Moorings closure

[Neil.A]

I have just received a letter from BW telling me that my mooring along with 3 others is to close next year.

Needless to say I am very concerned. The reason given is that they want to reduce the on line moorings. For every 10 new berths created in private marinas 1 will be reduced on line.

The moorings affected (in this letter, I don’t know if its occurring anywhere else) are Thurmaston, Beeston roadside (me) and Sawley cut.

In the letter it states that most BW sites are full. Alternative sites are listed to a 30 mile radius, which is of no use to me as I work 1/4 mile away.

Is there anything I can do to fight this? There are 8 licensed boats on these moorings and we are all facing the same dilemma.

Any help would be appreciated.

 

Neil

[Carrie]

That's awful Neil. Contact the Hebdon Bridge boating community (perhaps via the site:

http://www.liloontheweb.org.uk/) who are fighting a similar battle. Also, the Oxford group managed a sort-of compromise in 'agenda 21' moorings. It will come down to cost. The more your resistance costs them, the less likely they are to succeed in ousting you. At least you have time to get organised. Good luck.

[carlt]

I have just received a letter from BW telling me that my mooring along with 3 others is to close next year.

Needless to say I am very concerned. The reason given is that they want to reduce the on line moorings. For every 10 new berths created in private marinas 1 will be reduced on line.

The moorings affected (in this letter, I don’t know if its occurring anywhere else) are Thurmaston, Beeston roadside (me) and Sawley cut.

In the letter it states that most BW sites are full. Alternative sites are listed to a 30 mile radius, which is of no use to me as I work 1/4 mile away.

Is there anything I can do to fight this? There are 8 licensed boats on these moorings and we are all facing the same dilemma.

Any help would be appreciated.

 

Neil

If you have been living there for some time then you can try article 8 of the human rights act.

 

ARTICLE 8

RIGHT TO RESPECT FOR PRIVATE AND FAMILY LIFE

1. Everyone has the right to respect for his private and family life, his home and his correspondence.

 

2. There shall be no interference by a public authority with the exercise of this right except such as is in accordance with the law and is necessary in a democratic society in the interests of national security, public safety or the economic well-being of the country, for the prevention of disorder or crime, for the protection of health or morals, or for the protection of the rights and freedoms of others.

 

This has been used by Gypsies and travellers who have been settled in a site for some time and then, all of a sudden, the authorities have evicted them (usually citing planning irregularities).

 

A BW person told me that the article does not apply to boats as the boat is the home and so they are within their rights to crane out the boat, put it somewhere else and say "here's your home". If this was the case then I am sure the relevant authorities would have used this defence against caravans as well.

 

If BW are insisting you move an unreasonable distance from your work then this is 'interference by a public authority' in your 'private and family life'.

[NB Alnwick]

This does appear to happening elswhere and it is rather sad because I always feel that the colourful line up of residential on-line moorings adds a great deal to the atmosphere of the canals. It would be nice to think that BW give special consideration to the needs of established residential moorers . . .

[carlt]

This website may be of use:

 

Gipsy/Traveller clicky

[Paul H]

This is part of a national policy and makes some sense. The hundreds of boats in marinas need somewhere to park when they go out for little day jaunts and with the explosion in online moorings in recent years there are less and less places to go.

 

However I had assumed that this would only happen when a mooring fell vacant and it was not relet.

 

Also a bit suspicious that the first heard of instance of this policy will benefit the moorers in a marina owned by - you've guessed it - British Waterways! Yes I know its their subsidiary BWML but that's splitting hairs. I expepct their 600+ moorers were giving them grief about all the nasty online moorers getting in their way.

 

I should fight it. They'll back down, they usually do.

 

Paul H

[Neil.A]

Thanks for all the help and support, I feel a bit guilty as Ive only been here a short while and the first few posts are for help!!!

 

Seems odd they want rid of us, including insurance , which is a reqiurement of BW, it costs me almost £2000 a year just to stay afloat!

Maybe BW shoukd concentrate their efforts on removing the non licenced boats, thus getting them out of the way of the marina bods.

Edited April 25, 2007 by Neil.A

[Bones]

That's awful Neil. Contact the Hebdon Bridge boating community (perhaps via the site:

http://www.liloontheweb.org.uk/) who are fighting a similar battle. Also, the Oxford group managed a sort-of compromise in 'agenda 21' moorings. It will come down to cost. The more your resistance costs them, the less likely they are to succeed in ousting you. At least you have time to get organised. Good luck.

 

how does one get an agenda21 mooring or are they like hensteeth too?

[NB Alnwick]

Maybe BW shoukd concentrate their efforts on removing the non licenced boats, thus getting them out of the way of the marina bods.

 

The trouble is that a lot of people seeking an inexpensive lifestyle have been encouraged onto the waterways by TV programs like Waterways World and various magazine articles. They then find that living on a boat is not really any cheaper than living anywhere else and they quickly run out of money.

 

If the boat is all that they own they soon realise that maintenance costs, licencing and mooring fees go up every year while the value of their boat depreciates fast in relative terms. Many of the people living on unlicensed boats simply do not have the ability to pay . . .

[carlt]

Maybe BW shoukd concentrate their efforts on removing the non licenced boats, thus getting them out of the way of the marina bods.

Article 8 protects the rights of unlicensed boaters also.

 

The heavy handed approach of some local authorities towards Gypsies and travellers on unlawful encampments has prompted lawyers to investigate and use areas of law which could benefit all of us if it all goes tits up and the powers that be decide they want rid of the lot of us from the waterways.

 

A linear theme park consisting purely of hire fleets and token workboats with bonneted crews would be far easier to run than the mish mash of hirers, liveabords, ccers, shareboaters and bridge hoppers that confuse the issue and cost money.

[NB Alnwick]

A linear theme park consisting purely of hire fleets and token workboats with bonneted crews would be far easier to run than the mish mash of hirers, liveabords, ccers, shareboaters and bridge hoppers that confuse the issue and cost money.

 

Alternatively, if they just want to make lots of money, they could fill the canals with concrete and turn them into car, lorry and caravan parks . . .

[magnetman]

Ability to pay. Interesting point. Do we need DSS moorings?

 

Funny how this subject always comes up when the holidays start. Maybe people need to realise that the cut is not going to be a holiday park for much longer but a linear housing estate. Maybe go on holiday somewhere else. OK it's a problem but it's all related to BOE self government at the end of the day as steel canal boats do make comfortable alternative dwellings.

[Keeping Up]

how does one get an agenda21 mooring or are they like hensteeth too?

At least one-third of them appeared to be empty when we went past them last year. Of course people may have been out cruising ...

[NB Alnwick]

Ability to pay. Interesting point. Do we need DSS moorings?

 

Funny how this subject always comes up when the holidays start. Maybe people need to realise that the cut is not going to be a holiday park for much longer but a linear housing estate. Maybe go on holiday somewhere else. OK it's a problem but it's all related to BOE self government at the end of the day as steel canal boats do make comfortable alternative dwellings.

 

Please explain for those of us who are unenlightened . . .

[magnetman]

Please explain for those of us who are unenlightened . . .

Bank of England isn't interested in trying to prevent house prices going up and up and up whereas governments are, well thats how I see it anyway.

The mooring problem is not a traveller problem it is a housing problem. £100k average house price in every major town in the uk no wonder people are turning to canal boats.

 

that's what I think anyway.

[NB Alnwick]

Bank of England isn't interested in trying to prevent house prices going up and up and up whereas governments are, well thats how I see it anyway.

The mooring problem is not a traveller problem it is a housing problem. £100k average house price in every major town in the uk no wonder people are turning to canal boats.

 

that's what I think anyway.

 

You are quite right there - and although wages are generally increasing at a similar rate, pensions and benefits are not - so it is the non-earners and OAPs that are being forced out of the property market.

[RichardH]

I am perhaps being a bit thick but why does BW want to reduce on-line moorings. I would have thought they would have wanted all the extra dosh they could lay their hands on.

[Pie Eater]

Neil,

 

Are you a member of the AWCC, IWA, NABO etc, if you are they should be able to give you advice and perhaps fight your case for you.

 

Steve

[Big John]

This does appear to happening elswhere and it is rather sad because I always feel that the colourful line up of residential on-line moorings adds a great deal to the atmosphere of the canals.

I am afraid your view is not held universally. The growth of on-line moorings particularly on canals like the South Oxford and K&A has made cruising progress very slow for many lengths.

 

However, it would seem reasonable, if BW wish to cut a percentage of on-line moorings as marina moorings are provided, that they do so on a sort of wastage way. i.e. when moorings become vacant on heavily populated area, they could be withdrawn as part of the cuts.

 

Neil's situation is just not right. Whatever we can do to help we should.

[Neil.A]

Here is a copy of the letter

Excuse any typo's I had to do it manually, but its still better english than the original......

 

For some time we have recognised that long term, online moorings can have a negative effect on the people’s enjoyment of cruising along a waterway. Feedback from boaters has included frustrations associated with crusing past long lines of moored boats, and the view that linear moorings have increased unacceptably in recent years

 

BW has for some time expressed a desire to reduce online moorings in order to encourage private provision of new offline moorings, and our new Inland Marina Investment Guide published in 2006 made specific reference to this. New investment is essential to improve choice and competitiveness in the moorings market if we are to satisfy demand in the future. As a means of encouraging this we have decided that we will reduce one online mooring berth for every ten new berths being created in the new offline developments. These reductions will take place within the same geographical area as the new marina. The enclosed policy briefing not explains our thinking in more detail.

 

As you may already know a new 280 berth marina is due to open at Pillings on the river soar this month, and this means that we have assess which 28 berths we should cut from our own directly managed moorings in the vicinity. This assessment to account of local densities of online moorings, operational factors, demand patterns and the profitability of those of our sites serving the same market area. As a result we have decided that we should close the moorings at Thurmaston, Beeston (roadside only) and Sawley cut (does not affect 12 month permit holders).

Mooring permits for this site will all expire on 30th April 2008 and will no longer be renewable beyond this date. Our moorings officer (name withheld) is on hand to give you advice about locating to an alternative mooring for your boat We would encourage you in the first instance to use the moorings search facility at www.waterscape.com/boating/moorings which includes details of both BW and privately operated mooring sites throughout our network in case you do not have access to the internet, I am enclosing a printed list of contact details for all mooring operators within about 30 miles of your current site.

Most BW sites are currently full, but we will aim to give you and other boaters in the same position priority if any vacancies arise on any of our other sites in the vicinity, providing that your boat fits any local site rules. Please let (name withheld) know if you would like us to try and allocate you to one of our other sites in this way. If we are able to offer you an alternative mooring you would be required to move onto it as soon as it is available and not wait until your present site closes

 

I realise that this may not be welcome news and apologise in advance for the inconvenience. I hope you can understand our reasons, and we will do all that we reasonably can to help you find an alternative mooring

 

Yours sincerely

 

Kim Dale

 

 

 

If I wasn't so cynical I'd say its on its way nationwide, trying to pick off pockets of 30 at a time so as not to cause a stink.

What do you think?.....

[Paul H]

I am perhaps being a bit thick but why does BW want to reduce on-line moorings. I would have thought they would have wanted all the extra dosh they could lay their hands on.

It's a sop to the trade who BW want to encourage to invest millions in new marinas. Don't forget BW get 9% of all marina revenue (thats revenue not profit) so will not be worse off given that marina rates are generally rather higher. Also apparantly BW get more complaints about excessive online moorings than anything else. I would be surprised however if they ever get round to removing many moorings elsewhere in the country. Their stated policy for years has been to reduce online moorings but finacial pressures have meant otherwise. I think it is your bad luck for being so close to BW's honeypot

 

Paul H

[David Schweizer]

BW have recently anounced it's intention to reduce on line permitted moorings by one for every ten new off line moorings provided within the same area, however I had not realised that they are already doing it. Part of the stated criteria for reducing on line permitted moorings is also suppopsed to be that there has been an increased demand for visitor moorings in the same location, so the effect on travelling boaters will be that same, except that the line of boats will change every few days (or weeks) rather than be the same boats all years. Personally I can't see the difference as far as slowing down passing craft is concerned.

 

I am getting a bit worried about my mooring, as a new marina was opened about a year ago and another two have just got approval to double in size. However I could do what most of the other boats do where I pay for a mooring, and just moor all year without paying and tear up the enforcement notices when they stick them on the boat.

Edited April 25, 2007 by David Schweizer

[fuzzyduck]

So they seem to have a bit of a deal going on with the new marina bods.

 

"open a marina, and we'll deliver 10% of your berths as captive customers"

 

in this neck of the woods, certainly residential moorings are few and far between, so getting kicked off the in lines will be tantamount to forcing people into Pillings. and presumably representing a large hike in annual mooring costs for those concerned.

 

price list for Pillings is here http://www.pillingslock.com/Marinafees.pdf how does that compare with your inlines? I have to say they're a fair bit more than Raynesway (nearly double) , and Junction Marinas (must be nearly triple). for a boat the same length as ours.

 

that should get rid of a few more less affluent boaters.

 

I also note that they don't discriminate between residential, and non residential moorings.

Edited April 25, 2007 by fuzzyduck

[Guest]

Alternatively, if they just want to make lots of money, they could fill the canals with concrete and turn them into car, lorry and caravan parks . . .

Or make them into linear landfills, thereby getting paid to fill them.

[magnetman]

However I could do what most of the other boats do where I pay for a mooring, and just moor all year without paying and tear up the enforcement notices when they stick them on the boat.

 

This is beginning to look like a sensible way to play the game because it has become blatantly clear that it is not necessary to pay for a mooring and that 'continuous cruising', 'bridge hopping', 'amibovvereding' and other money saving techniques work quite well. I'm just wondering if I can claim a refund on my mooring costs on account of BW allowing free long term moorings in the area.