Dispute at Pillings

[carlt]

It has been edited by the poster. Read Carls post that follows. It may give you a clue as to what was in the post.

It is PL's post word for word.

 

I always copy lengthy posts and paste them back in when responding to bits of them.

 

It is a bit long winded but it comes in handy from time to time.

 

I'm surprised he edited it, to be honest, because his assurances that leaseholders will lose no money should improve his image no end, on the forum.

[csh]

Phantasm, you are not reading the posts. PLM did pay, then struggled to pay and made part payments. Those part payments were due to the fact that they reduced their mooring fees. So the money levied from the moorers as part of their fees was forwarded to CaRT. A reduced payment to reflect reduced mooring fees. CaRT then stopped banking the payments and insisted on the full amount. No negotiation. No compromise.

[Dangerous Dave]

It has been edited by the poster. Read Carls post that follows. It may give you a clue as to what was in the post.

 

 

Yes thanks have seen the context,but why erase it

 

Is the guy paranoid as well now?

[csh]

Ok carlt, apologies. Thanks.

[carlt]

carlt, once again we have the deliberately ironic use of the inverted comma. I believe we saw this earlier in the thread with the negative connotation implied to 'life partner'. Can we avoid emotive remarks or sarcasm. Let's stick to the issues. Many thanks.

.

I'm afraid I lack the gene that enables me to avoid sarcasm and irony.

 

Just because humour and sarcasm are used does not mean I wasn't on topic.

 

If you dislike my posting manner I suggest you use the "ignore" facility available on the forum so you don't have to suffer my "sarcasm".

[Dangerous Dave]

Oh i see now ..Pillings Lock is now CSH

[carlt]

carlt, once again we have the deliberately ironic use of the inverted comma.

Does putting businessmen in inverted commas mean I was being Harpaxophobic?

[PaulG]

I'm interested in this "economic downturn" claim as a reason for Plillings financial troubles.

 

In C&RT's Marina Investment Guide for 2008, (the year the Pillings opened) they state that there were 23,500 boats with home moorings, 1,500 cc'ers and another 2000 commercial.

They state that "Total current demand for moorings therefore is approximately 25,500 berths, of which 21% are currently in large marinas of more than 200 berths."

 

They now say that there are "over 35,000" boats on the network.

http://canalrivertrust.org.uk/boating

 

That's an increase of about 10,000 in about six years, or approx 40%. There's no breakdown, but they can't all be cc'ers!

 

The increase is certainly not incompatible with the historic and potential growth figures that they discuss in their Investment Guide.

 

These figures certainly do not suggest the BW/C&RT over-egged their offer and "promised" growth that did not materialise.

Edited February 27, 2014 by PaulG

[Dangerous Dave]

Does putting businessmen in inverted commas mean I was being Harpaxophobic?

 

Perhaps it would have been better to put down "Business person"

[johnlillie]

Pl is certainly an expert on inflated legal costs, he spent the best part of £8000 trying to avoid paying me the £7000 he owed me, and ended up paying well over £15000 in the end!

[SoosieQ]

But it makes no difference what historic marinas, those on the river, or those with larger 'honeymoon' periods do or do not have to pay. The bottom line will always remain that PLM had a binding agreement and failed to fulfil its obligations. The money was levied from the moorers but did not find its way to the correct department.

 

From PL's posting - "You must remember that PLM invested £3 million in the development of the marina. CaRT's investment was zero." Not sure of the reasoning behind this observation. [/size]

CRT didnt invest but did remove moorings ,thereby losing income. and historic marinas may not pay an NAA,but unless theyre on a river they are subject to a connection charge

[Dangerous Dave]

Pl is certainly an expert on inflated legal costs, he spent the best part of £8000 trying to avoid paying me the £7000 he owed me, and ended up paying well over £15000 in the end!

 

 

Also an estimated £4000 or so in legal fees in shutting us up..Reference overcharging of electricity..

 

£4000- perhaps i'm over inflating legal fees now!

[Paul G2]

Phantasm, you are not reading the posts. PLM did pay, then struggled to pay and made part payments. Those part payments were due to the fact that they reduced their mooring fees. So the money levied from the moorers as part of their fees was forwarded to CaRT. A reduced payment to reflect reduced mooring fees. CaRT then stopped banking the payments and insisted on the full amount. No negotiation. No compromise.

 

Are you saying that PLM did pay the NAA at some point? Can you please tell what amounts they paid and which years those payments were for?

[Phantasm]

Phantasm, you are not reading the posts. PLM did pay, then struggled to pay and made part payments. Those part payments were due to the fact that they reduced their mooring fees. So the money levied from the moorers as part of their fees was forwarded to CaRT. A reduced payment to reflect reduced mooring fees. CaRT then stopped banking the payments and insisted on the full amount. No negotiation. No compromise.

csh I AM reading the posts and I obviously understand the context of the posts and the history of the situation. Do you?

 

I am not stupid or feeble-minded and I do not need it to be explained to me in words of one syllable. I run my own business (successfully) and I also pay my bills. PL has continually mismanaged the financial direction of the marina, the main business of which is boats, boating, mooring and associated activities and this is where the majority of his efforts should have been centred. The café bar, apartment etc are simply appendages.

 

You want to avoid, what was it, oh yes, emotive remarks and sarcasm. How about you curb your patronising attitude!!

[Drop_Shunt]

Phantasm, you are not reading the posts. PLM did pay, then struggled to pay and made part payments. Those part payments were due to the fact that they reduced their mooring fees. So the money levied from the moorers as part of their fees was forwarded to CaRT. A reduced payment to reflect reduced mooring fees. CaRT then stopped banking the payments and insisted on the full amount. No negotiation. No compromise.

 

Hi csh,

 

It sounds like you have the relevant facts and figures to hand, so, to save me doing the legwork, over what time period were the agreed NAA payments made in full please ? I believe that the requirement to make payment in full was phased in over a number of years from the opening of the marina, and I don't have the information to hand to do the maths myself, so it would be very interesting to see when the dispute first arose - I had until your post been under the impression that the agreed payments had never been made !

 

Ta duck.

[Alan de Enfield]

..........In C&RT's Marina Investment Guide for 2008, (the year the Pillings opened) they state that there were 23,500 boats with home moorings, 1,500 cc'ers and another 2000 commercial.

They state that "Total current demand for moorings therefore is approximately 25,500 berths, of which 21% are currently in large marinas of more than 200 berths."

 

They now say that there are "over 35,000" boats on the network.

http://canalrivertrust.org.uk/boating

 

 

In C&RT's response (in the TowPath talk article) it also comments that

 

"In our 2006 Inland Marina Investment guide we predicted that licenced boats on our waterways would reach 35,000 by 2013. We reached 35,000 in 2011, two years earlier than predicted"

 

So - in a time of 'massive market growth' this company 'failed to thrive'

[johnlillie]

just realised, CSH is the life partner, not very subtle use of initials!

[dor]

carlt, once again we have the deliberately ironic use of the inverted comma. I believe we saw this earlier in the thread with the negative connotation implied to 'life partner'. Can we avoid emotive remarks or sarcasm. Let's stick to the issues. Many thanks.

 

I think that you forget that the marina was trading well and was indeed making the payments UNTIL the economic downturn. How many businesses have closed due to unforeseen events? Countless. If only we all had the amazing gift of foresight and being able to predict the future.

 

I don't know of any marina in my area, and there are a lot of them, who found that they couldn't pay the NAA due to the so-called economic downturn. Some of those marinas are full, some maybe at 70%, but they are on the whole well run by people who don't set out to piss people off or suck too much money out of the business. The owners of these marinas still seem to be living pretty well and their businesses are doing well.

 

Pillings Lock had good occupancy at one time, so why has that apparently suffered so much due to the economic downturn when others haven't? (rhetorical question as we all know thw real answer.)

[csh]

Drop_Shunt, I'll look into that and send you the information.

Phantasm, I'm sorry if you misunderstood my comment as patronising, I can assure you that was not my intention. It all gets lost in translation when typing. My apologies to you.

PLM does currently have a good occupancy rate. It is certainly not full and it is difficult to remain competitive when other marinas can afford to charge considerably less. It was paying a part payment to CaRT and was close to being able to resume paying the full amount, when CaRT took them to court.

 

Part of the problem faced by PLM was releasing £350k out of the company for Mr Lillie Snr when he chose to resign. His son fought to release his investment rather than have shares and this was a serious financial hole to fill. This coupled with the ongoing onslaught of legal cases actioned against the business by aforementioned Mr Lillie Snr put further strain on the companies finances.

[Phantasm]

just realised, CSH is the life partner, not very subtle use of initials!

I did think csh is who you say, especially with the lecture he tried to deliver.

[Nightwatch]

just realised, CSH is the life partner, not very subtle use of initials!

i don't know his name so the initials meant nowt. But I was fairly certain that csh was Paul's partner. Makes no difference does it?

 

Martyn

 

Edited to add it. And mistakenly gave myself a greenie.

Edited February 27, 2014 by Nightwatch

[Phantasm]

Part of the problem faced by PLM was releasing £350k out of the company for Mr Lillie Snr when he chose to resign. His son fought to release his investment rather than have shares and this was a serious financial hole to fill. This coupled with the ongoing onslaught of legal cases actioned against the business by aforementioned Mr Lillie Snr put further strain on the companies finances.

Chose to resign or pushed out? Don't be so obtuse. He was treated abominably. Am I wrong in believing that Pauls parents sold their house etc to put funds in to start this venture. What did their son do? As I said before, if not for his parents he would still be down south working for someone else. Maybe PL should have treated his mum and dad better and he should take responsibility for this farce instead of throwing his teddy.

 

Edited to change is to in

Edited February 27, 2014 by Phantasm

[csh]

I am not willing to enter into this nonsense. You have a terribly misguided viewpoint and that will never change. This is not a forum for personal attacks.

You are not in possession of the facts and I urge you to exercise some restrain on this matter.

This is forum that is supposed to inform and help boaters, not air dirty laundry.

[Pen n Ink]

This is forum that is supposed to inform and help boaters

 

Spot On. And this topic has so far been doing an excellent job in providing information which will allow all of us potential future customers for PLM to make up our own minds on the advisability of entering into any such arrangement.

 

I have to say though, that I am disappointed that the discussion has been so one-sided and has had to rely on third party reports rather than having truthful, polite, helpful and constructive input direct from Pillingslock.

[Nightwatch]

Spot On. And this topic has so far been doing an excellent job in providing information which will allow all of us potential future customers for PLM to make up our own minds on the advisability of entering into any such arrangement.

 

I have to say though, that I am disappointed that the discussion has been so one-sided and has had to rely on third party reports rather than having truthful, polite, helpful and constructive input direct from Pillingslock.

Ditto. I think it is important that 'the other side" is heard from Paul or his elected spokesperson.

 

This afternoon, for me has been a step forward.

 

Martyn