Open Wallet Surgery (maybe)

[Smoggy]

It will be interesting to see what they can actually do if you just say no to the mooring fees at ranworth and reedham, does the bylaws give them the power to issue fines for non payment? I can't imagine it would be anything a magistrates court would be interested in as there's no actual law broken so small claims court would be the only option for them, a lot of hassle to get their tenner.

[Wussername]

2 hours ago, Smoggy said:

It will be interesting to see what they can actually do if you just say no to the mooring fees at ranworth and reedham, does the bylaws give them the power to issue fines for non payment? I can't imagine it would be anything a magistrates court would be interested in as there's no actual law broken so small claims court would be the only option for them, a lot of hassle to get their tenner.

There are many organisations that are unable to issue fines. The MAIB, The BA, the Coroners Court, the RSPB, a whole raft of organisations, one could carry on infinitum.

However they all have one thing in common.

They "know a man who does"⁹

 

[rightsaidfred]

1 hour ago, Wussername said:

There are many organisations that are unable to issue fines. The MAIB, The BA, the Coroners Court, the RSPB, a whole raft of organisations, one could carry on infinitum.

However they all have one thing in common.

They "know a man who does"⁹

 

Only if you break a law, no byelaw exists authorising a charge regarding historical free moorings already funded from tolls paid by the same people they are trying to charge again, magistrates courts only act on breaches of law not civil matters.

Fred

[Wussername]

42 minutes ago, rightsaidfred said:

Only if you break a law, no byelaw exists authorising a charge regarding historical free moorings already funded from tolls paid by the same people they are trying to charge again, magistrates courts only act on breaches of law not civil matters.

Fred

You may be correct in some instances and you have quoted a unique circumstance.

Fact has determined a somewhat different conclusion on a number of situations and will continue to do so.

 

[rightsaidfred]

31 minutes ago, Wussername said:

You may be correct in some instances and you have quoted a unique circumstance.

Fact has determined a somewhat different conclusion on a number of situations and will continue to do so.

 

And that is the one we are discussing.

Fred

[Wussername]

33 minutes ago, rightsaidfred said:

And that is the one we are discussing.

Fred

Indeed. Is it not relative, or in isolation?

[rightsaidfred]

58 minutes ago, Wussername said:

Indeed. Is it not relative, or in isolation?

Not sure what you are asking but the circumstances of every case is specific, this instance would seem to be fairly unique and I don't know of a precedent other than a general reluctance of the BA to prosecute even for a breach of Byelaws far more substantial than refusal to pay a questionable £10 charge.

Fred

 

[BroadsBuccaneer]

Morning all

New user here and have a boating holiday booked for April 2023...However looks like I'm going to be spending over and above the already costly hire charge to moor at previous free moorings! 

What is the meeting happening on the 20th Jan?  According to here:

https://www.bbc.com/news/uk-england-norfolk-64262473.amp

it looks like the £10 fee for Ranwoth/Reedham has already been agreed... 

Thx

BroadsBuccaneer

[grendel]

thats the meeting they vote on it, though it does appear to be presented as a fait acompli, we do know there may be issues with implementing charges at both sites either legally or by the local council that they lease the moorings from at reedham vetoing the decision (again)

Lets just hope someone reminds them of this before they vote.

 

[Smoggy]

You can always ask for something written that shows the charge is legal when they ask for it and see if they walk away, I can see quite a few challenging it when asked.

[rightsaidfred]

28 minutes ago, grendel said:

 

Lets just hope someone reminds them of this before they vote.

 

Been done, 

Fred

[rightsaidfred]

Just wondering how many of those complaining on various platforms took the time to write to the BA or its members objecting to the charges.

Fred

[Broads01]

I'm not a legal expert but I'm struggling to see how any charge for mooring is legal unless it's being levied by the land owner. It may be the legalities behind the ownership of Ranworth Staithe and Reedham Quay are complex but I doubt the B.A. owns the land in either case. It feels like being charged for parking in a free car park by a contractor who's been employed for works on the car park.

[Vaughan]

1 hour ago, rightsaidfred said:

Been done, 

How did you do it, Fred?  I have been looking at the BA website but can't seem to find an e-mail address which will actually connect with someone.  All they seem to have is an on-line complaints form, which I imagine will go directly to the nearest storage bin.

[Vaughan]

1 hour ago, rightsaidfred said:

Just wondering how many of those complaining on various platforms took the time to write to the BA or its members objecting to the charges.

Just also wondering when the ownership and admin of this forum will realise that we are a considerable platform to get our voices heard?

It is all very well to say we are a "discussion forum" but we are representative of literally thousands of members, all of whom are concerned about the future management of the Broads that we all love.

We have a link here to the BA and it is called @BroadsAuthority

I assume they are reading our comments and could Tom Waterfall please confirm that?

[rightsaidfred]

8 minutes ago, Vaughan said:

How did you do it, Fred?  I have been looking at the BA website but can't seem to find an e-mail address which will actually connect with someone.  All they seem to have is an on-line complaints form, which I imagine will go directly to the nearest storage bin.

If you look on the members page their email addresses are there, with the officers names the email is first name and surname separated by a . an example rob.rogers@broads-authority.gov.uk

Fred

[rightsaidfred]

28 minutes ago, Broads01 said:

I'm not a legal expert but I'm struggling to see how any charge for mooring is legal unless it's being levied by the land owner. It may be the legalities behind the ownership of Ranworth Staithe and Reedham Quay are complex but I doubt the B.A. owns the land in either case. It feels like being charged for parking in a free car park by a contractor who's been employed for works on the car park.

The BA own the moorings the Parish council own the green etc.

Fred

[ExSurveyor]

3 minutes ago, Vaughan said:

Just also wondering when the ownership and admin of this forum will realise that we are a considerable platform to get our voices heard?

It is all very well to say we are a "discussion forum" but we are representative of literally thousands of members, all of whom are concerned about the future management of the Broads that we all love.

Individual members have every opportunity to register objections themselves, that would be more effective than one group speaking.

If we were to speak out on behalf of vocal members, who would represent those that are accepting of increases.

How many people have actually troubled themselves to write in.

Many prefer to sit behind a keyboard and complain on forums and groups rather than register objections themselves.

 For clarity, we are not recognised as, or wish to be recognised as, a campaign group.

If anyone wants to set up a forum that is dedicated to campaigning, it can be done but is a time consuming process.

Trying to alter the direction of this forum, that has been built by hard work and countless hours by a number of individuals is not going to happen.

 

[rightsaidfred]

10 minutes ago, ExSurveyor said:

Individual members have every opportunity to register objections themselves, that would be more effective than one group speaking.

If we were to speak out on behalf of vocal members, who would represent those that are accepting of increases.

How many people have actually troubled themselves to write in.

 

 

Agree, the NSBA, NHBF have objected as organisations, it's a bit like people who dont bother to vote the  complain.

Fred

[Mouldy]

Just seen on a FB Broads group that the toll increase was unanimously voted for, by those present and eligible to vote.

No update on mooring charges at Ranworth and Reedham, though.

[Tobster]

Many years ago Martin Broom used to chair the Navigation committee, and was very supportive of us water skiers when the BA wanted to ban waterskiing.

do the Navigation committee still have any powers within the BA & do they still act as the voice of the boating community?

[Vaughan]

6 hours ago, ExSurveyor said:

If we were to speak out on behalf of vocal members, who would represent those that are accepting of increases.

What is a vocal member, on a forum?  A contradiction in terms, if ever I saw one.  Perhaps this is why previous "vocal" members have been elbowed out, if they started to talk too seriously about real matters of concern.

 

6 hours ago, ExSurveyor said:

For clarity, we are not recognised as, or wish to be recognised as, a campaign group.

A sadly missed opportunity.

 

6 hours ago, ExSurveyor said:

Trying to alter the direction of this forum, that has been built by hard work and countless hours by a number of individuals is not going to happen.

Two things to say here :

1/. Those of us who contribute our knowledge and experience have also put in countless hours, to create the archive history and Broads "savvy" which is available to all its members.  The forum also depends on the input of its "vocal" members.

2/. Your comment could describe the Broads itself!  It is what it is today, because those who came before us have fought for it.  When I say that my father must be turning in his grave, I genuinely mean it. 

Life should surely have taught us that that you have to defend what you hold dear.

It seems I should devote more of my time to other groups which I am invited to join and who are prepared to speak up for the future of the Broads.

St Matthew chapter 11 verse 3. - King James version.

 

 

[ExSurveyor]

23 minutes ago, Vaughan said:

It seems I should devote more of my time to other groups which I am invited to join and who are prepared to speak up for the future of the Broads.

That is my point, there are other places and organisations that are set up for campaigning.

 

26 minutes ago, Vaughan said:

1/. Those of us who contribute our knowledge and experience have also put in countless hours, to create the archive history and Broads "savvy" which is available to all its members.  The forum also depends on the input of its "vocal" members.

And that is acknowledged and appreciated, but it doesn't mean we have to change the established and unique atmosphere of the forum that those past members have helped to create, to transform into a campaign group.

Horses for courses.

There may be a reason that campaign groups concerned with the Broads amoungst other areas are thin on the ground and struggle to get support, people generally like to moan but won't go as far as to join any thing that would require more effort.

It is sadly the way of the world today.

[grendel]

11 hours ago, Vaughan said:

It is all very well to say we are a "discussion forum" but we are representative of literally thousands of members, all of whom are concerned about the future management of the Broads that we all love.

and how many of those thousands are commenting on this thread, can we truly say we are representing thousands based upon those maybe tens of people commenting in one thread? this is why we can only discuss the issues as we cant say what the thousands of people who are not commenting views are on the matter.

[grendel]

that doesnt mean its not important, I believe it is important, but that doesnt mean i can go to the BA and say that all the people on the forum feel that it is important, because unless I have asked each and every one and they have told me they think its important, I could be  misrepresenting the feeling of many.