Restricted use of marina engineers

[CV32]

On 27/06/2024 at 13:12, Old Tim said:

My marina has recently introduced a requirement that any engineering work on boats not undertaken by the owner must be undertaken by the marina’s named engineer, and a fee of £50 per day will be levied if this engineer is not used. No charge will be levied for work undertaken by an outsider if such work is beyond the scope of the marina engineer.

 

As this approach precludes me from choosing between engineers in order to find the best deal - as well as ‘fining’ me if I do not comply – is it legal or is it contrary to competition regulations? Is this approach now an industry standard?

 

I have enjoyed mooring at this marina for the last 35 plus years, but resent this change which seems to reduce my autonomy – let alone reducing the work that is available to outside contractors - solely to increase the revenue of the marina owners. I have raised the issue with the marina management but to no avail.

 

I would very much like to hear the experiences of fellow boaters on this matter, and would welcome their guidance.

Not surprised, we experienced a similar situation in regards to BSS examination at a marina in the Napton area. They also expect bungs from the canopy companies that go on site to fit / repair for people. 

We moved.

Edited June 29 by CV32
typo

[Tonka]

9 hours ago, blackrose said:

 

Yes, does your boat move? Is there a convenient mooring nearby? Just take your boat out of the marina and you can have whoever you want do the work without paying the marina anything.

 

Or perhaps it's just the principle of this marina rule that you object to and you're not actually looking for a practical solution.

Yes my boat does move thank you. When I had my last Boat Safety done, I used the guy who the marina uses but he doesn't work at the marina. I moved the boat to moor near the marina entrance. He parked in the marina and walked down to my boat. He even told me that if the marina had of organised the job I would have to paid £10 more then it cost.

[Lady M]

This sounds ridiculous

[MtB]

1 hour ago, Lady M said:

This sounds ridiculous

 

Not really, given the law as we learned recently in another thread.

 

If a volunteer does something stupid and kills himself, it turns out the site owner is liable. So it seems wholly reasonable for a site owner to restrict who pitches up and starts working on a boat. Limiting it to only approved contractors or site employees seems sensible. 

 

 

[Lady M]

No I meant it sounded ridiculous to me that the marina to would have added £10 to the cost of the BSS examination carried out by someone approved by them simply because it had been arranged directly.  I have no problem with marinas checking insurances and wanting to know who is working on their site.

[Momac]

I had my BSS survey in May with the boat at its home berth. I am not aware of the marina requiring any payment from the surveyor.

I had arranged the survey direct with the surveyor.

The surveyor is a frequent visitor to the marina so I assume the marina has his insurance details .

If I had asked the marina to arrange the survey I expect a fee would have been added as this is just normal business  practice. 

 

 

 

[ditchcrawler]

5 hours ago, Tonka said:

 He even told me that if the marina had of organised the job I would have to paid £10 more then it cost.

Thats understandable if you ask the marina to organise the work there is bound to be a cost 

[Lily Rose]

6 hours ago, CV32 said:

Not surprised, we experienced a similar situation in regards to BSS examination at a marina in the Napton area. They also expect bungs from the canopy companies that go on site to fit / repair for people. 

We moved.

 

Glad I'm not at that one then, having just had a cratch cover fitted. Costly enough already without paying extra to the marina. And a BSS last year.

 

Which marina are you referring to?

Edited June 29 by Lily Rose

[Alan de Enfield]

6 hours ago, Lady M said:

No I meant it sounded ridiculous to me that the marina to would have added £10 to the cost of the BSS examination carried out by someone approved by them simply because it had been arranged directly.  I have no problem with marinas checking insurances and wanting to know who is working on their site.

 

You can go direct to a famer and buy a 20kg bag of potatoes for ~£8

You can go to a fruit and veg wholesale and pay ~£11 for a 20kg bag

You can go to distibutor and pay £13-£14 for a 20kg bag

You can go to Asda and pay £2.50 for a 2kg bag. (£25 for 20kgs)

 

Every step in the chains adds cost to a product

[Lady M]

But there wasn't a chain in this case.

[Alan de Enfield]

8 minutes ago, Lady M said:

But there wasn't a chain in this case.

 

Indeed - he went straight to the producer and paid his price - had he gone thru the marina the chain would have had an extra 'link; in it and an

on-cost of +7% (ish)

[David Mack]

Another point that some may not have noticed in marina Ts and Cs: Although you pay mooring fees for 365 days per year, the marina reserves the right to relet your mooring temporarily to someone else while your boat is not there. This is typically how marinas (which may be nominally full to capacity) can offer overnight or short term moorings to passing boaters. Of course the marina charge the visiting boat a fee, probably at a higher rate than the permanent moorer is paying. But does the permanent bertholder see any of that? Not a penny!

[ditchcrawler]

50 minutes ago, David Mack said:

Another point that some may not have noticed in marina Ts and Cs: Although you pay mooring fees for 365 days per year, the marina reserves the right to relet your mooring temporarily to someone else while your boat is not there. This is typically how marinas (which may be nominally full to capacity) can offer overnight or short term moorings to passing boaters. Of course the marina charge the visiting boat a fee, probably at a higher rate than the permanent moorer is paying. But does the permanent bertholder see any of that? Not a penny!

And when you come back you find a boat on your mooring like we often did at Braunston but that was a long time ago, so may have changed

[Tonka]

55 minutes ago, ditchcrawler said:

And when you come back you find a boat on your mooring like we often did at Braunston but that was a long time ago, so may have changed

Or your boat moored somewhere else in the marina. With doors left open and the keys in the engine panel because the traditional boat rally was on. 

Someone told me this, this year 

[Paul C]

1 hour ago, ditchcrawler said:

And when you come back you find a boat on your mooring like we often did at Braunston but that was a long time ago, so may have changed

 

There will be a clause somewhere in the contract which says they can reallocate you a different berth if they want to.

[Tonka]

10 minutes ago, Paul C said:

 

There will be a clause somewhere in the contract which says they can reallocate you a different berth if they want to.

And what would happen if you stuff got nicked whilst the boat left open

[Paul C]

2 minutes ago, Tonka said:

And what would happen if you stuff got nicked whilst the boat left open

 

I don't know - but I didn't quote/comment on that aspect of the conversation.

[beerbeerbeerbeerbeer]

3 minutes ago, Tonka said:

And what would happen if you stuff got nicked whilst the boat left open

Boat keys don’t need to be used though?

They can shift ‘em about in other ways. 
I’ve never left me keys with a marina (apart from when I left them for a BSs thing) 

But I have come back and found the boat’s been moved for a festival event. 
Didn’t bother me. I know my place 😕

 

[Tonka]

9 hours ago, Paul C said:

 

I don't know - but I didn't quote/comment on that aspect of the conversation.

The owner wasn't upset at being moved. But was upset that the boat was left open with the keys in. Plus the attitude of the marina staff when he complained about it.

Needless to say he didn't stay moored there for long after the event

[Momac]

12 hours ago, David Mack said:

Another point that some may not have noticed in marina Ts and Cs: Although you pay mooring fees for 365 days per year, the marina reserves the right to relet your mooring temporarily to someone else while your boat is not there. This is typically how marinas (which may be nominally full to capacity) can offer overnight or short term moorings to passing boaters. Of course the marina charge the visiting boat a fee, probably at a higher rate than the permanent moorer is paying. But does the permanent bertholder see any of that? Not a penny!

This is true in general.

At one coastal marina the bertholder gets a cashback sum if his spot is let to a visitor but that is probably a unique arrangement.

Must say I have never had my boat moved by the marina without my knowledge . But in theory they could ask me to relocate to a different position and I could ask to move if I wish. 

The marina doesn't usually move bertholders boats using the boats own engine, at least not without prior consent. It is seen as a liability in case you have left the boat unfit to use eg part way through some mechanical work .

[Mike Todd]

6 hours ago, Momac said:

This is true in general.

At one coastal marina the bertholder gets a cashback sum if his spot is let to a visitor but that is probably a unique arrangement.

Must say I have never had my boat moved by the marina without my knowledge . But in theory they could ask me to relocate to a different position and I could ask to move if I wish. 

The marina doesn't usually move bertholders boats using the boats own engine, at least not without prior consent. It is seen as a liability in case you have left the boat unfit to use eg part way through some mechanical work .

Unusual yes, but unique, no

[IanD]

On 29/06/2024 at 11:59, MtB said:

 

Not really, given the law as we learned recently in another thread.

 

If a volunteer does something stupid and kills himself, it turns out the site owner is liable. So it seems wholly reasonable for a site owner to restrict who pitches up and starts working on a boat. Limiting it to only approved contractors or site employees seems sensible. 

 

 

If a volunteer does something stupid and kills themselves, the site owner is liable only if they knew about (or should have known about) the risk and didn't put reasonable safety precautions in place.

[David Mack]

3 hours ago, IanD said:

 

If a volunteer does something stupid and kills themselves, the site owner is liable only if they knew about (or should have known about) the risk and didn't put reasonable safety precautions in place.

That may be the outcome, but a site owner in that situation is still going to find themselves subject to some unpleasant and intrusive investigation to determine the actual circumstances.

[john.k]

Dont buy a highrise apartment then,if you object to tied maintenance contracts at rip off prices .

[IanD]

11 hours ago, David Mack said:

That may be the outcome, but a site owner in that situation is still going to find themselves subject to some unpleasant and intrusive investigation to determine the actual circumstances.

As they should be, surely?