Jump to content

Dispute at Pillings

andy the hammer

By andy the hammer
in General Boating

 Share

Featured Posts

Dangerous Dave Collaborator

Dangerous Dave

Posted
Posted

I wonder if it would've helped if, once it was realised that not all the berths would be full, pulling out some of the pontoons and putting them on the bank, reducing the number of moorings, would've reduced the NAA charge.

 

 

There were actually a number of unused pontoons stacked up behind one of the seperate ponds..

 

He actually planned to plant those a couple of years ago to meet demand...hahahah!!..When the marina was only 60% full ish

 

,But the local authority dismissed the application.

Link to comment
Share on other sites
Jerra Veteran II

Jerra

Posted
Posted

What, other than the gap in the bank that has already been paid for, does the "access charge" give a marina moorer.

It is what it gives the business that the charge is for. It is up to the moorer to decide if the mooring charge (which includes all the businesses overheads) is value for money.

Link to comment
Share on other sites
Starcoaster Veteran

Starcoaster

Posted
Posted

Not only not paying the fee now, but also encouraging boaters not to bother paying their licence fees if not going out.

Cretin.

 

Matty do you mean the content of the email on the prior page? That is how I read it at first too- the Pillings guy trying to point out to moorers that they don't need a licence now, lucky them. But the email was actually from someone in CRT to the moorers, not from the marina owner.

Link to comment
Share on other sites
Paul G2 Rising Star

Paul G2

Posted
Posted

His argument and refusal to see the sense being put forward suggests he might have a financial interest in a marina.

 

Or maybe that he is just stubborn and opinionated - unlike you or me or all the other users here who are completely open-minded and willing to change our opinions at the slightest hint we may be wrong, right?

icecream.gif

Link to comment
Share on other sites
nipper Proficient

nipper

Posted
Posted

 

Matty do you mean the content of the email on the prior page? That is how I read it at first too- the Pillings guy trying to point out to moorers that they don't need a licence now, lucky them. But the email was actually from someone in CRT to the moorers, not from the marina owner.

 

Thank you Starry.

 

Maybe i should of explained that the mail was posted to me from CART.

 

From .Phil Spencer

 

Head of Business Boating

 

Canal & River Trust | Fearns Wharf | Neptune Street | Leeds | LS9 8PB | M: 07710 175342 | DD: 0113 281 6833 |

 

 

Sorry for any confusion I may have caused.

 

Nipper

Link to comment
Share on other sites
George94 Experienced

George94

Posted
Posted

Except that boaters in general pay twice. Once as a boater and again as a taxpayer.

 

A rambler, cyclist, horserider only pays once. I have omitted anglers in recognition of the fact that they do pay twice, even if it is only a pittance.

 

George ex nb Alton retired

 

I am not aware that walkers, cyclists, and riders use the locks or require there to be enough water to float a boat. Nor are anglers a major drain on the trust's resources.

 

Having said that, I think that the canals are such a vital piece of our heritage and contribute so much to the landscape and to leisure facilities generally that the government should pay the lion's share of keeping them going.

  • Greenie 2
Link to comment
Share on other sites
furnessvale Influencer

furnessvale

Posted
Posted

 

I am not aware that walkers, cyclists, and riders use the locks or require there to be enough water to float a boat. Nor are anglers a major drain on the trust's resources.

 

Having said that, I think that the canals are such a vital piece of our heritage and contribute so much to the landscape and to leisure facilities generally that the government should pay the lion's share of keeping them going.

As a boater I have no need of towpaths, as is demonstrated by my use of rivers and, in the early 1970s, the Shroppie. These are much beloved by walkers, cyclists and horseriders and major recipients of central and local government cash.

 

George ex nb Alton retired

Link to comment
Share on other sites
matty40s Veteran II

matty40s

Posted
Posted

who got insulted??

 

...and yes, I did misconstrue that CRT communication as being from the Pillie camp (can I say thatwink.png ) - it is as though CRT are inviting licence fee loss. I bet the enforcement officers and boat checkers up the ante in and around Loughborough now.

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
 Share
Go to topic listing

  • 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.