Two Moorings Lost?

[batrabill]

So a direct contradiction of the “£1 long lease” story. 

[gancanny]

20 hours ago, NeilB said:

According to Facebook a well known ex contributor to this forum has spoken to the landowner at Langley Dyke, while not from the horses mouth it's sounds pretty close!

The rent was peppercorn at £1 per year and although the length was not mentioned it was stated as a long lease.  For some unknown reason the BA turned this offer down.

do we blame facebook or the ex-contributor for the misleading story, 

[grendel]

15 minutes ago, LondonRascal said:

Look at what is going on in London - which is an amazing thing to see how people are being nudged to accept change. Freedom's are not being removed from anybody, but should you wish to use a car, it will cost you more

I would agree with this, but the truth is that the new expanded ULEZ zone encloses all of the tube stations, so coming from outside London, you have to enter the zone to be able to proceed via public transport, and once you have driven into the zone and been charged, there is no longer an incentive to get the tube, I normally drive to hornchurch and get a tube in the rest of the way, but the new zone means that I will be charged to even get to hornchurch ( for the last 3 miles of the trip)

[JawsOrca]

22 minutes ago, BroadsAuthority said:

Hello CambridgeCabby,

"The Authority currently manages 53% more mooring frontage than twenty years ago (data not shown in table), 9.9% more than 10 years ago and 4.8% more than five years ago. Although the total number of different 24-hour mooring sites has fluctuated from year to year, the length of mooring frontage has increased despite pressures from landowners as well as rising material and equipment costs."

There's more information on this in Broad Sheet Feb 2023 and on this page here: https://www.broads-authority.gov.uk/news/frequently-asked-questions-navigation-charges-2023 (scroll down a bit)

In response to whether the figures are accurate/include double mooring. They are fairly accurate but some mooring lengths on our website are approximations/rounded up so may not be to the exact metre. The figures above are for mooring frontage in metres, so don't include double mooring.

Hope that helps,

Tom

Hi Tom,

Just regarding the length of mooring meters for this year. Can you advise where this data comes from? I've looked on https://www.broads-authority.gov.uk/boating/facilities/moorings and if you pop these figures through a calculator you get 7824 meters.

Thanks, Alan

[BroadsAuthority]

16 minutes ago, JawsOrca said:

Hi Tom,

Just regarding the length of mooring meters for this year. Can you advise where this data comes from? I've looked on https://www.broads-authority.gov.uk/boating/facilities/moorings and if you pop these figures through a calculator you get 7824 meters.

Thanks, Alan

Hi Alan,

The figures you've added up don't include the 'other moorings' listed below the main table.

We also don't list a section of the frontage we have at Acle on the main table as, although it is usable with ground anchors, it isn't fully up to our spec yet.

I should caveat my response above by saying that's total frontage we manage, not exclusively 24hr frontage (I am out of the office and don't have that data to hand!)

Hope that helps, have a good evening.

Tom

[imtamping2]

48 minutes ago, gancanny said:

do we blame facebook or the ex-contributor for the misleading story, 

Blame nobody , the cost is correct but the timescale wrong … the £1 rent is what BA have been paying for 20 years …… a pretty good deal if I may say so …..the problem has arisen as it would appear they wished to continue with this arrangement …… not realistic when you look at the toll increases over the last 20 years I’m sure you will agree …..

[Mouldy]

@BroadsAuthority

Tom, many thanks for the update on Langley Dyke, however the question regarding the possible loss of moorings at Gayes Staithe remains unanswered.  Are you able to comment on this, please?

[gancanny]

i think the main problem may be the year to year basis,  spend £1600 per lin metre (97 metres), a lot of money,  then the landlord gives you notice the following year,  the BA is left with nothing and the land owner has a long stretch of pristine mooring

[CambridgeCabby]

May I thank Tom @BroadsAuthority for his prompt and most importantly accurate reply concerning the Langley Dyke moorings .

Also thank you for the figures regarding length of moorings currently managed by the BA , although these figures include the former free 24hr moorings at Ranworth and potentially Reedham they do show that all appears less gloomy than many would have you believe .

[Bernard]

If the BA piled and refurbished these moorings with the deal being offered in a few years the landowner refused to re lease everyone would be complaining they wasted toll payers money with a bad deal, no one wants to see moorings go but sometimes you need to look further then just blaming  the BA because it's easy.

[rightsaidfred]

4 hours ago, LondonRascal said:

 

Look at what is going on in London - which is an amazing thing to see how people are being nudged to accept change. Freedom's are not being removed from anybody, but should you wish to use a car, it will cost you more and it will take a very long time to get to where you want to go verses other forms of transport. This causes frustration and costs people which makes the other ways of moving around the city begin to appeal more.   New buses can now only travel at the speed limit of the road they are using because they know the speed limit of the road and know where they are (GPS) and since almost all the roads in London (where they are managed by the local Council) are 20MPH, this is a great way to create rolling speed controls where drivers behind the buses cannot do more than the speed limit it also ensures the buses are driven with more care and cannot speed either, this all makes for a more pleasant environment if you are walking by the road or cycling .

 

I am sorry Robin I don't know what world you live in but its not the one most of us do, I am afraid our mayor an even bigger autocrat than JP is not nudging people he is compelling many of us to accept stringent penalties for what is an essential part of our lives, many old or disabled people and ones working unsocial hours are dependant on a car, many can't afford to replace what are often very good vehicles with many years life left in them, as for 20mph speed limits and road closures to pander to cyclists  its causing more air pollution and snarl ups than ever.

It would seem you often fall into the line of thinking of many of the younger generations who think they know better than and want to regulate the lives of those of us who have lived through and seen most of what life can throw at you,  contrary to what you think the freedom of choice is constantly being eroded from every day life on both a national and local level, just because someone is placed in a position of authority it doesn't always  mean they know what's best for others.

Fred

[NeilB]

4 hours ago, gancanny said:

do we blame facebook or the ex-contributor for the misleading story, 

Nothing to do with Facebook but I've asked him directly, I'll let you know.  I suspect he reads this forum anyway, just no longer posts.

[Vaughan]

It seems the "ex contributor" is fighting his corner, on this one.

I think more info may follow soon.

[Hylander]

Far from misleading us, he has given us all a heads up as to what is happening.    As a lot of us plan a year ahead when booking boats it could have a bearing on bookings if too many of the lovely moorings down South go by the wayside.  Proper moorings and I call them are far more relevant down South than up North where you can practically rock up wherever you are and stop.   You try doing that down South.

 

 

[imtamping2]

Signs being removed now  07/06/2023

 

[Gracie]

14 hours ago, rightsaidfred said:

I am sorry Robin I don't know what world you live in but its not the one most of us do, I am afraid our mayor an even bigger autocrat than JP is not nudging people he is compelling many of us to accept stringent penalties for what is an essential part of our lives, many old or disabled people and ones working unsocial hours are dependant on a car, many can't afford to replace what are often very good vehicles with many years life left in them, as for 20mph speed limits and road closures to pander to cyclists  its causing more air pollution and snarl ups than ever.

It would seem you often fall into the line of thinking of many of the younger generations who think they know better than and want to regulate the lives of those of us who have lived through and seen most of what life can throw at you,  contrary to what you think the freedom of choice is constantly being eroded from every day life on both a national and local level, just because someone is placed in a position of authority it doesn't always  mean they know what's best for others.

Fred

I have to say what a brilliant post and better put than I ever could.

I'm of the younger generation, I certainly don't know how to do things better but I do know how disability affects people, if my dad was 'nudged' to give up his car, he would be housebound. He has to attend the Douglas Bader Unit in London on a regular basis, it would be very difficult for me to get him there by train, it can be done, of course it could but extremely difficult, stressful and uncomfortable for him

My children and I can travel on a train to anywhere if we wanted to but for some people it's not that easy. Life is difficult enough for disabled people, we really don't realise how difficult and we never will unless we walk a mile in their shoes x

 

 

[NeilB]

I'm not sure if I'm allowed to copy and paste from Facebook so I won't unless a mod gives the ok.  The owner was not amused by the BA press release and their response can be seen on the Broads Authority Facebook page for those of you with access.

The latest info suggests the BA may have re-started negotiations with the owner......

[BuffaloBill]

Just a slight diversion for this thread.... We did 'loose' the moorings

at Acle which I believe Pedro's used to collect the fees for?

Can these moorings be used now and are they fee payable or free?

[Meantime]

11 minutes ago, BuffaloBill said:

Just a slight diversion for this thread.... We did 'loose' the moorings

at Acle which I believe Pedro's used to collect the fees for?

Can these moorings be used now and are they fee payable or free?

They are still open, a lot of the quay heading is in a bad state of repair. I believe they are free during the day, but a charge applies overnight 5pm onwards. I think it is £10, there are signs there but I didn't study them too closely.

They are now operated by Broads Bank Moorings? or something similar, basically they still appear to be owned by Richardsons. Purely supposition but I wouldn't mind betting one of the employees stops by on the way home to collect the mooring fees.

[Meantime]

17 minutes ago, NeilB said:

I'm not sure if I'm allowed to copy and paste from Facebook so I won't unless a mod gives the ok.  The owner was not amused by the BA press release and their response can be seen on the Broads Authority Facebook page for those of you with access.

The latest info suggests the BA may have re-started negotiations with the owner......

I know the land owner and have found them to be very reasonable, honest and easy to deal with. I wish I could say the same for the BA.

[NeilB]

4 minutes ago, Meantime said:

They are still open, a lot of the quay heading is in a bad state of repair. I believe they are free during the day, but a charge applies overnight 5pm onwards. I think it is £10, there are signs there but I didn't study them too closely.

They are now operated by Broads Bank Moorings? or something similar, basically they still appear to be owned by Richardsons. Purely supposition but I wouldn't mind betting one of the employees stops by on the way home to collect the mooring fees.

I stopped there last week, the signs are still there asking for payment stating collection would be after 5pm, I was on board until 7pm and no one knocked on my boat.  The moorings were pretty full but are not in the best condition, I had to pick my spot to avoid some nasty bits of metal.

I do wonder what the long term outlook is for these moorings as they will need significant work soon.

[ExSurveyor]

1 hour ago, NeilB said:

I'm not sure if I'm allowed to copy and paste from Facebook so I won't unless a mod gives the ok.  The owner was not amused by the BA press release and their response can be seen on the Broads Authority Facebook page for those of you with access.

The latest info suggests the BA may have re-started negotiations with the owner......

A copy and paste of the owners reply is fine, the other side of the story is good for balance.

[Meantime]

8 minutes ago, ExSurveyor said:

A copy and paste of the owners reply is fine, the other side of the story is good for balance.

Copied in full along with Author's name

Edited to add: This was in direct reply to the BA's post on their official Facebook page.

Jamie Tubby

I feel as the landowner I must defend myself from your take on recent events.

I did contact the BA in March 2021 so talks could start for finding a mutual solution in order to grant a new lease before the current lease ended.

Over the past two years I have offered -(a), Moving the 24 hour moorings to the other end of the dyke. (b), asked for quay heading and (c), asked for £2000 p.a for a fixed period of 5 years and I would take on grass cutting.

The response has been - (a), The BA is not interested in moving as the quay heading is not in good repair and there is a health and safety risk being so close to the river mouth. No problem! (b) we cannot be seen to fix your quay heading when so much of ours is in a bad state of repair. Makes sense! (c) If we paid you £2000 a year then we would have to pay all of our other landowners a similar figure in the future. Again another logical explanation as to why they cannot accept my offer.

It is true that in February this year the BA did offer to dredge Langley Staithe but unfortunately it is not needed and there would be a risk that it could undermine the quay heading if it was done unnecessarily.

I was shocked and disappointed to receive the email on Friday 2nd June giving me 11 days notice that my recent proposal was rejected, my understanding from the last conversation that I had with the BA was that my so called offer was actually a question, if you cant pay £2000 per year then what can you pay? The BA have at no point offered any money to secure a new lease, not even a pound!

The previous landowner granted a 21 year lease at a peppercorn rent because the BA dredged the dyke, that was not a free transaction so I'm confused as to why I am being portrayed as the greedy landowner?

It is a sad loss to the boating community and because of the lack of notice and my naivety that an agreement would be reached it leaves me have no choice but to close the mooring whilst I consider the options.

[rightsaidfred]

While I appreciate Tom can only repeat the information he is given as usual we are left with the same feeling of here we go again, if the BAs version is 100% accurate why was there no mention in this months Broads Briefing? 

The BA still havn't admitted they don't have a lease at Reedham although it is still manned, given the number of times things are slipped through hopefully unnoticed ones left doubting just about everything they say.

Fred 

[RealWindmill]

9 hours ago, Hylander said:

Far from misleading us, he has given us all a heads up as to what is happening.   

Couldn't agree with you more M. And we should also remember that this ex contributor is the person that alerted many of us to what was afoot with the National Park idea and the whole debate that followed. Many of the arguements he put forward and quotes he provided proved very prophetic and are still very relevant in the light of recent BA shenanigens.

There were several detractors at the time who said it was an unimportant irrelevent issue and what did a few words or an NP title matter. I suspect not so many are thinking that way now.

Vigilance is still required as recent events conspiring against boaters are unfolding show.