Another eviction

[Ssscrudddy]

I'm a neighbour of the couple in question.

I've read the comments above - some are misinformed, some ill-informed, some potentially libellous.

<snip>

Just to point out, the discussions up to that point where based on what we knew so far before you decide to sue us. Thanks for giving us more info, & welcome to the forum, also welcome to The Director

[nicknorman]

Many of the smaller boats WILL move out if BWML/C&RT won't see sense. But does anyone seriously think there's a big queue of people willing to pay nearly £13,000 to berth my example above of a 12m x 3.05m boat? Even London prices do not support this - as shown objectively by the PLA Consultation I quoted above. So the marina ends up 70% occupied, which is roughly BWML's average across their marinas - is it good business to alienate all your customers, destroy a functioning and supportive community with strong local links and jobs/businesses, only to realise in a couple of years that you're making less money than previously, and destroyed the 'National Trust of the Waterways' brand in the process ?

 

What is the occupancy level at this marina currently? As far as I can tell it is 100% so commercially, BWML should be charging more since the market can obviously stand it.

[magnetman]

I didn't realise it was £13k published figures are 9.5k

 

13 is a bit high for Poplar for a very small Barge 12x3

[Pen n Ink]

Interestingly some moorings are sold with 25year terms these usually do have security of tenure.

 

True. There are some for sale currently at a certain marina… Oh no! sorry - I'm thinking of parking spaces!

[RLWP]

BWML's T&C's and Berth Conditions - all available at www.bwml.co.uk/customer-info classify certain marinas as inland, others as coastal. The classifications seem arbitrary. They allow themselves to charge an extra 30% widebeam charge _for boats taking up more than one mooring_. In Coastal marinas, the threshold is 4.5m (eg. Limehouse - connected to 2 canals and the Thames). In Inland Marinas, the threshold is 3m (eg. Poplar - 2m downriver from Limehouse, 1m on land, connected to the Thames and totally disconnected from the inland network by 2miles of fast-flowing tidal river...). Also, the Waterways Ombudsman stated that it was clear that not a single boat in Poplar was taking up more than one mooring.

 

3m is not a wide beam for a sea-going or estuary boat. A lot of boats in Poplar are not capable of accessing the inland network - due to draft, air draft, length etc. - but by no means are the majority large boats. The maximum length in Poplar is around 22m, whereas the neighbouring Blackwall Basin (C&RT-managed) has 38m x 6m Dutch barges paying, in some cases, less than a 12m x 3.05m cruiser in Poplar.

 

If £12,000 to £15,000 per annum is a fair market rate, why is it that nobody can sell their boat in Poplar?

 

The issue comes down to BWML having the right to dictate whatever T&C's they choose, but to ignore them when they see fit.

Thank you. So, it is something that BWML use to describe their own marinas

 

Richard

[magnetman]

Limehouse is 9.5k for up to 18x4 I think they seem to have space but told me its full (it isn't physically full and has never been since they opened the new moorings)

[Naughty Cal]

I didn't realise it was £13k published figures are 9.5k

 

13 is a bit high for Poplar for a very small Barge 12x3

 

If it were too high would it be occupied?

[magnetman]

Poplar isn't central London but its a stones throw from the wharf and that place has a huge effect on property price. even rubbish ex local 2 bed flats are over £250k now with 90 year lease and pitbull neighbours

[raymondh]

Poplar Dock Marina : Available Berths

We do not have any permanent berths available on site. However, if you are looking to buy a boat, it is worth checking out our brokerage section as sometimes boats are available with a mooring on site.

[sueb]

Director please make another post as I would like to message you and you need 5 posts for that to work.

 

I'm glad that some posters are happy for cart to increase any fees to whatever they wish and that they will willingly pay without protest. Bwml & cart must be overjoyed to read that.

[Naughty Cal]

Director please make another post as I would like to message you and you need 5 posts for that to work.

 

I'm glad that some posters are happy for cart to increase any fees to whatever they wish and that they will willingly pay without protest. Bwml & cart must be overjoyed to read that.

 

It is no different to what any other marina operator can do.

 

Why single out BWML?

[PaulG]

Thank you. So, it is something that BWML use to describe their own marinas

 

Richard

I'm not familiar with these marinas, but possibly the classification has something to do with the layout of the pontoons.

Coastal - the ponoons are spaced out for widebeam boats, so no surcharge for widebeams.

Inland - pontoons spaced for narrowoats. A widebeam takes more than one berth, so 30% surcharge.

 

Second alternative is, of course, that I've misunderstood the situation.

[Albion]

Many of the smaller boats WILL move out if BWML/C&RT won't see sense. But does anyone seriously think there's a big queue of people willing to pay nearly £13,000 to berth my example above of a 12m x 3.05m boat? Even London prices do not support this - as shown objectively by the PLA Consultation I quoted above. So the marina ends up 70% occupied, which is roughly BWML's average across their marinas - is it good business to alienate all your customers, destroy a functioning and supportive community with strong local links and jobs/businesses, only to realise in a couple of years that you're making less money than previously, and destroyed the 'National Trust of the Waterways' brand in the process ?

 

BWML IS different to other marinas - it was handed a nationally-owned asset to play with, but still can't make a decent profit because it is badly managed, wasteful and inefficient, and is supposedly bound by a complaints procedure. It's different because it's a wholly-owned subsidiary of C&RT - even if it's a commercial arm of the charity, it has to conform to the charitable aims and uphold the brand's good name.

The marina business is just that, a business. As such it is up to the people running the business to make whatever commercial decisions that they feel best for the business. If they end up making the wrong decision and the marina becomes empty then they have made the wrong decision and must live with that decision or change it.....but it is their choice, their responsibility.

As for the stuff in red whatever makes you think that a business is obliged to function in a manner that is purely to support your local 'community'?

Roger

[The Director]

Firstly, thanks for putting your perspective and you and your fellow boaters at Poplar obviously are finding yourselves in an unpleasant situation, HOWEVER:

 

Regarding the two point above, the marina is a commercial enterprise and they have all the excuse they need to evict someone. They can do it just because they don't like his face. So please don't pollute your point with such inaccuracies. If you mean that it shouldn't be an excuse, well that is your opinion, but don't present your opinion as if it were fact when it isn't.

 

Secondly, I have no idea what Rod is like but the letter makes reference to aggressive behaviour towards the staff. Who knows wether this is true or not and to what degree, but if it is true then that in itself is sufficient grounds for eviction.

 

Finally, taking your point about no-where else to go, perhaps this is a point you should have considered before putting yourself at the mercy of a commercial enterprise who have no need to be concerned with your welfare. You knew the situation regarding security of tenure when you went there (or should have done).

 

Yes I'm sure you think I am unsympathetic and that is partly true, but I can see both sides of it. If I am honest it is the current fad for trial and government by twitter/Facebook campaigns that irks, since so often these are based in bluster and emotion and conveniently miss out some important facts. A kind of mass bullying which the recipient is not empowered to defend against.

 

Firstly, thanks for putting your perspective and you and your fellow boaters at Poplar obviously are finding yourselves in an unpleasant situation, HOWEVER:

 

Regarding the two point above, the marina is a commercial enterprise and they have all the excuse they need to evict someone. They can do it just because they don't like his face. So please don't pollute your point with such inaccuracies. If you mean that it shouldn't be an excuse, well that is your opinion, but don't present your opinion as if it were fact when it isn't.

 

Secondly, I have no idea what Rod is like but the letter makes reference to aggressive behaviour towards the staff. Who knows wether this is true or not and to what degree, but if it is true then that in itself is sufficient grounds for eviction.

 

Finally, taking your point about no-where else to go, perhaps this is a point you should have considered before putting yourself at the mercy of a commercial enterprise who have no need to be concerned with your welfare. You knew the situation regarding security of tenure when you went there (or should have done).

 

Yes I'm sure you think I am unsympathetic and that is partly true, but I can see both sides of it. If I am honest it is the current fad for trial and government by twitter/Facebook campaigns that irks, since so often these are based in bluster and emotion and conveniently miss out some important facts. A kind of mass bullying which the recipient is not empowered to defend against.

 

 

This was done to death under the last government when harmonisation between RM and Tenancies on land was proposed, however even that would not make it secure.

You just have to accept that moorings have no security of tenure, fight as much as you like it won't change.

Interestingly some moorings are sold with 25year terms these usually do have security of tenure.

 

 

 

Really?

 

Poplar isn't central London but its a stones throw from the wharf and that place has a huge effect on property price. even rubbish ex local 2 bed flats are over £250k now with 90 year lease and pitbull neighbours

 

Do you know - I would love a 90 year lease at Poplar for £250k - I could even cope with pitbull neighbours!

[RLWP]

I'm not familiar with these marinas, but possibly the classification has something to do with the layout of the pontoons.

Coastal - the ponoons are spaced out for widebeam boats, so no surcharge for widebeams.

Inland - pontoons spaced for narrowoats. A widebeam takes more than one berth, so 30% surcharge.

 

Second alternative is, of course, that I've misunderstood the situation.

You can have some fun on Google Maps with that Poplar Dock Marina

London E14

http://goo.gl/maps/y9BWA

 

Richard

[raymondh]

Hi,

Can anyone clarify actual mooring fees ? website states £ 9450 all grades inc residential up to 18m no mention of extra cost for widebeam

Ray

[magnetman]

£250k for 90 years in the marina would be great can I have one as well please

 

I can deal with dogs but not if I am in the lift with them

 

Edit to add k after 250

Edited February 19, 2014 by magnetman

[PoplarBoater]

 

If you read your T&C's when you signed up for the mooring there would no doubt have been a statement somewhere about them being able to change the terms and conditions.

 

You signed up too it, you took that choice. So no it isnt worth fighting for

There is case law relating to this, and you're incorrect. A company can't change contractual terms in mid-contract, as BWML is doing in the way it's applying the widebeam surcharge. It can't offer a contract when it is, a priori, unable or unwilling to uphold its own contractual obligations. But as individuals or as a small community, we cannot afford the legal costs to test this particular issue in court.

[Alan de Enfield]

.

If £12,000 to £15,000 per annum is a fair market rate, why is it that nobody can sell their boat in Poplar?

 

 

This is a strange statement - are you making the assumption that you can only sell your boat in Poplar, if so, why?

 

What has the mooring cost got to do with selling your boat - you are selling a boat, not a mooring.

 

Boats move (they are genrally quite good at it) so you can sell it anywhere.

 

This whole saga is starting to look like another 'i dont want to pay a fair price for what I get, its not fair, someone help me"

[RLWP]

Hi,

Can anyone clarify actual mooring fees ? website states £ 9450 all grades inc residential up to 18m no mention of extra cost for widebeam

Ray

It is in here: http://www.bwml.co.uk/uploads/pdfs/4-mooring-berth-definitions.pdf, page 20

 

Richard

[Naughty Cal]

There is case law relating to this, and you're incorrect. A company can't change contractual terms in mid-contract, as BWML is doing in the way it's applying the widebeam surcharge. It can't offer a contract when it is, a priori, unable or unwilling to uphold its own contractual obligations. But as individuals or as a small community, we cannot afford the legal costs to test this particular issue in court

 

From April 2013

 

http://www.bwml.co.uk/uploads/pdfs/2-Pricing_of_BWML_marina_moorings.pdf

[KevMc]

There is case law relating to this, and you're incorrect. A company can't change contractual terms in mid-contract, as BWML is doing in the way it's applying the widebeam surcharge. It can't offer a contract when it is, a priori, unable or unwilling to uphold its own contractual obligations. But as individuals or as a small community, we cannot afford the legal costs to test this particular issue in court.

 

I understood that BWML contracts run for 12 months unless you pay for a 3/5 year extended contract. I'm invited to re-apply each year to stay for another 12 months at whatever rate they have determined for that period.

[Alan de Enfield]

PoplarBoater, on 19 Feb 2014 - 1:41 PM, said:

There is case law relating to this, and you're incorrect. A company can't change contractual terms in mid-contract, as BWML is doing in the way it's applying the widebeam surcharge. It can't offer a contract when it is, a priori, unable or unwilling to uphold its own contractual obligations. But as individuals or as a small community, we cannot afford the legal costs to test this particular issue in court.

 

Was it impose 'mid-contract' ?

It reads as if the revised payment was expected at the expiry of the first contract, as the resident didnt get the letter they were then given one years 'grace' to either find a new home, or accept the charges.

 

That all reads that it was not changed mid-tem and your facts are therefore suspect.

 

I have a piece of land - I rent it out to someone for £1000 per annum, At the end of the year I decide that due to so many other people wanting to rent it, it must be worth more, I increase the cost to £2000, the original 'renter' has 'first choice' & can either accept the increase or I'll rent it to someone else. Their choice.

[MtB]

 

It isn't right that anyone can change their T&C's to suit their mood - that alone is worth fighting for!

 

Yes it IS right. It's a feature of our society and a founding principle of our free market economy.

 

The freedom to enter into contracts without external interference is a freedom well worth fighting for.

 

 

MtB

[PoplarBoater]

Hi,

Can anyone clarify actual mooring fees ? website states £ 9450 all grades inc residential up to 18m no mention of extra cost for widebeam

Ray

£9450 up to 18m, then per metre rate (9450/18) on extra length - it's at the bottom of the page. The 30% widebeam charge isn't mentioned on the price list - and yet it's already being charged to existing and new customers. Probably hidden in the Berth Definitions/T&C's. Trades Descriptions Act?

Rates will go up in April, but they haven't even informed us what they'll be.