Removal Of Sunken Vessel

[Hylander]

https://www.greatyarmouthmercury.co.uk/news/24051345.sunken-vessel-will-raised-bure-great-yarmouth/

[dom]

There was a £2k charge in BA's accounts recently to raise a sunken vessel at Sutton Staithe.

If this is another unregistered and abandoned vessel, dealing with tide issues at GY it's got to be another £3-4k going on next year's toll fees.

[Happy]

I hear what you are saying - but what would you suggest they do then?

[dom]

They need to utilise the legislation they've been given properly. Sections 17-20 of the Broads Authority Act give them extensive powers to enter, inspect, remove, impound, sell or destroy anything unsafe.

Obviously, these are often unlicensed vessels. If something appears unsafe, phone the last recorded owner. If they still own it, enforce the toll requirement. That will require a BSS and invariably deal with any safety issues routinely. It also has the added benefit of bringing in more revenue, mitigating the need for toll increases.

If there's no owner, stick a 28 day notice on it. If nothing happens, move it to Postwick, either by river or road. Store it on the brownfield land they own there. Every 6 months or so, have an auction to sell off anything unclaimed. It could actually prove to be a fairly profitable exercise, which could either benefit toll payers, or underwrite the cost of anything unsellable which needs costly disposal.

I think in general, the BA could do with someone within their organisation with decent private sector commercial experience to tackle issues like this - and a lot of the other criticisms raised by BRAG and elsewhere. Having spent all my life in the private sector, I see things going on within BA and think how the hell do people keep their jobs? Why is the "Head of safety management" or the "Operations directorate" not getting to grips with these things before they incur costs?

 

[Meantime]

All of the above sounds good, until you consider that some of the boat owners know how to play the game. The BA start to take action, the owner sells the boat on to a friend. The BA start to take action against the new owner, the boat gets sold on again. Often for a pittance, often with the same boats doing the same rounds amongst the same group of friends.

What they need is the power of seizure irrespective of who owns the boat and irrespective of how long they have owned the boat for. You shouldn't be allowed to sell or buy a boat unless it is tolled and has a BSS, unless it is on dry land. In the same way you cannot buy a car and drive it away unless it is taxed.

Then you also have to consider the outcry if the BA seized a boat and it turns out to be the persons home. There are many complexities with no easy answers.

[dom]

The unlicensed home issue already has too great an influence on how they handle things. BA have taken one individual to court within the last year for non-payment of tolls, but incurred substantial costs in doing so which they'll never recover. The trouble is, they're doomed to failure with a lot of approaches due to the Human Rights Act.

It's a growing issue and has a cost impact to legitimate boat owners (including law abiding liveaboards). They really need to send out a signal that unlicensed liveaboards won't be tolerated any more than non-payment of council tax would be on land.

I think they need to get brave and either sieze the boat (as they're lawfully entitled to do), place it on land and provide power, water and a portaloo at nominal cost (to address human rights issues), or to remove and impound it and liaise with local councils to provide emergency housing. The counter arguement to the former is that you risk ending up with some sort of homeless encampment but, as things stand, it's fast becoming the case in some places anyway, in locations which should be some of the Broad's main beauty spots. A bit of a cluster of liveaboards tucked away in a corner of a marina somewhere isn't too much of an issue, but it's now overtaking public staithes and blocking power points, etc.

[grendel]

I see we are having a go at the unlicensed and unregistered boat owners- do we have any proof that this boat is unregistered and untolled before we start jumping to conclusions, I dont see that stated anywhere in the news article, and barring some quick action on my part could easily have been me last year when I arrived at great yarmouth with a blocked bilge pump and 6" of water in the fore cabin, (not really thinking it advisable to stop halfway across breydon).

luckily i managed to unblock the bilge pump and get it working after a fashion which eventually cleared the water out (the float switch had also jammed under a beam shelf rendering that inoperable too)- not a situation you want just a few hours after relaunching in a wooden boat.

[floydraser]

...but what if is unlicensed?

 

[ExSurveyor]

The article does say ' contractors' are raising the vessel. Unless BA have instructed the contractors it is likely to be an insurance company footing the bill.

[dom]

36 minutes ago, grendel said:

I see we are having a go at the unlicensed and unregistered boat owners- do we have any proof that this boat is unregistered and untolled before we start jumping to conclusions,

I did say "If this is another unregistered and abandoned vessel" in my initial post.

I don't really understand why anyone would not criticise them. Tolls are a product of expenditure divided by tollpayers. Anyone not paying the toll is directly increasingly legitimate tollpayer's outgoings.

There is ultimately no excuse. DWP will pay housing related expenses for liveaboards to anyone genuinely in need.

 

[dom]

4 minutes ago, ExSurveyor said:

The article does say ' contractors' are raising the vessel. Unless BA have instructed the contractors it is likely to be an insurance company footing the bill.

They used a 3rd party contractor to recover an abandoned vessel at Sutton Staithe recently. Not sure if they have the resources to lift a boat anyway, but I'd suspect they'd be too risk averse to try lifting something in Yarmouth's tidal waters.

[ExSurveyor]

12 minutes ago, dom said:

They used a 3rd party contractor to recover an abandoned vessel at Sutton Staithe recently. Not sure if they have the resources to lift a boat anyway, but I'd suspect they'd be too risk averse to try lifting something in Yarmouth's tidal waters.

I agree, I doubt they have the equipment or skills in house.

My point was that as they have issued a notice doesn't automatically mean they / we are footing the bill.