Jump to content

District Enforcement contract ending


Featured Posts

Just received this…

Dear non-tidal Thames boater,

The Environment Agency’s contract for our mooring management contractor, District Enforcement, will be brought to an end from 30th September 2021. This decision has been taken following a review that subsequently identified issues with our internal procurement processes, rather than as a result of any fault by District Enforcement.

District Enforcement will cease operations under the contract on 31st August 2021, with the following four weeks being spent removing their signage from our sites.

We expect to look into options to retender for this work in the future but in the meantime moorings will be managed by the Environment Agency’s Waterways staff.

  • Greenie 1
  • Happy 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

23 minutes ago, Tonka said:

Good news for the linger lingers maybe but what about the genuine boaters

 

What is this genuine boater nonsense that keeps coming up in threads like these? Granted, I appreciate it's a bit different on the rivers, but on the canals there seems to be a bizarre mentality that only people who cruise every or every other day are 'genuine' boaters.

 

It is a shame that many of these always-cruising genuine boaters can't manage to lift their fenders when they cast off...but I suppose that's a different topic.

Edited by tehmarks
Link to comment
Share on other sites

59 minutes ago, Thames Bhaji said:

This decision has been taken following a review that subsequently identified issues with our internal procurement processes, rather than as a result of any fault by District Enforcement.

So no criticism of DE, but a suggestion they weren't appointed fairly.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 hour ago, Tonka said:

Good news for the linger lingers maybe but what about the genuine boaters

It is the fact that the car park company is out of the loop, not against there being robust enforcement against those who don’t stick to the 24 hour limit.  When you need particularly on the lower Thames is a fair crack at finding somewhere to moor overnight.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I don't see this as particularly good news, it could mean returning to 24 hours maximum stay at most EA moorings but we shall see.

When TVM ran the trial I thought it a great idea and was disappointed when they didn't get the contract, but I take it from this announcement  that EA aren't allowed to award such contracts anyway.

 

Keith

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

6 minutes ago, MtB said:

 

To answer your question, I think it is the 'state of mind' of the boater that differs. 

 

Supposed "genuine boaters" like boats and boating, and live aboard specifically because they like boats and boating.

 

People who are perceived as not "genuine boaters" are those who bought a boat because they see it as accommodation cheaper than a house or flat, who avoid boating whenever possible, who prefer to stay put in one place in perpetuity, and who only move their boat under duress. 

Sounds about right.

 

Keith

Link to comment
Share on other sites

5 minutes ago, MtB said:

 

To answer your question, I think it is the 'state of mind' of the boater that differs. 

 

Supposed "genuine boaters" like boats and boating, and live aboard specifically because they like boats and boating.

 

People who are perceived as not "genuine boaters" are those who bought a boat because they see it as accommodation cheaper than a house or flat, who avoid boating whenever possible, who prefer to stay put in one place in perpetuity, and who only move their boat under duress. 


I'd agree with that definition, yes. I don't agree with the seemingly popular mindset though that you have to be on the move constantly. I fit living on the water around a full and busy life of work and other hobbies, and while I actively like boats and enjoy boating, I still take fullest advantage of most nice 14 day moorings that I come across. Am I a genuine boater?

 

Anyway, sorry, I've gone off on a tangent.

  • Greenie 1
  • Happy 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

3 minutes ago, tehmarks said:


I'd agree with that definition, yes. I don't agree with the seemingly popular mindset though that you have to be on the move constantly. I fit living on the water around a full and busy life of work and other hobbies, and while I actively like boats and enjoy boating, I still take fullest advantage of most nice 14 day moorings that I come across. Am I a genuine boater?

 

Anyway, sorry, I've gone off on a tangent.

You'll need to ask Tonka what a linger linger is.

 

Keith 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

3 hours ago, tehmarks said:

....

, but on the canals there seems to be a bizarre mentality that only people who cruise every or every other day are 'genuine' boaters.

 

Every other are part time hobby boaters. You have to cruise every day without stopping for lunch, do the Silver Propellor challenge 3 times a year and be an executive of the Provisional IWA to be a true CCer

  • Happy 1
  • Haha 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 hour ago, matty40s said:

Every other are part time hobby boaters. You have to cruise every day without stopping for lunch, do the Silver Propellor challenge 3 times a year and be an executive of the Provisional IWA to be a true CCer

 

Not only that but any day spent cruising where you didn't cover 35 miles and do at least 50 locks, doesn't count. 

 

Obviously.

 

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Great news. DE simply don't have the right attitude towards boating and boaters IMHO. Just read their signs.

 

Lingering malingers (?) will sit on a mooring however long they like, whoever patrols it. They will tolerate abuse from officialdom, fellow boaters and the general public to stay as long as it suits them and will only leave when actual removal (as opposed to the threat of removal) is imminent. If you don't give a toss about others, you can get away with quite a lot.

 

There's the rub: most of us abide by the rules because we can place ourselves in others' shoes and perceive what is fair. We don't like confrontation, or threats, or the possibility of being fined. We shy away from hassle. As a result we can become easy targets for the attention of overzealous enforcers like DE.

 

I think that's why most boaters prefer to pay their fiver to lockkeepers.

 

Personally, I found the Thames Visitor Mooring people nice, reliable, easy to contact with easy payment and an accurate site. And I'm not sure they were given a fair hearing in the 'procurement process'. 

  • Greenie 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

But if the moorings enforcement contractor gets to keep the mooring fees and the fines from non-compliers, they are incentivised to make it as difficult as possible to pay the correct fee, so they maximise the income from fines. So in a competitive procurement process Mr Nice Guy is always going to get undercut by the ruthless operators.

  • Greenie 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

TVM were nice but turned a blind eye to persistent overstayers leaving it to the EA to do any enforcement.

 

DE want their cut of fees plus any money they can make out of people they can "fine". They won't want to chase persistent overstayers as it costs too much, so again that will get left to the EA to deal with.

 

JB sums it up nicely for me, the EA should just do it themselves.

 

 

Edited by Paringa
And stop wasting money on these schemes
Link to comment
Share on other sites

On 17/08/2021 at 14:13, phantom_iv said:

On the other hand, they're going to be running the council's moorings in Henley - https://www.henleystandard.co.uk/news/council/164697/council-hires-company-to-enforce-mooring-charges.html

 

Interesting. This is what DE says of taking over the Henley Mooring payments:

 

Quote

A spokesman said: “We are delighted to be working for Henley Town Council. 

“The three pillars of our approach are engagement, education and enforcement. We look forward to working on this most distinctive and charming section of the Thames.

“District Enforcement’s existence is to facilitate behaviour change for the betterment of society as a whole. We are a profit-making business but not at the expense of the core beliefs we operate to. 

“It is true that the offenders pay for the service but this enables us to deploy our officers on educational visits and special operations intended to provide residents with cleaner, safer open spaces.

 

I didn't realise DE were such positive-spirited social benefactors. Imagine, deploying staff on educational visits ... to provide cleaner (really?) and safer (really?) spaces. I think claiming all this as their 'core beliefs' is laying it on pretty thick!

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

But they aren't.   Nowhere in the puff piece posted do DE actually say what their core beliefs are.

 

They do say what the pillars of their approach are, state that they are a profit making business and remind us that offenders pay for it all.

 

I could quite easily suggest from this  that their core beliefs might be :

 

 A belief in all mooring spaces being paid for

A belief in enforcing,  so as to have offenders 

A belief in making profit.

 

There might be other things too, like believing being nice to small furry animals, but there is no clue given.

 

N

Link to comment
Share on other sites

19 minutes ago, BEngo said:

But they aren't. 

I was speaking ironically!

 

Take their statement: “District Enforcement’s existence is to facilitate behaviour change for the betterment of society as a whole. We are a profit-making business but not at the expense of the core beliefs we operate to."    

 

If a business says its existence is to facilitate behaviour change for the betterment of society, I take this to be a core belief. If they immediately follow that statement by essentially saying that they're out to make money but not at the expense of facilitating behaviour change ... that suggests their priority is behaviour change for the betterment of society.

 

But, of course, I don't believe a word of this. I don't think you do either, right?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

The object of any business (other than statutory  "not for profit" ones) is to make money.  The stuff about mission statements, social responsibility  etc. that often gets spouted these days  is usually just pure BS. 

 

 

Edited by Ronaldo47
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!

Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.

Sign In Now
  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    • No registered users viewing this page.
×
×
  • Create New...

Important Information

We have placed cookies on your device to help make this website better. You can adjust your cookie settings, otherwise we'll assume you're okay to continue.