Dispute at Pillings

[matty40s]

This is standard practice , from previous management, for Roy Rollings (who registered on here as a member but has never dared speak) to continue the Paul Lillie style of management is astounding.

Does he not consider his future reputation.......

oh, no, sorry, he wants to be a lawyer doesn't he.....

[SoosieQ]

Phil's email reads as if they are taking RR as the new director of a new company and that PL is no longer part of it all. They surely don't really believe that?

If they do....i hope they are quickly disabused of that notion! I hope theyre keeping an eye on this thread

[adam1uk]

He is not liveaboard, so the marina office had the other set of keys for his boat (in case of emergencies).

Is this normal? We've moored our boat at two different marinas, and neither has asked for a set of keys. And if they had, I wouldn't have given it to them.

[Marc Harris]

Is this normal? We've moored our boat at two different marinas, and neither has asked for a set of keys. And if they had, I wouldn't have given it to them.

Common practice for non liveaboards.... PLM don't ask for keys AFAIK, but will hold them for you if you feel safer / happier / whatever that someone can look after your boat while you are away for a period of time.

That wont be the workshop thats there now....as far as i know theyve not been there a year.

The CRT tug Little John was heading towards Pillings today

IIRC Clean Sailing (the current workshop tenants) moved into the workshop around Jan 2013

[tony collins]

Common practice for non liveaboards.... PLM don't ask for keys AFAIK, but will hold them for you if you feel safer / happier / whatever that someone can look after your boat while you are away for a period of time.

Am I being simple? When I was involved in running a club marina, we didn't require keys of members boats. If a boat needed to be moved, we moved it by hand. If it needed pumping out we called the owner. Sudden events rarely happen when moored in a yard.

[Marc Harris]

Am I being simple? When I was involved in running a club marina, we didn't require keys of members boats. If a boat needed to be moved, we moved it by hand. If it needed pumping out we called the owner. Sudden events rarely happen when moored in a yard.

As I said before, they don't *require* keys. They will hold them at the customers request. I know a few people at the marina that have their spare keys at the marina office (or have done in the past).

[Alan de Enfield]

Common practice for non liveaboards.... PLM don't ask for keys AFAIK, but will hold them for you if you feel safer / happier / whatever that someone can look after your boat while you are away for a period of time.

 

IIRC Clean Sailing (the current workshop tenants) moved into the workshop around Jan 2013

 

Funny how the mind works - as I was 'speed reading' this I thought it said :

 

"can look after your boat while you are away for a period of crime".

[MtB]

I have a boat in Calcutt. They require a set of keys as a condition of mooring there.

 

MtB

[AndrewIC]

Phil's email reads as if they are taking RR as the new director of a new company and that PL is no longer part of it all. They surely don't really believe that?

That appears to be the legal position, and CRT are (as they should be) playing a straight bat.

[b0atman]

interesting to know if any boats come out this weekend

[Ally]

That appears to be the legal position, and CRT are (as they should be) playing a straight bat.

I agree its the legal position, but that doesn't by any means mean the ultimate control has changed.

[Alan de Enfield]

interesting to know if any boats come out this weekend

 

Maybe before they leave they should check to make sure there isn't sugar in the fuel tank, disconnected filters or batteries and that all the plumbing is tight.

[MtB]

I agree its the legal position, but that doesn't by any means mean the ultimate control has changed.

 

Correct. This is what the often mentioned 'shadow director' thing is all about.

 

Google it!

 

MtB

[NigelMoore]

I have a boat in Calcutt. They require a set of keys as a condition of mooring there.

 

MtB

I never required keys of those who lived aboard, but when responsible for a boat moored with me when the owner was resident overseas, I held the keys. When one owner later requested they be handed over to his in-laws, I agreed on condition that the boat become BWs responsibility not mine, and moved the boat off my moorings. I was not prepared to remain responsible for a boat to which I could not gain access in emergencies, in a situation when the owner was on the other side of the world and the key holders were at least 24 hours away. If a boat started sinking from some leak within the cabin that needed access into it to sort out, I wanted immediate access.

[johnlillie]

What surprises me is that anyone is surprised to hear about "strange goings on" at PLM All these tales of alleged sabotage, we are still talking about someone who did what he did to his own parents, mother in particular.

[Phantasm]

 

Actually, if you look at what RR said, his statement is really quite ambiguous.

 

 

Where is the NAA being sent and for approval by whom? Steadman & Lillie can approve the NAA in the sense that they can take it or leave it, but that's about it on their end. CRT, on the other hand, has made it quite clear that they want guarantees of payment for approval by them. RR's statement probably means that he has applied for the NAA and that CRT is now laughing at reviewing his application. If this is the case, there's a long way to go before any "approval" is granted by CRT.

 

 

One can already see the PL doubletalk taking over here. RR is talking about "closing" a jetty, seemingly, CRT is talking about removing that jetty. While RR and CRT may be saying the same thing, I doubt it and this really does seem to be setting the scene for future obfuscation on PL's part. If CRT wants a jetty removed, they had better be darn sure it is removed before the NAA is approved or it will never happen and PL will insist that his understanding was that it only had to be "closed".

 

ETA - Whilst I was typing this someone else posted the letter from Phil Spencer. It would appear that RR's letter is, in fact, all sizzle and no bacon.

There was talk some time ago about (I think) 'C' jetty being closed to reduce payments to BW. IIRC the requirement was that the jetty be "severed" so that no-one could access it from the land and the electricity removed.

[AndrewIC]

Correct. This is what the often mentioned 'shadow director' thing is all about.

I'm quite sure CRT will be paying close (and perhaps prolonged...) attention to the structure of the companies and the identities of any ultimate controlling authorities, but if they are going to put out an email to their customers then they will reflect the official position that they are in discussions with PLT and its director.

interesting to know if any boats come out this weekend

If the allegations made elsewhere in this thread are true, it would be interesting to know if any other boats find themselves unable to leave this weekend because of unexpected mechanical difficulties...

[Paul G2]

IIRC Clean Sailing (the current workshop tenants) moved into the workshop around Jan 2013

 

Unless the former workshop tenants left a shelf or cupboard marked "Parts from Sabotaged Boats", how would anyone other than the person responsible for removing and storing that part know a) that they had the part, and where to find it?

[MtB]

 

Unless the former workshop tenants left a shelf or cupboard marked "Parts from Sabotaged Boats", how would anyone other than the person responsible for removing and storing that part know a) that they had the part, and where to find it?

 

I suspect this is common practice there because despite denying any involvement, RR called the workshop to ask them about it. Now why would he have done that? The only answer I can come up with is that he knew they were in the habit of doing such things under instruction from the office.

 

The workshop, being a separate business, would have no reason to do such a thing unless instructed to do so.

 

I wonder if there will be more unexplained breakdowns soon if RR fails to get his NAA.

 

 

MtB

[Bod]

If you leave your boat & keys with a responsible and professional marina, surely there is a duty of care.

I see big claims for damages, only staff had access.

In this case very bad publicity, enough to put the marina, out of business.

 

Bod

[costalot]

CRT are correctly removing the personal and emotional aspects from the situation. This is a business issue and their focus will be on ensuring they (CRT) are financially protected from a repeat occurrence. I would be astonished if NAA payment wasn't required in advance. Moreover I can't see them going to court if a future payment is late. Instead, the barrier will go in very quickly.

 

If PLT wants a NAA quickly then they are going to have to dance to the CRT tune. Somehow I can't see this occurring and PLM will instead tell moorers that they are trying hard but CRT are dragging their feet. CRT will tell the moorers they have their (moorers) best interests at heart but that there must be satisfactory arrangements to prevent a re-ocurrence. Eventually a mutually acceptable solution will be found. But the pressure is now on PLT!

[SoosieQ]

PL didnt know Mr Steadman before Steadman invested in PLM? Why would a successful businessman keep PL in the business after causing such a debacle? Does PL have something on Mr Steadman to keep him in his job?

[Puddlejumper]

---------- Forwarded message ----------

From: Phil Spencer <Phil.Spencer@canalrivertrust.org.uk>

Date: 9 Apr 2014 16:55

Subject: Pillings Lock Marina

To: Phil Spencer <Phil.Spencer@canalrivertrust.org.uk>

Cc:

 

Dear Boating Licence Customer

 

 

 

Since I wrote to you on the 24th March there has been a lot of activity and which I can summarise as follows:

 

 

 

1. We have been informed that a new company Pillings Lock Trading Ltd (PLT) has become the owner of the marina.

 

 

2. That company has indicated that it is willing to enter into a new standard Network Access Agreement (NAA).

 

 

3. We are in discussions with Mr Roy Rollings the sole director of PLT and PLT’s solicitors about completion of that agreement. I had a meeting with Mr Rollings yesterday to discuss some aspects of the agreement and we are giving these discussions our absolute priority. The Trust is of course seeking to ensure that it is protected from a repeat of the situation that arose with the previous owner of the marina which caused us to revoke the original NAA.

 

 

4. The Trust will proceed with the works to sever the navigable connection in accordance with the timetable previously advised to you unless and until we have a completed NAA. So if we do not have a completed NAA by the 14th April – next Monday – the works to prevent navigation between the marina basin and the waterway will be installed.

 

 

5. I have previously advised that from the 14th April until the 31st May controlled passage out of the marina only will be permitted. I can now tell you that this passage will be made available on each Saturday between the hours of 10.00am and 1.00pm, a total of seven occasions.

 

I hope the above is clear but if you have any questions please email me.

 

 

 

 

 

Yours sincerely

 

 

 

Phil Spencer

 

 

 

Head of Business Boating

 

 

 

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

 

 

 

Please visit http://canalrivertrust.org.uk/ to find out more about the Canal & River Trust.

Can someone explain this copy?? I was not aware If an email was sent to the sender it could end up anywhere else (From Phill Spencer to Phil Spencer

[pillingslock]

So at the moment, we're delivering a boat for a forum member, back to Cambridge.

 

This boat has come out of Pilling's Lock.

 

We went up last Saturday to test the engine and ensure it was ready to leave yesterday.

 

The engine would not initially start. I found that the umbilical cable between the control panel and the engine had been unplugged, but kept together so nothing appeared wrong.

 

We started the engine, but noticed that the PRM gearbox was chucking out oil in an alarming fashion, and it turned out that the control arm for the gearbox had been removed, causing the leak. The nut, washer and stud were still in place, but the actuating arm was missing.

 

The forum member went to talk to Roy, as he owed them a small amount of money. Roy initially said (paraphrasing) "oh no, we wouldn't do a thing like that, but we might chain up a boat that owed money as people have left before". However, he rang the workshop, and it transpired that they had removed the gearbox arm, without permission, and had it. However, they stated that they would not be able to fit it until sometime next week, perhaps Wednesday.

 

I was able to fit it, and replace the oil in the gearbox, and we successfully had a cruise around the marina, once the bill was settled.

 

I asked Roy when the control arm had been removed, and he stated that it had been taken a year ago when the boat first arrived- but at that time, the owner of the boat did not owe any money at all!

 

So either:

 

-Pillings staff sabotaged this boat when it first arrived, before the owner owed any money at all

 

Or

 

-They gained access to the boat without the owner's permission later in the year, once he owed them some money, perhaps by using copied keys, but subsequently lied about this and denied it.

 

Either way, it doesn't look good. Deliberately sabotaging customer's boats, in a way that could have caused a great deal of damage had the oil leak not been spotted, seems a very poor way to do business indeed.

This is factually incorrect and Slander.

The vessel in question had a Tort Notice on it as there was a marina bill of over £1500 outstanding and the owner went AWOL - we even contacted the Police as we assumed he was dead!

The vessel had the drive linkage disabled at our request as we had to protect the vessel from any potential theft (keys were in the house where the owner lived and later missing) and also we had a Tort notice to recover our owed money which was considerable. Redwood Collections dealt with this matter formally.

The owner eventually re-appeared and paid his outstanding bill in instalments, but payments were never up to scratch.

The owner departed the Marina last week (still owing a few hundred quid) - there was still a Tort notice in place and had an unpaid bill. The owner actually couldn't pay the bill and therefore offered us a used Generator as payment which we accepted as it was better than nothing!!!

This person quoting this is damaging the reputations of the businesses involved and any post that refers to this matter incorrectly needs to be removed.

Thank you

Paul Lillie Director, Pilling's Lock Marina

pillingsbackoffice@btconnect.com

[RLWP]

Can someone explain this copy?? I was not aware If an email was sent to the sender it could end up anywhere else (From Phill Spencer to Phil Spencer

 

If you are sending out a lot of emails, it's common practice to send it to yourself and BCC in all the other recipients. That way you don't send a huge list of email addresses out to people who don't need to know who else gets the email

 

Richard

Ooh look, a credibility gap

 

Richard