Dispute at Pillings

[costalot]

 

Well I hope you are right. I would feel mightily reassured if you were but my point remains we still don't know, and CRT don't have much of a track record when it comes to protecting their interests effectively.

 

 

MtB

I would be extremely surprised if there wasn't a reminder "flag" on the CRT NAA payments calendar for the next annual payment from PLT. I would also assume CRT would be making regular checks of the marina moorings to ensure the "correct" number of moorings were in place. Finally, if PLT were so stupid (it would be RR responsible for the payment) as to not make the 2015 payment by the due date I'd be astonished if CRT didn't take immediate action.

 

My guess is the marina members of the BMF are all probably rather annoyed with events at Pillings Lock Marina. But then as far as I can tell from the BMF website PLM isn't a member of the BMF!

[Paul G2]

What is this talk of "annual" payments? Payments are due quarterly, with the next payment being due July, 2014.

 

It is my understanding, from what Phil Spencer wrote, that PLM/RR were forced to pay a full year's NAA fees as a deposit to secure their promise to pay and they are still on a quarterly payment basis with their second payment being due July, 2014. CRT should have retained the ability to blockade the marina when the first quarterly payment is missed and not have to wait out the year. If they worded their agreement any other way, that is, if they treat the advance payment as anything other than a "deposit against losses", they are bigger fools than one could possibly imagine and all involved in the decision deserve to be sacked.

[b0atman]

I think CaRt employees should be named and shamed for this situation which has caused misappropriation of money from moorers in this marina without them being informed at the start of money for NAA not being paid.

[MtB]

What is this talk of "annual" payments? Payments are due quarterly, with the next payment being due July, 2014.

 

RR said he had to pay one year in advance, £30k odd.

 

If this was a security deposit then the first quarter's payment of £8k-ish would also have been due. But it wasn't. Therefor we may deduce that CRT are simply requiring 12 months in advance instead of three months in advance like all the other marinas.

 

MtB

I would be extremely surprised if there wasn't a reminder "flag" on the CRT NAA payments calendar for the next annual payment from PLT. I would also assume CRT would be making regular checks of the marina moorings to ensure the "correct" number of moorings were in place. Finally, if PLT were so stupid (it would be RR responsible for the payment) as to not make the 2015 payment by the due date I'd be astonished if CRT didn't take immediate action.

 

And are how surprised are you at how long BW/CRT allowed the affair to drag on for six years in the first place? Not very? Very? extremely?

 

My guess is that on balance, when the next payment from Pillings is missed, CRT will pass it to their legal dept and take no action other than applying for a court hearing. Then you'll be 'extremely surprised' once again!

 

MtB

[Graham Davis]

I think CaRt employees should be named and shamed for this situation which has caused misappropriation of money from moorers in this marina without them being informed at the start of money for NAA not being paid.

 

Why?

By doing that you are laying the blame on the CaRT employee instead of PL.

[Richard T]

Passed Pillings this morning - one of the pontoons is almost empty.

[FredDrift]

I think CaRt employees should be named and shamed for this situation which has caused misappropriation of money from moorers in this marina without them being informed at the start of money for NAA not being paid.

 

How does CRT become the guilty party in respect of "misappropriation of money from moorers"?*

 

*Technically of course, there has been no "misappropriation of money from moorers".

[costalot]

 

RR said he had to pay one year in advance, £30k odd.

 

If this was a security deposit then the first quarter's payment of £8k-ish would also have been due. But it wasn't. Therefor we may deduce that CRT are simply requiring 12 months in advance instead of three months in advance like all the other marinas.

 

MtB

 

And are how surprised are you at how long BW/CRT allowed the affair to drag on for six years in the first place? Not very? Very? extremely?

 

I'm not surprised that the affair dragged on for six years. But I'd be very surprised if CRT opted for exactly the same strategy a second time!

 

 

 

 

 

MtB

[MtB]

 

I'm not surprised that the affair dragged on for six years. But I'd be very surprised if CRT opted for exactly the same strategy a second time!

 

 

Why would things be any different next time around? I won't be one bit surprised if things remain the same. The same people are still there making the same sorts of decisions and none of them has any skin in the game. Nothing has changed.

 

Anyway we'll see in a year's time when the next annual payment in advance falls due. If I were Paul Lillie I'd test out CRT once again by failing to pay up, mainly to see if they immediately chain off the entrance, or just pass it to the legals dept to fiddle about with for a few years while I carry on collecting those mooring fees.

 

I know which I'd be expecting to happen!

 

MtB

Edited April 22, 2014 by Mike the Boilerman

[PaulD]

 

 

Why would things be any different next time around? I won't be one bit surprised if things remain the same. The same people are still there making the same sorts of decisions and none of them has any skin in the game. Nothing has changed.

 

MtB

 

I worked for several companies in sales and if I had a debt of £180,000 overdue for even a few months I would have to put the account on stop and submit monthly reports detailing action taken. I wouldn't have survived a fiasco lasting as long as PL and I am sure that would be the case in most real world companies.

 

Raises the question who is C&RT accountable to now it is a charity?

[MtB]

 

I worked for several companies in sales and if I had a debt of £180,000 overdue for even a few months I would have to put the account on stop and submit monthly reports detailing action taken. I wouldn't have survived a fiasco lasting as long as PL and I am sure that would be the case in most real world companies.

 

Raises the question who is C&RT accountable to now it is a charity?

 

It's not a charity, please don't propagate this mis-information.

 

It's a charitable trust. Not the same thing at all.

 

 

MtB

[George94]

 

It's not a charity, please don't propagate this mis-information.

 

It's a charitable trust. Not the same thing at all.

 

 

MtB

 

Funnily enough, CART is listed by the Charity Commissioners as the fourth biggest charity by income, and the 41st by spending. The funds must be piling up.

 

Perhaps you should have a word with them and put them right. After all, what do they know?

 

Then have a word with the Economist about your interesting definition of a monopoly.

 

Finally you could consider apologising to all those Pillings moorers who you advised to find new moorings. I hope none took your advice.

[kevinl]

 

Funnily enough, CART is listed by the Charity Commissioners as the fourth biggest charity by income, and the 41st by spending. The funds must be piling up.

 

Perhaps you should have a word with them and put them right. After all, what do they know?

 

Then have a word with the Economist about your interesting definition of a monopoly.

 

Finally you could consider apologising to all those Pillings moorers who you advised to find new moorings. I hope none took your advice.

Point 1 - Where?

http://webarchive.nationalarchives.gov.uk/+/http://www.charitycommission.gov.uk/showcharity/registerofcharities/sectordata/Top10Charities.aspx

Point 2 - More than you by the look of it

Point 3 - They're near enough of a monopoly on the canals as makes no difference

Point 4 - MtB said what a lot of us thought, time to get out of Dodge. If living there suits you then OK then stay, but pretty soon when it gets spelt out to the long term leaseholder they've been shafted and they have to pay again the mood might change and under the "new" management who knows what will happen next.

K

[MtB]

 

Funnily enough, CART is listed by the Charity Commissioners as the fourth biggest charity by income, and the 41st by spending. The funds must be piling up.

 

Perhaps you should have a word with them and put them right. After all, what do they know?

 

Then have a word with the Economist about your interesting definition of a monopoly.

 

Finally you could consider apologising to all those Pillings moorers who you advised to find new moorings. I hope none took your advic

 

Blimey I thought you'd slunk back off under your bridge after making such a twerp of yourself struggling so hard to grasp the concept of a monopoly!

 

MtB

[boathunter]

If the fact that CaRT are content that they are dealing with the owner of the marina, when everyone else can see it's another dummy company set up to fail is anything to go by, it's hard not to take Mike's view that CaRT have no real interest in whether they get paid or not as long as they can dot the i's and cross the t's, draw their salaries and move along to the next item in the in-tray. No skin in the game as has been said. Employees content to cover their arses.

And as to whether the canals would be allowed to fall into disrepair being impossible because the public like canals and wouldn't let it happen, if you think this you must be incredibly blinkered. As a non-boat owner living amongst other non-boat owners I can assure you that 99% of the population wouldn't even bother to read the newspaper article beyond the headline if this happened.

[George94]

 

Blimey I thought you'd slunk back off under your bridge after making such a twerp of yourself struggling so hard to grasp the concept of a monopoly!

 

MtB

 

So you still haven't got it?

 

Or you just can't bring yourself to admit it. Ask KevinL to put you right. "Point 3 - They're near enough of a monopoly on the canals as makes no difference"

 

And Kevin, here's the link:

 

http://www.charitycommission.gov.uk/find-charities/

Go to "Top Ten Charities".

 

BTW, Mike, you are forgiven for your unpleasant personal remark. It's not as though you have any facts to put on the table, so you do what you can.

[MtB]

I think I'll put you on my 'ignore' list. That waym CWF will be a nicer place to visit!.

 

Bye!

 

MtB

 

 

 

(Edit to clarify, it's George94 on my ignore list of one, not Boathunter or anyone else!)

Edited April 23, 2014 by Mike the Boilerman

[Paul G2]

A while back there were some questions raised here about the status of residential moorers at PLM. Dangerous Dave sent me a document regarding this issue and asked me to post it. I don't belong to any social groups (like FB) or photo sharing services and this document is a pdf file, so I just copied and pasted it below. The document is on PLM Letterhead.

Pilling`s Lock Marina Berth Holders Meeting & BBQ

Monday 9thJuly 2012

HOSTED BY:

Roy Rollings & Paul Lillie

Why are we here?

•To discuss the ‘Official’ status of Pilling`s Lock as a “Residential Marina”.

•Confirmed all year round status

•Use of local services (Schools/Doctors/Dentists)

•Benefits Payments

•Pilling`s Lock willbe allowing a number of Residential Berths for Customers.

Payment of Council Tax…

•Pilling`s Lock has received a Council Tax bill for the “Residential” users at the Marina.

•Pilling’s Lock is required to “Collect Council Tax” on behalf of the Local Authority (via Mooring Fees)

•Residential Berths will enable Voters Role

•Charges consist of Local Authority Charge (Decided Nationally) plus a small admin fee.

•Charge will be collected up-front at the start of a Mooring Contract.

•No Changes or refunds.

So, what is the cost?

•If 8 boats are deemed to be Residential, the cost per boat would be

£152.00 Per Year.*

*We are not able to confirm the cost if there are any more than 8 boats at this time.

Payment of your Council Tax

•One off annual payment added to your account & paid at the start of your contract.

•Council Tax can increase.

•If you leave the Marina for any reason,it will not be refunded.

•You will still be subject to our terms, conditions and contract.

•If you go cruising for a few months, you will not be eligible for any discount on the bill.

•Once you “opt in” the only way to “opt out” will be to move off the boat. Opted In Boats & Clients may be traced around the waterways system.

Who needs a Residential Berth?

•If you claim benefits, you mustpay council tax.

•If you use the local services, such as the schools etc, you shouldpay Council Tax.

•If you would like “residential” status, meaning it is easier to get things such as your driving license sent here, a bus pass etc, opt in!

•If you stay on your boat for a number of nights each week, you should pay Council Tax.

Where do we go from here?

•This is optional for many people here at present BUT compulsory for some.

•We need to identify how many berths will be subject to Council Tax.

•Clients wishing to register need to come into the marina office in the next few weeks.

•We will then declare the residential berth numbers to the Local Council.

Where do we go from here?...

•This is coming to all Inland Marinas.

•Marina Operators are aiming to simplify it for berth holders.

•The Valuations Office are issuing Council Tax bills to almost all Marinas.

•Forewarning was given BMF but exact pricing details still unclear for larger sites.

What do we do next?

•Residential Contracts being written & will need to be signed in the Marina Office.

•Annual Billing for Residential berths will be from 01 April to 31stMarch each year.

•2012/2013 –pro rata

•Marina Office can find out exact charge once all ResidentialsDeclared.

•Any further contact with Local Authorities for “non-Res” clients could result in them automatically be identified as Residential.

Don`t think it is just us…

•This is coming to all Inland Marinas. We are doing our best to work with it, and make it as easy as possible for you, as berth holders.

•The Valuations Office are issuing Council Tax bills to lots of Marinas.

 

[Alan de Enfield]

That Paul Lillie is a 'naughty' man and again is economical with the truth.

 

Yet again PLM moorers are being given a load of Bull, lies and ........and ...... again words fail me.

 

I'd suggest that any PLM moorers subjected to this charge read up on the VOA website - here is a couple of brief paragraphs contradicting some of the PLM 'rubbish'

 

3.2 The Rating (Caravan and Boats) Act 1996 amends Section 66(3) & (4) with effect from 1 April 1990 so as to clarify when a caravan pitch or a boat mooring comprises domestic property. A copy of the relevant sections of the Act is attached to this Practice Note as Appendix A.

Broadly, a caravan pitch or boat mooring is domestic property when either:

• is occupied by a caravan or boat that is a sole or main residence of an individual, and therefore treated as a dwelling; or
• is an appurtenance enjoyed with other living accommodation (which is itself a dwelling) and is not a separate hereditament.
• a constructed or established pitch or mooring becomes occupied by a boat or caravan used as a sole or main residence, then the pitch or mooring will constitute domestic property ie a dwelling from that date.

Not quite sure how the above sits with :

* If you stay on your boat for a number of nights each week, you should pay Council Tax.

* If you claim benefits, you must pay council tax.

* If you use the local services, such as the schools etc, you should pay Council Tax.

 

Maybe the VOA just forgot to mention those requirements

 

 

 

Example 3

A man lives on a motor cruiser with living accommodation on board. He rents a berth in a marina comprising a finger pontoon at right angles to the bank with water supply and sewage pump-out. The marina operator controls access to the site and reserves a continual right to move the boat from its mooring. When the boat is absent, as it frequently is for weekends and holidays, and even though the boat owner pays rent continuously in order to reserve a berth at the site, the marina operator allows other boats to use the mooring.

Although the mooring is virtually in permanent use and affords self-containment to any boat with living accommodation, the cruiser owner's occupation of the mooring is non-exclusive and insufficiently permanent for him to be liable for Council Tax. The marina operator is in paramount occupation of the mooring for the purposes of his business of running a marina.

 

Full Info on the website

 

http://www.voa.gov.uk/corporate/Publications/Manuals/CouncilTaxManual/council_tax_man_pn/p-ct-man-pn7.html#TopOfPage

[adam1uk]

And Kevin, here's the link:

 

http://www.charitycommission.gov.uk/find-charities/

Go to "Top Ten Charities".

 

And the top ten charities also includes the Arts Council (a government quango), the British Council (a cultural organisation established by Royal charter), the National Trust, and Cardiff University. If you click on the CRT link, it describes it as "the charitable operator" of canal and rivers. It also gives its income as £680,500,000 and its spending as £126,200,000 -- both of which have three zeros too many.

[Tam & Di]

That Paul Lillie is a 'naughty' man and again is economical with the truth.

 

Yet again PLM moorers are being given a load of Bull, lies and ........and ...... again words fail me.

 

I'd suggest that any PLM moorers subjected to this charge read up on the VOA website - here is a couple of brief paragraphs contradicting some of the PLM 'rubbish'

 

post withdrawn as apparently based on outdated information

Edited April 23, 2014 by Tam & Di

[FidoDido]

Bollards at the ready about a mile down the cut from PL...

 

[mayalld]

Alan is absolutely correct. Even if Council Tax were to be charged it would NOT be the marina operator who collected it on behalf of the Council - they would collect it themselves. Is is possible that a marina owner might pay business rates calculated on the basis of them having residential moorings. He might even decide his mooring charge on the basis of his rates overheads, but it would have nothing whatsoever to do with the moorer's entitlement to Council services or unemploymeny benefit, voting rights or anything else at all. The bare-faced cheek to add an "admin fee" to this and say there would be no pro-rata refund should a boater leave the site is out and out confidence trickery and thievery to my mind.

 

That isn't quite true.

 

Where a Marina has residential moorings, but the number and location of those moorings is indeterminate, then (remembering that the CT is on the mooring, not the boat), it is often treated as a single entity, and billed to the marina.

 

I know that New Mills Marina, with around 20 residential boats and 10 non-residential was treated as a single entity for CT purposes. the marina received a single bill for a band B property, and the moorers paid a share.

 

It is an arrangement that works very well for residential boats in marinas, who pay a very modest amount of CT (even taking into account an admin fee)

[Boat&Bikes]

 

And the top ten charities also includes the Arts Council (a government quango), the British Council (a cultural organisation established by Royal charter), the National Trust, and Cardiff University. If you click on the CRT link, it describes it as "the charitable operator" of canal and rivers. It also gives its income as £680,500,000 and its spending as £126,200,000 -- both of which have three zeros too many.

Are you sure there are three zeros too many?

 

Ian.

[mayalld]

 

And the top ten charities also includes the Arts Council (a government quango), the British Council (a cultural organisation established by Royal charter), the National Trust, and Cardiff University. If you click on the CRT link, it describes it as "the charitable operator" of canal and rivers. It also gives its income as £680,500,000 and its spending as £126,200,000 -- both of which have three zeros too many.

 

I suspect that in its first year, its income includes the value of the property vested in it.