Tam & Di

The point has already been made now, but we certainly leased the land and de facto the water held within it at Adelaide Dock, right to the junction with the canal mainline, and the plans showed that. I can't see why Maypole Dock should be any different. In the OP's instance there is no effective difference between someone blocking the water or blocking the land - it is still not possible to pass without the offending craft being moved. Tam

It would be fairly simple to check that one way or the other. Tam

I'm slightly puzzled by this. I would assume that Maypole Dock Ltd owned the whole of the dock including the access point to the canal, and Catalyst Housing Ltd who bought it from them does therefore now own the access. The fact that they were only interested in being able to build a bridge over the dock wouldn't mean that they don't own the whole entity. I will try to send you a private message about it. Tam

That makes your case pretty strong, but obviously to have such discontent within a small enclosed community is never going to be easy. From the website of the owners they are supposed to be positively disposed to people such as the boat owners there - quote their own philosophy at them and pressure them to sort it. Best luck, and keep us informed if anything happens. Tam

You use the phrase "his mooring within the marina" - do you all have specified mooring places, or is it that you do just generally always return to the same space? If you do have specific allocated lengths then you have quite a strong argument, but not otherwise. I'd be very surprised if there is anything to say about access to the canal though - I've not heard of any such clause in mooring agreements used by marinas that I know of. Are you the only person who does occasionally cruise, or are other moorers equally inconvenienced? I wonder too, why does this guy moor so others can't get in or out? Is it easier or better for him in some way, or is he being deliberately awkward? These thoughts are interesting, but probably do little to help you resolve the issue. The answers may prompt different forms of advice though. Tam

If, as you imply, you have some form of mooring agreement then any problems about access would have to be dealt with by whoever you signed with - it shouldn't be between you and a fellow moorer, and certainly nothing to do with C&RT. Tam

We used to lease Adelaide Dock just along from Maypole Dock. The Grand Junction Canal Act gave owners whose land the canal ran through Rights "to construct places for boats to moor or lie", and Maypole Dock will almost certainly have been dug under those terms. We had to pay the canal company £1.00 a year 'in perpetuity' for the access and maintain the bridge that carried the towpath over the entrance, and I would expect the Maypole Dock to have similar terms. I've no idea if whoever the current owner is has allowed any such agreement to lapse. Dredging would be the responsibility of the owner of the arm, as would maintenance of its watertight integrity. I'd guess that it was used for coal brought in by narrowboats, as at the Jam 'ole a couple of miles away at the Bulls Bridge end of the Paddington Arm. Tam

I thought it mildly amusing when my wife reminded me of it. This woke world seems to have become a very humourless place. Tam

I believe there is a floating brothel in Amsterdam - I'm not sure how that would work CCing on UK canals but I'm sure it must be profitable. 🤷‍♂️ Tam

Whoops - I calculated the day rate in error. Too much 🍷 Tam

Wow!! Just under £6.20 per week isn't going to break the bank is it! (nor make the land owner a millionaire over night. 😁) Tam

The OP said the owner of the land will allow the boat to remain where it is while work is done, but I can't see any mention of the hard-standing fees involved. I don't imagine they would be free though. It would be pretty much impossible to live on the boat while doing the sort of work involved, so these non-productive costs would soon mount up. It's OK having something like this as a hobby, and many people do so, but that does not sound like the OP. Tam