Houseboat owners living rent free in Bath beauty spot are ordered to leave by council bosses

[Alan de Enfield]

 

 

 

The iconic 18th century Pulteney Bridge across the River Avon is one of the most recognisable landmarks in Bath and one that millions of tourists flock to the city every year to see.

But the lucky owners of houseboats have been able to live right next to the picturesque setting for years.

And those who call the area home do not pay to moor at the site as there is 'free navigation' - but some did say they would be willing to pay to stay. 

However, their days of living rent free along the river could soon be over after the Liberal Democrat-controlled council ordered them out saying they are dangerous, unsafe and branding them a 'hazard'.

Bath and North East Somerset Council say it is 'taking action to keep people safe by addressing unauthorised and dangerous mooring locations'.

But those who live on the boats have hit back at the council's claims, instead alleging they are being kicked out because they are 'scruffy'.

While others believe they are being moved away from the spot due to plans to build a new Bath Rugby stadium to replace the nearby old one.   

One boat owner Ted, 54, said: 'There's not a health and safety issue - they're just using that against us.

 

'It's all about the rugby ground, getting rid of the boats and trees.

'They're going to move us by September, they're going to put us somewhere else.

'They're not being kind, they'll use force. I've been a boater for years, I've been moved before.'

The 54-year-old claimed that 'no one owns' the stretch of land and that the main reason they were being moved was 'the rugby ground, and because the boats look a bit dirty and scruffy'.

 

Another resident, who wished not to be named, said: 'They want to send us to the canal but there are no residential moorings on the canal.

'Normally stuff like this is all smoke and mirrors. It's about the development of the rugby ground.

'If it's about flooding they should've put pontoons in. It's completely safe when it floods.

'All down the river they've got pontoons but not here.

 

'The amount of money they are going to spend in legal action and evicting us, I've heard it's £1.5million but they don't have a leg to stand on.'

The resident added: 'We won't leave. We'll put in a planning application to manage it ourselves, manage the mooring, holiday boats, residential boats, tours.'

Another boat dweller said that their homes were 'good for tourism' and that the area could 'look so nice if the council tried'. 

The person even went on to accuse the council of 'penalising a minority'.

'They think the boats ruin the view but the opposite is true - we are part of the landscape here,' they continued. 

Percy Walton, 67, has lived on his boat there for four years.

He said: 'The letter came out of nowhere, it's awful.

'There are no other moorings on the Avon so where are they proposing to move everything?

'We contribute to the area, tourists are always asking us questions and I tell them about the trees. We dispose of our waste responsibly.

 

'I've been here four years and there've been no health and safety issues at all.

'They just want us to go because we're scruffy.'

The 67-year-old said that the residents who live in the houseboats are 'part of a community' that they contribute to. 

He added: 'They told us we had to go by September, and they would help us if they could.'

 

The council said last week: 'Boat owners moored there will be supported to move their vessels by the middle of September this year as the moorings are not safe for them to use.

'The moorings also pose a hazard to other river users.

'The channel forms a critical part of the city's flood defences and is not part of the river's navigation for boat users.

'In recent years, a number of boats including holiday rentals have moored along this stretch of the river, despite the council working with boat owners to explain the dangers and installing warning signage at the location.

'The owners of the rental vessels were asked to leave the area prior to the winter months when bad weather poses the greatest risks, however this was not acted upon.'

Councillor Sarah Warren, Deputy Leader and Cabinet Member for Sustainable B&NES, said: 'Boats moored in the Pulteney stretch are in danger from the high risk of flooding, particularly during periods of severe winter weather.

'This could put lives at risk. We want everyone in B&NES to have a safe place to call home and prevent all our residents from coming to harm.

'We are also concerned about the risk of serious injury in instances where gangplanks are being used on benches, and boats are being moored to grab lines, which prevents those lines from being used as essential lifesaving equipment.

'By working with boat owners and the Canal and River Trust to help residents move to a safe location, we're taking action to prevent accidents and protect everyone's wellbeing.

'As a last resort, we will take legal action if vessels remain in place beyond the date we have asked them to leave.'

 

[ditchcrawler]

33 minutes ago, Alan de Enfield said:

 

 

 

The iconic 18th century Pulteney Bridge across the River Avon is one of the most recognisable landmarks in Bath and one that millions of tourists flock to the city every year to see.

But the lucky owners of houseboats have been able to live right next to the picturesque setting for years.

And those who call the area home do not pay to moor at the site as there is 'free navigation' - but some did say they would be willing to pay to stay. 

However, their days of living rent free along the river could soon be over after the Liberal Democrat-controlled council ordered them out saying they are dangerous, unsafe and branding them a 'hazard'.

Bath and North East Somerset Council say it is 'taking action to keep people safe by addressing unauthorised and dangerous mooring locations'.

But those who live on the boats have hit back at the council's claims, instead alleging they are being kicked out because they are 'scruffy'.

While others believe they are being moved away from the spot due to plans to build a new Bath Rugby stadium to replace the nearby old one.   

One boat owner Ted, 54, said: 'There's not a health and safety issue - they're just using that against us.

 

'It's all about the rugby ground, getting rid of the boats and trees.

'They're going to move us by September, they're going to put us somewhere else.

'They're not being kind, they'll use force. I've been a boater for years, I've been moved before.'

The 54-year-old claimed that 'no one owns' the stretch of land and that the main reason they were being moved was 'the rugby ground, and because the boats look a bit dirty and scruffy'.

 

Another resident, who wished not to be named, said: 'They want to send us to the canal but there are no residential moorings on the canal.

'Normally stuff like this is all smoke and mirrors. It's about the development of the rugby ground.

'If it's about flooding they should've put pontoons in. It's completely safe when it floods.

'All down the river they've got pontoons but not here.

 

'The amount of money they are going to spend in legal action and evicting us, I've heard it's £1.5million but they don't have a leg to stand on.'

The resident added: 'We won't leave. We'll put in a planning application to manage it ourselves, manage the mooring, holiday boats, residential boats, tours.'

Another boat dweller said that their homes were 'good for tourism' and that the area could 'look so nice if the council tried'. 

The person even went on to accuse the council of 'penalising a minority'.

'They think the boats ruin the view but the opposite is true - we are part of the landscape here,' they continued. 

Percy Walton, 67, has lived on his boat there for four years.

He said: 'The letter came out of nowhere, it's awful.

'There are no other moorings on the Avon so where are they proposing to move everything?

'We contribute to the area, tourists are always asking us questions and I tell them about the trees. We dispose of our waste responsibly.

 

'I've been here four years and there've been no health and safety issues at all.

'They just want us to go because we're scruffy.'

The 67-year-old said that the residents who live in the houseboats are 'part of a community' that they contribute to. 

He added: 'They told us we had to go by September, and they would help us if they could.'

 

The council said last week: 'Boat owners moored there will be supported to move their vessels by the middle of September this year as the moorings are not safe for them to use.

'The moorings also pose a hazard to other river users.

'The channel forms a critical part of the city's flood defences and is not part of the river's navigation for boat users.

'In recent years, a number of boats including holiday rentals have moored along this stretch of the river, despite the council working with boat owners to explain the dangers and installing warning signage at the location.

'The owners of the rental vessels were asked to leave the area prior to the winter months when bad weather poses the greatest risks, however this was not acted upon.'

Councillor Sarah Warren, Deputy Leader and Cabinet Member for Sustainable B&NES, said: 'Boats moored in the Pulteney stretch are in danger from the high risk of flooding, particularly during periods of severe winter weather.

'This could put lives at risk. We want everyone in B&NES to have a safe place to call home and prevent all our residents from coming to harm.

'We are also concerned about the risk of serious injury in instances where gangplanks are being used on benches, and boats are being moored to grab lines, which prevents those lines from being used as essential lifesaving equipment.

'By working with boat owners and the Canal and River Trust to help residents move to a safe location, we're taking action to prevent accidents and protect everyone's wellbeing.

'As a last resort, we will take legal action if vessels remain in place beyond the date we have asked them to leave.'

 

Last time I went to Bath they had no moorings signs along there, I couldn't figure out why.

[hoopdriver]

Does a council have jurisdiction over waterways?

[David Mack]

1 hour ago, Alan de Enfield said:

.'The moorings also pose a hazard to other river users.

'The channel forms a critical part of the city's flood defences and is not part of the river's navigation for boat users.

What hazard to other river users?

This part of the river is not on the through route from the K&A to Bristol, but so what? It is an officially navigable river up to Pulteney Weir, and is much used by both visiting craft and trip boats.

I suspect this has much to do with the boats in question being 'scruffy', tying to railings and benches (presumably because there are no rings or bollards) and not paying anything to use the moorings or contributing to the local services they use.

The proper answer would be to provide floating pontoon moorings, some as paid for long term moorings, and the rest free for short term visiting boaters (with proper enforcement against overstayers).

[Graham Davis]

7 minutes ago, hoopdriver said:

Does a council have jurisdiction over waterways?

Depends, however I suspect they do have rights over the banks, which these people moor against. I'm sure that when we were there last there were "No Mooring" signs all along that section.

[Tony Brooks]

7 minutes ago, hoopdriver said:

Does a council have jurisdiction over waterways?

 

That is a river and the banks are usually under the jurisdiction of the riparian owner of the adjacent land. I think that the rugby ground is council owned to the answer is Yes, on rivers that may do, as may the farmers, house, and commercial premises owners as well.

[David Mack]

11 minutes ago, hoopdriver said:

Does a council have jurisdiction over waterways?

They may have riparian rights on rivers which include controlling mooring. They also have bylaw powers and powers to control anti social behaviour which could perhaps be invoked here.

[Alan de Enfield]

3 hours ago, David Mack said:

They may have riparian rights on rivers which include controlling mooring. They also have bylaw powers and powers to control anti social behaviour which could perhaps be invoked here.

 

Richmond Council passed byelaws limiting mooring to 1 hour, with enforcement "applied with all vigour"

 

 

Byelaws related to mooring Richmond Council.pdf

[Cheese]

And Elmbridge, a bit futher upstream, went down the PSPO route, with a 24 hour limit: https://www.elmbridge.gov.uk/news/2025/new-pspo-crack-down-unauthorised-moorings-elmbridge

[ditchcrawler]

5 hours ago, Graham Davis said:

Depends, however I suspect they do have rights over the banks, which these people moor against. I'm sure that when we were there last there were "No Mooring" signs all along that section.

was in 2014

[Chris John]

About time Oxford council did the same. The Thames near Folly bridge is an absolute mess. Let’s guess where the occupants of these boats put their waste. 

[junior]

If they know they are getting moved because they are 'scruffy', why don't they sort themselves out and become a bit less scruffy. 

[Arthur Marshall]

29 minutes ago, junior said:

If they know they are getting moved because they are 'scruffy', why don't they sort themselves out and become a bit less scruffy. 

Because it's so much easier for it to be someone else's fault?

[MtB]

7 hours ago, David Mack said:

(presumably because there are no rings or bollards)

 

 

 

These look like bollards to me!! 

 

 

[ditchcrawler]

13 minutes ago, MtB said:

 

 

 

These look like bollards to me!! 

 

 

But if you tie to them you may trip up passes by 

[MtB]

6 minutes ago, ditchcrawler said:

But if you tie to them you may trip up passes by 

 

True, but what are they for then?

 

 

[GUMPY]

11 minutes ago, MtB said:

 

True, but what are they for then?

 

 

Decoration 😉

[Cheese]

I suspect for the boaters the concern is as much about the financial implications, although they won't say so!

 

At present they are on non-C&RT waters, so probably don't need a licence. Which in turn means little pressure to maintain  insurance or BSS if they don't want to. The council are said to be negotiating with C&RT, presumably to find moorings on either the K&A or Avon, which will in future mean a significant cost.

 

In addition some are rented out as overnight/holiday lets, which will command a high price in  central Bath but substantially less further out. 

[Graham Davis]

Only boat there I could find on AirBnB
https://www.airbnb.co.uk/rooms/19078413?adults=1&check_in=2026-06-02&check_out=2026-06-05&location=Bath%2C United Kingdom&search_mode=regular_search&photo_id=2263516164&source_impression_id=p3_1780349908_P34A6C881kwVFSzy&previous_page_section_name=1001&federated_search_id=12aacedd-9685-4a47-8081-c73022ccfb87

[David Mack]

1 hour ago, Cheese said:

 

At present they are on non-C&RT waters, so probably

Surely this is CRT waters,and needs CRT licence.

[MtB]

1 minute ago, David Mack said:

Surely this is CRT waters,and needs CRT licence.

 

The River Avon is CRT?!!

 

[David Mack]

24 minutes ago, MtB said:

 

The River Avon is CRT?!!

 

Yes, from Bath to Hanham, Port of Bristol below that.

[DandV]

In 2012 we paid a modest amount to moor there. It was either to the council, or to the Bath Football Club, and included access to the Football Club's showers. And was limited to 48? hours.

I think the arrangement came to an end shortly after, and no mooring signs appeared instead, as somebody questioned the legality of the charging regime.  Evidently prohibiting mooring was legally easier. A shame, as they were great visitor moorings and were retained as such.

When we were there on our hireboat, we made the local radio news as the item just following the announcement of Michael Jackson's death. A group of local fishermen tackled a gent making off with property he had stolen after breaking into our boat. I wonder if the same recidifist offender was not the same gent, who made a living of burgling boats in the same area later at about the time he was due for release. 

 

 

[Llamedos]

I’m with the council on this one - 100%. 

[IanM]

20 hours ago, Alan de Enfield said:

And those who call the area home do not pay to moor at the site as there is 'free navigation'

 

What's one of them then?  Or is it some Freeman of the Land wibble?