfellow]

22 hours ago, dnks34 said:

There is every chance your Tenants yearly income remains the same yet they become poorer each year through you putting their rent up.  They may well have every right to moan. 

This thread is beginning to leave a sour taste. 

Comments like this really irritate me.

This is a free-market-economy and in that we have a housing issue where there is a dearth of social housing created in no small part by the Right To Buy and other government policy that directly affected housing stock. We have many private landlords who were encouraged to become so by governments and pension planners who were saying for years that the state pensions were not going to be sufficient to look after us when we retired.  We had a failing private pension system too and plenty of crooks like Robert Maxwell (who's Daughter has just been finally arrested by the FBI) who plundered pension funds for their own benefit. 

We also had housing market conditions that left people in situations that would see them lose if they bought at the top of the market and subsequently sold at the bottom which also created a raft of private landlords. 

There seems to be a big misconception over the average private landlord. There are many who are professional landlords who make their whole living off the profit between the rent paid and the mortgage repayments. There are many more who have just a few properties to act as their pension planning, as I say, encouraged to do so through specific conditions and policy of the past. Many of these people have been smacked squarely in the privates by the more recent shift in tax relief policy too which favours the very big landlords rather than those just getting by with a pension plan that might now be costing them money rather than accumulating a pension pot. 

What are we supposed to do? Should we look merely to break even and then accept that we CAN'T afford to fix the boiler so our tenant can go cold? Or should we regularly review the rents so that we have the money to get a plumber in when the toilet won't flush or should we just pay for that out of our own funds? 

There is a one heck of a realisation that some people need to arrive at.