Broads Authority Mooring Fees

[MauriceMynah]

I thought that this was worthy of it's own thread as the Ranworth thread may need to continue in it's own way. 

I wonder if a mod can move the Sutton Staithe electricity posts from the Ranworth thread to here please.

[MauriceMynah]

Is it against the ToS to ask for the link to the footage of the Sutton Staithe leccy posts being taken out of service, to be sent to me by a pm? 

If not, please can someone do that for me ?

[Smoggy]

24 minutes ago, MauriceMynah said:

Is it against the ToS to ask for the link to the footage of the Sutton Staithe leccy posts being taken out of service, to be sent to me by a pm? 

If not, please can someone do that for me ?

I wouldn't mind a peek at that too to make up my own mind.

[andyfish]

2 hours ago, MauriceMynah said:

Is it against the ToS to ask for the link to the footage of the Sutton Staithe leccy posts being taken out of service, to be sent to me by a pm? 

If not, please can someone do that for me ?

I'm fairly certain that the video is on YouTube 

[Hylander]

It is on YouTube but more to the point the comments underneath are tantamount to encouraging vandalism.   It is quite shocking.

[dom]

Does the date on the video reflect when it actually took place? If so, I wonder if the incident at Neatishead has any bearing on things. Only two days earlier, so could be a related safety concern?

[Hylander]

Today is the 5th and it states 1 day ago.  I wouldnt stand up in Court with that though as not always bona fide.

 

 

[dom]

He says "nice thursday", so I suspect it was yesterday. Also makes reference to a Police visit.

Just how many boats does he have? Says he'll move his boats to Irstead and the other ones to Dilham, which suggests at least 4?? Have to wonder if they're all licensed.

 

 

[Meantime]

9 minutes ago, dom said:

Does the date on the video reflect when it actually took place? If so, I wonder if the incident at Neatishead has any bearing on things. Only two days earlier, so could be a related safety concern?

I think that's unwise speculation to link the two. Very little details have been released in the press about the incident at Neatishead, but if it had anything to do with the safety of an electric post they would all be turned off until checked.

[Meantime]

11 minutes ago, Hylander said:

Today is the 5th and it states 1 day ago.  I wouldnt stand up in Court with that though as not always bona fide.

 

 

Today is the 6th according to my calendar, unless yesterday was Wednesday  in which case I must have drank too much as I lost Thursday. 

[Meantime]

7 minutes ago, dom said:

He says "nice thursday", so I suspect it was yesterday. Also makes reference to a Police visit.

Just how many boats does he have? Says he'll move his boats to Irstead and the other ones to Dilham, which suggests at least 4?? Have to wonder if they're all licensed.

 

 

And with that deduction you are probably getting a lot closer to why the posts have been turned off.

[NeilB]

Just been speaking to a local and the police were called to support a Ranger recently.  He wasn’t sure why as was some distance away.

I don’t know what the answer is, I know some liveaboards live hand to mouth and may have issues we are not aware of.  However, they should try and present a lower profile to avoid antagonising other river users.

[dom]

44 minutes ago, Meantime said:

And with that deduction you are probably getting a lot closer to why the posts have been turned off.

Why disable the posts though, when it'll antagonise an already less than happy group of rule abiding private owners?

Just a quick cursory read of the Broads Authority Act and I can see about half a dozen points which are probable legislative breaches by the problem individuals, each with fines up to £5k. It's self evident that a fine or two of that order would very quickly have these people either moving on elsewhere, or attracting criminal attention for non-payment of fines.

Apart from anything else, all they're going to do is move elsewhere, exacerbating the problem. By the sound of things, 4 boats at Sutton are now going to block out Irstead and cause other issues at Dilham. Meanwhile legitimate owners at Sutton are left without power and will sit there wondering why they paid the increeased tolls. If BA really find it that hard to tackle, they're welcome to pay me a couple of days a week and I'll find ways to address these issues without affecting the quiet and respectful liveaboard owners.

[Meantime]

These things are never as simple as it seems. Firstly are the boat registered and therefore if not how do you serve paperwork to bring a court case? If they are registered they often change hands soon after to another owner and the paperwork has to be cancelled and the process started again. 

There but for the grace of God, if the BA were successful and managed to get a fine lodged against them, would they be able to pay? Or as is often the case would they agree a payment plan that could be afforded, say £1 per week, which might get paid for the first month and then the BA have to go chasing the fine again.

I guess the BA's first and more importantly first course of action is to make the mooring less attractive to overstayers.

There are no easy answers. It bugs me when I turn up at Sutton and cannot get moored on the green, and it has definitely got worse in the last couple of years, but at least I do have other options, not least a home to go to.

I know there are many who make a lifestyle choice to liveaboard, or to live within their means are forced to do so and generally you wouldn't know who they are. Then there are others with little option but to do it as cheaply as they can, and others who just don't want to conform, but you have to ask your self, if there was a genuine alternative would they be living like it?

Its a more complex issue than just the Byelaws can deal with, but I do agree the BA could and should and in fact I think have a duty to do more, even if it means working more closer with the social services departments of the local and county councils the BA executive area overlaps with. 

[kpnut]

39 minutes ago, Meantime said:

Its a more complex issue than just the Byelaws can deal with, but I do agree the BA could and should and in fact I think have a duty to do more, even if it means working more closer with the social services departments of the local and county councils the BA executive area overlaps with. 

I agree with this last paragraph,  but I don’t think speculation about what exactly has ‘gone wrong’ as in a few earlier posts is particularly helpful, as speculation leads to generalisations and guesses as to individuals’ circumstances. 

[Vaughan]

11 hours ago, kpnut said:

as speculation leads to generalisations and guesses as to individuals’ circumstances. 

I quite agree, this is not necessarily a "live-aboard" issue.

However :

12 hours ago, Meantime said:

but you have to ask your self, if there was a genuine alternative would they be living like it?

And there was a genuine and practical alternative in Jenners Basin, until, after 10 years of quite vicious persecution, the BA succeeded in throwing them all out to fend for themselves on the river.  "As ye sow, so shall ye reap".

[Cheesey69]

I'm going to appear heartless but what the hell. Also, just to add to the mix, I was reprocessed in the 90's.

A saying I like "Their circus and we are their monkeys" fits because this isn't a free for all.

The BA has not got to solve the live aboard issue, the rules are there, many follow them (and i have met them especially on The Chet) some don't.

The rest is a government issue, that's what we vote for. That is the bigger social problem for them to sort not the BA.

You cant pick and choose what rules and laws you follow as was quoted to me many times during lock down and the same still applies

so until the rules change then we dance to the same old tune.

[Vaughan]

I agree with that Cheesy and in a lot of ways some of the problems are public order issues, in other words anti-social behaviour, which is not the BA's problem.

All the same, the BA have a lot of "previous" over the years, in their deliberate and sometimes very expensive persecution of residential moorings.  It cost the Tolls Fund an almost 6-figure sum in legal fees, plus all the admin costs, before those living peacefully in Thorpe were thrown out "into the stream".

So where does the BA suggest they go now?

Edited to add : And will other electric posts now be disabled, to stop ovestaying on other moorings? In which case, what does the BA suggest to other boats, wishing to stay legitimately overnight and to use the shore power provided by their river tolls?

[Meantime]

1 hour ago, Cheesey69 said:

The BA has not got to solve the live aboard issue, the rules are there, many follow them (and i have met them especially on The Chet) some don't.

The rest is a government issue, that's what we vote for. That is the bigger social problem for them to sort not the BA.

I guess where I'm coming from when I say the BA should be working with its partners to solve the issue, is that as the local planning authority it must have a responsibility. 

The closest I can come to equating it, is that local authorities have a responsibility to provide a legitimate number of traveler sites and pitches.  Liveaboards are I think the Broads based equivalent.

The Government has acted and created the Planning Policy for Traveler Sites. One of its stated goals is,

3. The Governments overarching aim is to ensure fair and equal treatment for traveler, in a way that facilitates the traditional and nomadic way of life of travelers while respecting the interests of the settled community.

And, some of the ways to achieve this are stated as,

b. to ensure that local planning authorities, working collaboratively, develop fair and effective strategies to meet need through the identification of land for sites

h. to increase the number of travellr sites in appropriate locations with planning permission, to address under provision and maintain an appropriate level of supply

j. to enable provision of suitable accommodation from which travellrs can access education, health, welfare and employment infrastructure

I'm not going to go into specifics, but the above is relevant to at least one of the regulars at Sutton.

I believe the BA has particularly failed in delivering the following;

10. Local planning authorities should, in producing their Local Plan:

a) identify and update annually, a supply of specific deliverable sites sufficient to provide 5 years’ worth of sites against their locally set targets[footnote 4]

b) identify a supply of specific, developable sites, or broad locations for growth, for years 6 to 10 and, where possible, for years 11-15[footnote 5]

 

[SwanR]

1 hour ago, Vaughan said:

And will other electric posts now be disabled, to stop ovestaying on other moorings?

I think we should be careful as we don’t actually know the reason. Or have I missed something? The wording of the notice is ambiguous. 

[Vaughan]

8 minutes ago, Meantime said:

Liveaboards are I think the Broads based equivalent.

I agree. 

Travellers presumably have vehicles with a current licence and MOT, giving them the right to use the highway.

And so do residential boat owners.

[Vaughan]

4 minutes ago, SwanR said:

I think we should be careful as we don’t actually know the reason. Or have I missed something? The wording of the notice is ambiguous. 

Perhaps it is time that @BroadsAuthority put us out of our misery and gave us the reason.  I am sure it is legitimate for toll payers to know why their facilities are being withdrawn?

[Meantime]

6 minutes ago, Vaughan said:

I agree. 

Travellers presumably have vehicles with a current licence and MOT, giving them the right to use the highway.

And so do residential boat owners.

With regards to your last sentence, I would argue that not all do, only the law abiding ones, and this is where things do get complicated. The Police have the power to seize and possibly crush cars or vans that are not insured or MOT'd. Whilst the BA have certain powers under the Byelaws, they don't have the power to seize and destroy unless the boat is abandoned, which I'm sure no one would want anyway if it was someone's home.

[Oldspice]

I've searched YouTube high and low and can't find anything about the electric post issues at Sutton Staithe... has it been taken down ?

[Meantime]

24 minutes ago, Oldspice said:

I've searched YouTube high and low and can't find anything about the electric post issues at Sutton Staithe... has it been taken down ?

No its still there. If I were to search for such items I would use specific search terms on the Youtube site such as Broads Authority and Sutton staithe which would probably give you a reasonably short list of videos. Then I'd look for one that had been uploaded in the last few days from that list.