Dispute at Pillings

[johnlillie]

You obviously have not met my"son"! It is a good marina, one of the best around, or could be with the right management.

 

Just removed the strikethrough (It's the 4th icon on the lower row above the editing window. Nick aka Theo)

Edited January 23, 2014 by Theo
Strikethrough,

[steven wilkinson]

in the grey bit of the 'reply box', there is an S with a line through it. click on it and your words wont be crossed out.

[Southern Star]

You obviously have not met my"son"! It is a good marina, one of the best around, or could be with the right management

Well no, I haven't met your son. I suppose there might be circumstances under which I would disown one of my sons but that their being poor at financial management would not be sufficient cause. I hope you come to an equitable solution for all concerned, CaRT, the boaters and most importantly your family.

[Hey Ho]

Ragarding the leasehold moorings, this is part of the wording from an advert for one of them:

 

 

"you cannot register a piece of water with the Land Registery, you actually lease a carpark space, in this case slot LH24, which has guaranteed Mooring Rights for one narrowbeam vessel up to 60 foot in length for the period of the Lease."

 

 

Presumably your car parking space would still be available to you, as would your mooring, all be it in 'reduced circumstances'.

 

 

(From: http://www.abnb.co.uk/boat_pages/2336web/2336abnb.php?BoatID=2336 - ABNB who I'd have expected to know better)

 

 

 

 

- edited for spelling

Edited January 18, 2014 by Hey Ho

[matty40s]

No problem for cars to leave their leased spaces if the canal is closed off, the road is still open.

[andy the hammer]

Firstly I will say sorry for posting in the wrong area, it was done on my Ipad and I have big fingers.

 

Has anybody seen the communication from C.A.R.T., as I have seen the one from Pillings.

 

After reading it is my take on the subject is that there is two companies one owns the property and the other runs the mooring business and the problem lays with the company that owns the property.

 

Despite the two companies being owned by the same owners they are different companies, so people who have paid for moorings have a contract with the mooring company so basically not involved in the dispute.

 

So it could be argued that until the entrance is blockaded they have no place to complain.

 

Under Trust Law C.A.R.T are by law forced to inform any members of the trust of their actions that may effect specific members, so all licence holders within Pillings have to be told of the forth coming action.

 

Now that C.A.R.T. are a trust they have to abide by trust law, which is totally different to B.W. which was effectively a government department.

 

So everybody involved in the waterways and that means all of us will have to think different ways to when the waterways were under the control of B.W.

[Alan de Enfield]

 

 

Under Trust Law C.A.R.T are by law forced to inform any members of the trust of their actions that may effect specific members, so all licence holders within Pillings have to be told of the forth coming action.

 

As far as I am aware C&RT do not have any 'members'. I believe that the subject of membership was discussed before / during the foundation of C&RT but it never progressed.

 

The nearest thing to a'member' is the 'Friends of C&RT'.

 

We pay a licence to use C&RT's facilities but we do not pay a 'membership fee' so as licence holders I do not believe that they have to inform us, or the moorers at Pillings about their proposed actions

[Southern Star]

As somebody planning to buy a narrowboat in 2016 and mostly on Canalworld to research much more basic questions, such as about engines, layouts, stern types etc I don't normally have time to follow a thread like this, but this time I have, and I will post as an outsider looking in. Maybe a more detached view will help, and if it doesn't then at least I tried.

 

My enforcement agency is VOSA, and compared to them, CaRT seem to be a bit like a puppy rolling over and begging to have its tummy tickled. I read on CaRT's website that non-compliance will "lead to us sending you a series of increasingly strident letters".

 

If your enforcement authority is CaRT, then you have to pay them the fees, same as I have to pay for my Operator's Licence, the diesel, the yard rental, the road tax etc etc etc. It seems as if you haven't, and you just cannot carry on doing that and not expect CaRT to take action against you. That's your behaviour and you have to own it.

 

 

Reading between the lines, my guess is that you feel your son has taken more money out of the business than is justified in the early days, when it should have been put back into the business. Although that's just a purely random guess.

 

Anyway, I hope you sort it out, I looked at your website and your Facebook page and as I said before, your marina seems a very pleasant place.

[stickleback]

As a former director of Pillings lock marina who was involved from the outset, I feel I can shed light on this topic. We (myself and my former "son"among others) entered into an agreement with the then British waterways for a network access agreement, whereby we would pay 9% of all projected mooring fees, including unoccupied berths. The marina was filled in March 2007 (I personally removed the stop planks) and the fees commenced from March 2008. At the time there were 347 moorings of varying lengths. As far as I am aware, these fees have never been paid, that is why the C&RT took Pillings to court(actually, it was Quorn marina properties, who own the site), and won.

cant understand why previous post has lines through it, but I am sure the gist is there

 

• the leases will still be valid, even with a new owner/operator of the site, but whilst it is/when it is blocked off, I am not sure.

I am SO sorry to read these threads and find how Pillings is going, and your problems with Paul. I and my partner came to see Pillings when it was still a project and Paul drove us up to show us where everything would be. We were looking to buy a long lease mooring (I think I remember 12 years?) but really I didn't like the guy. Really really didn't. Didn't trust a word he said. We ended up buying an lease at another marina nearby for 30 years for no more money (he had assured us he was the only projected marina offering such a scheme!) and are very happy there

 

John, so sorry to hear that my first opinion if your "ex son" coincides with your last one. The marina and initial plans were great. I just wasn't prepared to sign ANY paper that I guy who I couldn't trust at all put In front of me.

 

Edited to say my partner did trust him. I'm glad I won!

 

Andrrw

Edited January 18, 2014 by stickleback

[Smelly]

Now then, is Johnlillie the person who has previously threatened to sue this forum now using it for his own ends?

Edited January 18, 2014 by Smelly

[stickleback]

Now then, is Johnlillie the person who has previously threatened to sue this forum now using it for his own ends?

Fascinating! So the sins of the fathers.....!

Edited January 18, 2014 by stickleback

[Grace and Favour]

Fascinating! So the sins of the fathers.....!

But does that work with 'ex-sons'?

[Hey Ho]

We were looking to buy a long lease mooring (I think I remember 12 years?) but really I didn't like the guy. Really really didn't. Didn't trust a word he said.

 

 

Funny you should say that. I've met the guy on an unrelated matter. There wasn't really much at stake financially from my point of view, but I felt exactly the same as you.

 

From what I can see in these early stages of my boating career, things on the canals are much more relaxed than in the land based world. In many ways that's great & it's been good to meet some of the characters. On the other side of the coin, there do seem to be a few sharks who are inclined to turn the good natured & trusting, & largely unregulated, environment to their advantage.

 

You tend to see more horror stories of vulnerable people being ripped off on the canals than you do, for instance, in the housing market. While I'm all for a free market & a reduction in paperwork, the beurocratic inconveniences of house buying - land registry, conveyancers etc - do work effectively to protect joe public. It seems that naturally dodgy business people are drawn to the canal environment, where they can take advantage of easy going, trusting, sometimes elderly & often cash rich punters.

 

Don't mean to be too negative here. It's more good than bad, but the canal environment is one in which the less scrupulous can prosper & it pays to be vigilant & go with your gut feelings, I think.

[Graham Davis]

Strikes me that any marina that builds it's business model on 100% mooring take-up, even with a rosy projection from BWB/CaRT, is either very naive, or very stupid. That is not the way to make a profit. Even 75% is probably being "hopeful".

[Ally]

As a business, expecting to launch a new build in spring at pillings, I'd like some assurance {or otherwise}that we will be able to maiden run outside the marina....I, and I guess, other businesses that are connected....if at a distance....have some concerns currently.

We may need to make alternative arrangements.

[RLWP]

Might be best to plan your alternative now Ally. That way you can make a guarantee to your client

 

Richard

[Ronniesonic]

did Paul Lillie go to the same school as Tony Mcmaster. The school that forgot to teach Maths & Public Relations..........................

[junior]

I'm offering 5/1 on a lock within the next 2 pages and 1/5 on a Narrowboat World article off the back of this thread.

Edited January 19, 2014 by junior

[Ronniesonic]

The current article on NBW is so one sided it fell over.

[mark99]

 

As a slight sidestep of the main debate, this may be of interest to some to see what you may face if you fall out with the management at Pillings Lock Marina.

 

As this was lifted from Paul Lillie's personal Facebook page, where he had thought it perfectly acceptable to publish what he had said to some former tenants, I can see no reasons why it can't be reproduced here, (particularly as it has already available in full elsewhere on the forum for at least 6 months!).

 

If you have not previously seen it, it is well worth a read, if only for the gob-smacked amazement that Mr Lillie thought it was a good idea to make it public!......

 

SNIP

 

 

In any commercial dispute it's always best to deal with professionally and curteously but also to the leave the other party the "bus fare home".

 

Otherwise it's a race to be bottom with only a short gained empty satisfaction that often turns to regret.

 

My old gaffer used to say when composing responses to disputes "don't let them drag you down to that level - rise above it - it's not only effective but you feel better".

Edited January 19, 2014 by mark99

[Ally]

I have contacted them privately, so sure they will keep me in the loop for the launch if anything is to change.

Edited January 19, 2014 by Ally

[johnlillie]

I am most certainly NOT the John Lillie that threatened to sue this or any other forum. I was, until 2009, a director of pillings , along with my wife. We were forced to leave and forfeit our share, if you want the full story, feel free to email me on john-Lillie@sky.com. Paul actually owns 8.66%, the rest of the shares are owned by the Steadman family (information readily available on companies house). There is a holding company-Quorn holdings ltd, a property company-Quorn properties ltd, and the operating company, -Pillings lock marina ltd. If Pillings goes into liquidation, the debtors have little chance, as its assets are very small. The Steadmans hold the mortgage on the property, as well as being directors of all three companies. The leases were for a parking space with mooring attached, as previously stated, but as to what redress the lease holders would have against Quorn properties if access to the network is denied through the incompetence of Pillings, I am not sure. A better legal brain than me would need to read the small print to solve that issue.

sorry, that email address is john-Lillie@sky.com (no capitals)

[pearley]

I made a tentative enquiry about a leasehold mooring, sending this email to ABNB who handle the sales:

 

Its states car park space LH24 but what marina berth does that relate to?
Given the amount of press statements from pllings marina about poor profits, would this mooring be ours if the marina went bust?

Regards
Pete

And received this reply from Pillings:

LH24 is Berth E19 – plan attached. We would be willing to move the berth to any other vacant 60ft Berth – but we cannot change the berth size (i.e. make it shorter, wider or longer) as are we are running short on all other berth sizes. We would not be able to move this lease to a Linear 60ft berth either.

Our Leases are attached to the Freehold of the Site & all 24 Leases form part of the Land Owning Company that is a sister company to “Pilling’s Lock Marina Ltd”.

If anything did happen to our trading company (Pilling’s Lock Marina Ltd, which in reality this isn’t very likely as Pilling’s Lock is Financed, Owned and Operated by very wealthy people – we don’t have any bank mortgages on the site at all) then subsequently the Leases remain protected as they are held on a different company balance sheet. This company is called Quorn Marina Properties Ltd.

If for some unlikely reason the company owning the Leases did ‘go bust’, the liquidators of the property would pass the leases on (with tenants in situ) to the new operating company or land owning company. The Terms of the Lease cannot be varied unless both parties are in agreement to any changes and they take place formally. The new people operating the company would be responsible for servicing the site and therefore they would be the one charging the ground rent etc for the remaining term.

If anyone considering purchasing a lease has any doubts they really should seek legal advice from a Solicitor experienced in assembling & generating limited company paperwork, and experienced in Leasehold Property. Conveyance for these Leases are usually £400 to £500 in total with a decent solicitor.

I do hope this addresses any concerns you may have following the negative publicity that you have seen in the media.

It didn't really allay my concerns and we didn't proceed.

[Henhouse]

In the Bricks & Mortar property world there are always houses for sale with sitting tenants. Some with long term leaseholds, or some with 6 or 12 month agreements.

 

If the legal side of things are in order, then they can be excellent investments for a buyer, and produce much better returns than having the cash sat in a bank at an interest rate of 1.5% or less.

[johnlillie]

Quorn properties most certainly DO have an outstanding mortgage (or at least, did) .With regard to the moorings attached to the lease, you would be at the mercy of the operator, he can stick you wherever he likes, whenever he likes. Ifyou didn't much care for your neighbours-tough!