Toll's, is the policy unfair or even illegal?

[senator]

Or let's look at it another way, If you went i8nto a restaurant and ordered a Steak and halfway through the meal you sent it back aqnd said I think I would prefer Fish, would you expect the Restaurant owner to knock half the price of the Steak off the bill for the Fish?

 

Dave

I think I may consider very carefully any restaurant that would expect you to take 12 months to eat a fish. besides the fish would be unsaleable at that point and as such chargeable. the water that my first boat sat in has been sold again at a higher price to me.

[senator]

Thought about this and it would probably be better to respond by saying it would be like buying a steak at a restaurant, eating 10% of it and then sending it back to have a bit of sauce added.

 

Would you expect the restaurant to bring back the same Steak that the chef has cut 10% off and added a bit of sauce but charge you for all of the steak again along with a bit extra for the sauce.

 

It is the same bit of water that the boat is sitting in, it just has a bit more in front.

[MauriceMynah]

No simile fits this situation. 

 

I would say that you are in an unusual position in as much as...

You sold your boat without using a broker.

The boat you sold is to leave the broads.

You had only just tolled the boat you sold.

You purchased a new boat very soon after selling your old one.

The boat you purchased did not come from the broads, thus had no toll paid.

 

You make it clear that you are not asking BA for a refund but for a toll transfer, and as that cannot be done under the existing system, you want that system changed to accommodate your somewhat unusual set of circumstances.

 

If you didn't know the way the toll system worked, you should have researched the matter. You should have been aware of the toll situation before you went through all this.

 

Now you are shouting "unfair" here and elsewhere. I'm very sorry if I sound uncaring but I, ( like a number of others it seems ) cannot support your objections or objectives.

 

You asked my opinion as a forum member. That is it!

[JennyMorgan]

This is 2015, not 1985, systems move on and computers have simplified many transactions. Perhaps our complainant has a point. 

[senator]

MM

 

your opinion is yours and perfectly valid.

 

As you correctly say I have posted this in a number of places and in general there is a high degree of support. As the saying goes you can never please all of the people all of the time.

 

I do feel that the way the tolls are collected is unfair and unjust so will continue to campaign in an attempt to change it. It does also seem that I have been told a few little untruths along the way which may have negated the need to toll my other boat at all, as that all needs to be checked legally I will say no more. What does look very likely is that despite parliamentary debate and agreement, what is written in the act at least ignores what was agreed in parliament and may even attempt to mislead.

 

It is highly unlikely that I will ever see my money again but even if it costs me more each year I seriously believe it is wrong for me to expect those that wish to change their boat to subsidise my tolls.

 

The set of circumstances you describe is far more common than you may suspect, possibly with exception of the use of a broker. I know to at least a dozen owners that have been caught by having to pay two tolls for the same year despite their old boat leaving the system and their new one coming from somewhere other than the Broads. I'm guessing it is more common on the Southern Broads where most of the less traditional Boats are kept but if I know to 12 in the last year there are bound to be far more. 

[senator]

This is 2015, not 1985, systems move on and computers have simplified many transactions. Perhaps our complainant has a point. 

Thank you JM your comments are most welcome

[SPEEDTRIPLE]

What i find amusing is the road tax analagy.

 

A lot of people, some on here have in the past complained about the way road tax is collected, saying "put it on petrol and deisel, then those who use the roads most will pay the most". Is`nt it amazing to find out that SOME of those very same people DON`T want the same principle used for tolls?.

 

Having cake and eating it come to mind, as well as double standards.

 

I think the fairest way is for everybodies toll to be counted monthly, with the ability to pay on line. That way, there`s no need for BA bearocrats to get involved, and you will only pay for the amount of time your boat is in the main river. With modern day electronics, ANY boat can be loged wherever it goes via GPS, so it will be very difficult to mess with it. As JM said, this is 2015, not 1985, and the technology is already available.

 

My last point is that several people have been saying "open to abuse". By those words, you are implying that toll payers are possible fraudsters out to fleece others.  You must have a pretty low opinion of your fellow toll payers.

[johnm]

"As you correctly say I have posted this in a number of places and in general there is a high degree of support."

I count 16 respondents here with 7 in another place (at least one of whom is a double poster) and not all of those are supportive. Given the 1.058 views here and 820 elsewhere it would suggest that there are a significantly larger group of people who cannot be bothered to comment and, if they are anything like me, probably remember previous similar moans and are bored of the ongoing circular discussion.

 

You chose to base your boat here; you, presumably, looked into the toll rules and accepted them when you first decided to base on the Broads; you chose to remain based on the Broads and even embarked on another boat sale.

 

​To me it sounds like sour grapes and a sadly tedious continuation of BA bashing.

 

Purely my opinion of course and you will disagree and the round-robin of bitterness will continue but without me.

[BroadScot]

Hi Folks,

 

I think the circular tour has gone full circle, don't you think?

 

 

Iain

[Hockham Admiral]

Hi Folks,

 

I think the circular tour has gone full circle, don't you think?

 

 

Iain

Definitely, Iain. 

[JennyMorgan]

Speed suggests that we should only pay when we use our boat, consider that some boats are never used and some only three or four times a year. Those who do use the system regularly will probably then have to pay a huge amount to compensate for those who simply store their boats here meaning that actual users will be priced off the Broads. Consider that those who cruise at sea, from Lowestoft for example, pay no toll, don't have a BSS certificate and don't have to be insured.

 

Having sat on a previous toll review I wholly support the Broads Authority in the general principle of its tolls. The Broads have to be maintained, every boat tolled on the Broad has the right to be used 365 days a year, how many times it is used is down to the owner, not the Authority. The system we have is right for probably 95% plus of Broads boaters. 

 

I agree that this topic has been discussed ad nauseum and far beyond but, in my opinion, some of you have made ill considered comments. No system is ever going to be perfect for everyone but having updated its computer system I do believe that the BA could review its approach to tolls being transferred from an old boat that's leaving the system to a new boat on the Broads, it can't be that hard.

[GoneRoaming]

We could be possibly be in this same situation in the near future and I strongly believe the BA are acting illegally, you are in fact being charged twice and that to me is wrong. if I were to change my boat in January I would have to pay a new toll of £500+ and then another £500+ in April, so between April and January next year I would have paid £1000+ for the same boat. the only way to challenge this to me would be through the Courts if you want to go down that road. I would say offer the BA the difference, that is £125+ for the months January to April, then pay the full toll £500+ in April. if this was refused they would then take you to Court for their full amount and the judge would decide if they could charge you twice. I am sure it would turn out in your favour. this could also open a big can of worms as I am being charged for waters I cannot use as I cant get under Yarmouth Bridges with the new boat.

 

Tell me your thoughts, I'll put my tin hat on.

 

 

[Hockham Admiral]

Peter & GR, I refer you to Iain's comment above.

[senator]

I agree that the tolls are charging twice for the same boat but only in certain circumstances. Just in the interest of fairness.

 

If you pay the toll in January you will only have to pay 6 months for your 3 months use. Why I have no idea, I would think given that they have acknowledged the shorter cruising time available, in that you only have 3 months before renewal, then they would charge for 3 months, especially as they are winter months in off season.

 

The Bridges are contentious in that they would have to offer Southern tolls, Northern Tolls or Whole System. Not sure what the logistics for that would be nor the effects on local businesses both north and south. Other than that everyone knows the height of the Yarmouth Bridges so if you want to go to bumper car land by a dodgem so to speak. that one would open up the above potter debate as well.

 

The BA will also tell you that you are not paying to Navigate the rivers but to keep a boat on them or waters connected to them. not too sure why they call them navigation tolls or why you pay them to the navigation authority but think it has more to do with the fact that if the BA fail in their duty to maintain navigation (Mutford Lock) etc. then they don't have to give you any compensation for it.

 

If the boat being sold is staying on the system and the toll is sold with the boat then there would be no justification for a refund unless the BA were to give the option of transferring it if required, in which case the new owner would be subject to the new 12 month toll.

 

I really appreciate your support on this but it is quite specific in that if a toll is no longer on the system and the payer of that toll brings a new boat to the system within the toll year they should be able to transfer the toll, or they are being charged twice for the same thing.

 

I do also agree that on first registration any boat coming to the Broads should be charged for the months remaining. the same colour sticker can be provided and there is absolutely no admin charge other than registering the boat, which should cost pennies. Why when the boat quite blatently wasn't on the system for the first 4 months of a year should that boat be charged for them?

[senator]

Peter & GR, I refer you to Iain's comment above.

Are you saying that you would like to stop the debate now john?

[ExMemberBobdog]

I believe the offence is not displaying the toll stickers, however every time I have been unable to attach them to our boat in what I thought was a reasonable time, I have informed BA office. They promised in turn to inform the local Ranger. I have never had a notice stuck on our boat.

 

I have many reservations about some of the actions of BA, but I have never met an unreasonable attitude regarding these matters.

 

When I needed replacement stickers, they were sent free on request.

  

 I don't have a strong opinion about the main theme of this thread.  I can see the arguments, but haven't heard a convincing alternative to the present system that maintains the necessary level of income and avoids fraud.  But I agree with John B that the Rangers do their best to act fairly and reasonably with regards to tolls offences.  

The Rangers seem to generally start actively checking toll plaques on boats around the end of April beginning of May, in my experience, by visiting every mooring area, adjacent waters etc, by launch.  That gives most people time to have got their boats back in the water and plaqued up

There are two issues.  1) boats are required to be tolled, and 2) toll stickers are required to be displayed.  

The Rangers carry a laptop on their launches, on which they update online, before going out on patrol, a database of which boats have been tolled.  If the Ranger sees a boat not displaying a toll sticker, he checks against the database to see if the toll has been paid (and if the boat has BSS).  An untolled boat is ticketed.  If the boat is not displaying (which is an offence under the byelaws) but the toll has been paid, the Ranger (at this stage) generally gives some leeway/turns a blind eye to the 'non display' offence.  It is recognised that some owners live a long way away, and only come down to their boats later in the season.  Later in the year (June/July) the Rangers tighten up - by now toll stickers really should be on boats - and start issuing tickets for non display.

This seems to me a fair and common sense approach, but the Rangers do seem to be 'damned if they do, damned if they don't'.  I've heard boat owners say things like "that boat over there isn't tolled, why aren't the Rangers doing anything about it?", when in fact the boat has been checked, found to be tolled, and the Ranger has exercised his judgment as above to be fair to the owner.

I have a friend who lives in France, and visits his boat on the Broads only in August.  Each year he pays his tolls in April, but 'phones the tolls office and explains he won't be able to get to the boat until later in the year, and arranges for a passing Ranger to stick the plaques on for him.

[JennyMorgan]

. . . . . . . . .  this could also open a big can of worms as I am being charged for waters I cannot use as I cant get under Yarmouth Bridges with the new boat.

 

Tell me your thoughts, I'll put my tin hat on.

Please excuse me, John, but GR has requested a response.

GR, that you have chosen a boat that can't pass under the YH bridges is not the fault of the Authority! 

[imtamping2]

I hear that BA are looking to change the Toll structure and the new measurement is going to  calculated on overall  cubic feet......... so look out you tall uns.......

[JennyMorgan]

I hear that BA are looking to change the Toll structure and the new measurement is going to  calculated on overall  cubic feet......... so look out you tall uns.......

That should push up the price of 'bath-tubs'! Strikes me as being a not so subtle way of hammering the bigger boats.

[Hockham Admiral]

Are you saying that you would like to stop the debate now john?

I thought Iain's comment was self explanatory.

[senator]

Obviously as moderators of the site I respect your decision. Why you would want to put an end to such a hot topic I have no idea but I will post no more .

[Hockham Admiral]

Ian, hello.

Thank you for your considerate reply.

Only when we consider that topics are becoming increasingly acrimonious do we suggest that.

We have talked amongst ourselves in the Team Room over this and thought that it might so be coming.