Preston canal charges

[moggyjo]

Preston canal charges 30/01/2008

 

Row over increased rent charges.

 

British Waterways has sent the residents of a street in Preston in Lancahire a rent demand for the canal which passes their home. 150 terraced houses in the street have gardens which back onto the canal. Over the years they’ve maintained the canal bank as part of their garden, paying a nominal rent of approx £10 a year. Now they’ve been sent new license agreements which ask them to pay, in some cases, over £400 a year. Residents not happy. British Waterways say that anyone who has land that belongs to British Waterways could be faced with the same kind of increase. A Local MP says this is outrageous and should not have been implemented in this way – that British Waterways may now have to re-think the way they handle future rent increases.

 

Disclaimer

The BBC is not responsible for the content of external websites.

 

was on you and yours today.

[carlt]

It seems strange that other organisations who have to gain access across other people's land have to negotiate a wayleave agreement and compensate the landowner.

 

With BW, however, it works the other way round.

 

Fence their canal bank from your land and use section 5 of the Waterways act 1995 against them:

 

clicky

 

Edited to say: keep reading until section 9, btw

Edited January 30, 2008 by carlt

[gralyn]

Preston canal charges 30/01/2008

 

Row over increased rent charges.

 

British Waterways has sent the residents of a street in Preston in Lancahire a rent demand for the canal which passes their home. 150 terraced houses in the street have gardens which back onto the canal. Over the years they’ve maintained the canal bank as part of their garden, paying a nominal rent of approx £10 a year. Now they’ve been sent new license agreements which ask them to pay, in some cases, over £400 a year. Residents not happy. British Waterways say that anyone who has land that belongs to British Waterways could be faced with the same kind of increase. A Local MP says this is outrageous and should not have been implemented in this way – that British Waterways may now have to re-think the way they handle future rent increases.

 

Disclaimer

The BBC is not responsible for the content of external websites.

 

was on you and yours today.

 

Old news here up north. The real issue is that BW have an inflated idea of the value of the land. The prices thay are asking are the local equivalent of letting out an hectare of prime arable land rather than the one eighth hectare of industrial wasteland most end of garden embankments and cuttings represent. They seem to think that people will want to rent a strip of land 3mtrs wide to develop into flats.

[greywolf]

It is high handed to say the least.If they were going to increase rents like this then they should have given notice of it so that the residents could re aline there property boundaries accordingly, then as you say use the law on entry against them.Two can play silly Bs after all or negotiations can be entered into.

[Glenn]

I wonder how BW would feel if the residents decided they did not want the canal there and filled it in!

[tony collins]

This situation was discussed at some length a few months ago on here see:-

http://www.canalworld.net/forums/index.php...ncaster+gardens

 

Tony

[fender]

I wonder how BW would feel if the residents decided they did not want the canal there and filled it in!

 

BW wouldnt care, it just wants YOUR money

[Sir Nibble]

BW really do insist in shooting themselves in the foot don't they, they could just sit back and count the little cheques coming in but instead they decide to try and make these people make up the DEFRA shortfall and they demand a big cheque. Now they shall have nothing but a little useless land closely watched by people who will be VERY keen to go to court if it is not perfectly maintained. Fools!

[fender]

BW really do insist in shooting themselves in the foot don't they, they could just sit back and count the little cheques coming in but instead they decide to try and make these people make up the DEFRA shortfall and they demand a big cheque. Now they shall have nothing but a little useless land closely watched by people who will be VERY keen to go to court if it is not perfectly maintained. Fools!

 

BW has never done anything properly. In the 1980's licence overstayers and unpaid boats were big news and nothing was done. BW could have reasonbly ensured that offenders were paid up but they've only just begin to do something about it. So thats a LOT OF MONEY lost in the past 30 years, and lots of money lost in investement of the waterways. Overstayers, unpaid licences, mooring offenders, bridge hoppers - they are all your fault BW! Your'e a lousy, incompentent, constipated, heads-on-backwards organisation!

 

And as for these gardens that back onto the canal, BW could have made little rent increments that amounted to a lot when acclumated over the years. Instead it decides to give a massive wallop and increase rents in one go. No wonder in Preston people are so angry with BW.

 

BW's in full panic since the DEFRA cuts. In all reality the incompetence and the massive losses BW has overseen in the 30 years could have instead ensured that its fall-back nest-egg was more substantial - that it had more money inthe coffers for a rainiy day - and that any increases, such as garden rents and boat licences that might have to come, such as now in the light of DEFRA would also be more softer.

 

There's just one word for BW in all total aspects of the waterways - P*SS OFF AND DON'T COME BACK!