Mooring Auctions, Unsuccessful Bid

[denboy]

so the way i read that is the guy (lawyer dentist vet etc) who earns say for instance 50k a year is allways going to beat the guy (farm worker storeman night watchman etc) earning 20k a year.

ie the farm worker can only afford lets say £1500 a year he has a fixed wage

and lets say the lawyer can pay £3000 a year as he will probably spread the added increase on his invoices to his clients

basicly the more money you got the more clout you got forcing the little guy out of the way ..

[Hairy-Neil]

so the way i read that is .......

 

......... the more money you got the more clout you got forcing the little guy out of the way ..

 

But surely thats been the case since the birth of time.....

 

The caveman with the biggest club got the cave with the panoramic view and the biggest lump of dinosaur on his plate....

[WJM]

"basicly the more money you got the more clout you got"

 

Welcome to The United Kingdom! (and the rest of the developed world)

[SoggyMoggies]

Hang on a minute... isn't one of the criteria of Agenda 21 providing affordable housing?

I think I might have missed something here.

 

I thought BW had always been very clear that their responsibilities don't include providing housing. So how do Agenda 21 moorings fit in with this? (I know that the legal status of residential boaters is unclear to say the least but this seems to imply that they do have a responsibility to house people.)

[denboy]

But surely thats been the case since the birth of time.....

 

The caveman with the biggest club got the cave with the panoramic view and the biggest lump of dinosaur on his plate....

 

 

hahaha but its not the done thing to club someone to death and take thier mooring ,just off to cut down a pine tree and bang a few nails in the end just in case

[anhar]

But surely thats been the case since the birth of time.....

 

The caveman with the biggest club got the cave with the panoramic view and the biggest lump of dinosaur on his plate....

Despite what it shows in the Flintstones, cavemen and dinosaurs did not co-exist Neil. In fact there are many millions of years between the near extinction of the latter and the emergence of the former evolving from some lower form of proto human.

 

Less seriously, why is anyone surprised that people with more money have more clout? As you say it has always been that way, it being found by experience to be the best way to run society. Not perfect of course, merely the least worst.

 

A guy with more money can eat at better restaurants, wear better clothes, go on dearer holidays, live in a better house and so on than someone with less. Why should canals be any different? Especially because canal boating for most is a luxury pursuit, a hobby and therefore there is no moral imperative, let alone an economic one, to make provision for the poorer amongst us.

 

regards

Steve

Edited June 25, 2007 by anhar

[gralyn]

If you were to bid on every auction, and never be lucky enough to be the highest bidder, you would NEVER get a mooring and BW couldn't really tell you off for bridge hopping, could they, escpecially if you proved that you'd bid on every auction via recorded delicery to the 'Auction Department' or something.

 

Hang on a Mo. Although BW may be a mooring provider there is nothing in their licence agreement or any other of their conditions of use for the waterways that they MUST provide a mooring for everyone that decides to plonk their boat in BW managed waterways. If you plant your boat on the canal without a propper mooring it is your problem NOT BWs.

[WJM]

"If someone bids over the odds for a mooring then that mooring is going to be the best maintained on the system, costing more, in the end. Even if BW ignored the requests for this, that and whatever, it would still cost them more in admin, fielding the complaints"

 

 

I'll bet it is the other way around - the low yield customer generates the most 'noise'

[CanalWalker]

elderly being priced off the system by the highest bidder

 

do old people have to pay extra or something?

[roger]

do old people have to pay extra or something?

 

Would disabled people have to pay extra too? I mean would they have to pay over the odds to secure a particular mooring especially if it met their needs?

 

Is this scheme by BW in contravention of the DDA?

 

If a disabled boater needed an accessible mooring and was outbidded by others, this could be a severe breach of legislation.

[ChrisPy]

Hang on a Mo. Although BW may be a mooring provider there is nothing in their licence agreement or any other of their conditions of use for the waterways that they MUST provide a mooring for everyone that decides to plonk their boat in BW managed waterways. If you plant your boat on the canal without a propper mooring it is your problem NOT BWs.

 

I wish the same logic could be applied to motorists who think they have a god-given right to park in the street, partly blocking the traffic and occupying some expensive tarmac that is provided and maintained to a greater extent by the guy with a driveway who usually pays far more council tax because his house is considered to be more valuable.

 

Why does the government issue tax discs to vehicles that have no permanent parking space? They are not generally continuous cruisers, that's for sure.

 

 

rant over.

 

................. all right, I'll get my coat.

[magnetman]

BW did try to address the problem of too many boats in 1995 but failed. Making moorings more expensive MAY reduce the influx of new boats. As for fairness I want a nice new range rover (not badly) but they are a luxury not a necessity, in the same way as a boat is a luxury (and if you live on it that is a Choice). If u can't afford it don't have it. ?

[Chris J W]

Would disabled people have to pay extra too? I mean would they have to pay over the odds to secure a particular mooring especially if it met their needs?

 

Is this scheme by BW in contravention of the DDA?

 

If a disabled boater needed an accessible mooring and was outbidded by others, this could be a severe breach of legislation.

 

Ooooo - not thought of that angle! Boy, I bet that could be fun if it went to court ....

[g0n]

BW did try to address the problem of too many boats in 1995 but failed. Making moorings more expensive MAY reduce the influx of new boats. As for fairness I want a nice new range rover (not badly) but they are a luxury not a necessity, in the same way as a boat is a luxury (and if you live on it that is a Choice). If u can't afford it don't have it. ?

 

Can't say I've seen the canals filling up with 'too many boats'. I've spent the last 3 years mooring on the Shropshire Union, a pretty popular canal for holidays, and only once seen a queue of more than 3 or 4 boats at a lock. OK, some canals run a /little/ short of water towards the end of the year, but generally not so drastically that BW have to close them.

 

The Range Rover analogy would only hold up if people were complaining about the price of /boats/. Land Rover is a commercial company with the avowed intention of putting as much of your money into their pockets as possible - you know they're there to make a profit. BW is not a commercial company. The situation is more analogous to the DVLA saying that they would only issue X number of tax discs this year, and they would auction them off to the highest bidder. Or more accurately if you live in a residential permit parking zone as I do, the council limiting the number of available parking spaces and auctioning them off. (Something I suspect it's only a matter of time before York council decides to try).

Edited June 25, 2007 by g0n

[carlt]

 

I wish the same logic could be applied to motorists who think they have a god-given right to park in the street, partly blocking the traffic and occupying some expensive tarmac that is provided and maintained to a greater extent by the guy with a driveway who usually pays far more council tax because his house is considered to be more valuable.

 

Why does the government issue tax discs to vehicles that have no permanent parking space? They are not generally continuous cruisers, that's for sure.

 

 

rant over.

 

................. all right, I'll get my coat.

The difference in contributions to the road maintenence budget of a person in the lowest council tax bracket and the person in the highest is negligible. And the right to park in the street is not 'god given' but it is a right, held by the person who lives in a terraced town house (whatever CT bracket he's in) and the person with a driveway (whatever CT bracket he's in).

 

Also parked cars have long been utilised as a traffic calming measure by councils (by staggering yellow lines) aimed at the people who think they've got a god given right to speed down residential streets.

 

The angry rant is one of selfish greed..Glad it's over

[Freetochat]

As in all competitive pricing system, the less well of will always pay more as a percentagte of income than those on higher income, and eventually will be priced out of the market. That has always been the position, and why many find it impossible to gain any improvement in their lives. Fixed income people (ie pensioners) will also be seriously affected. You only have to look at council tax, road pricing, fuel costs, first time house buyers to see that those at the bottom of the income bracket will always be struggling to climb.

[carlt]

BW did try to address the problem of too many boats in 1995 but failed. Making moorings more expensive MAY reduce the influx of new boats. As for fairness I want a nice new range rover (not badly) but they are a luxury not a necessity, in the same way as a boat is a luxury (and if you live on it that is a Choice). If u can't afford it don't have it. ?

The influx of new boats is reducing. Look at all the boat builders going under, and Gary telling us his order book is chock full.....of wide beams heading for france.

 

What it will mean is an increase in people walking away from their boats because, due to BW's near monopoly of waterways, where do you put them if you keep getting knocked back on the moorings auction?

 

Where do Neil and his fellow moorers go now he's being kicked out of his home?

 

BW don't give a s**t and they are too stupid to see the consequences. As long as there are enough selfish people saying "I'm alright Jack, pull the ladder up" there will be moor bridge hopping, more abandoned boats and less canal maintenence.

[WJM]

"many find it impossible to gain any improvement in their lives"

 

We are all born equal... well in a Republic we are.

[carlt]

As in all competitive pricing system, the less well of will always pay more as a percentagte of income than those on higher income, and eventually will be priced out of the market. That has always been the position, and why many find it impossible to gain any improvement in their lives. Fixed income people (ie pensioners) will also be seriously affected. You only have to look at council tax, road pricing, fuel costs, first time house buyers to see that those at the bottom of the income bracket will always be struggling to climb.

What utter rubbish! The housing market is an anomaly, everything else has become more affordable and more accessible to the less well off.

 

When I was a child in a poor family we couldn't afford a colour tv, a car or a holiday abroad. Where the waterways (our waterways) differ is that it a publically owned body being run as a private monopoly, and the dictator isn't benign. The removal of GRP and on-line moorings will exclude the entry level boater who, in the future will maybe graduate to a steel gin palace.

 

There are entry levels in all markets, including housing with shred ownership schemes. No other market sector excludes the poor, or young, pound like the waterways. And it will be to the waterways' detriment.

Edited June 25, 2007 by carlt

[Freetochat]

What utter rubbish! The housing market is an anomaly, everything else has become more affordable and more accessible to the less well off.

 

Sorry you disagree, but it is logical that where you have a shortage of something, in this case moorings, and a system of highest payer gets the goods, then it will disadvantage those on lower incomes. Shortage of houses are forcing up prices as people clamber to have somewhere to live. If moorings are set at a fixed affordable price and access is open to all, then I fail to see how that is not a level playing field for all income groups.

[carlt]

If moorings are set at a fixed affordable price and access is open to all, then I fail to see how that is not a level playing field for all income groups.

 

That's what we have now, that's what is being taken away.

[denboy]

Despite what it shows in the Flintstones, cavemen and dinosaurs did not co-exist Neil. In fact there are many millions of years between the near extinction of the latter and the emergence of the former evolving from some lower form of proto human.

 

Less seriously, why is anyone surprised that people with more money have more clout? As you say it has always been that way, it being found by experience to be the best way to run society. Not perfect of course, merely the least worst.

 

A guy with more money can eat at better restaurants, wear better clothes, go on dearer holidays, live in a better house and so on than someone with less. Why should canals be any different? Especially because canal boating for most is a luxury pursuit, a hobby and therefore there is no moral imperative, let alone an economic one, to make provision for the poorer amongst us.

 

regards

Steve

think ill get my serfs clothes out of the wardrobe and head off down to watford to my lords palace to see how i can best please him then

[John Orentas]

Despite what it shows in the Flintstones, cavemen and dinosaurs did not co-exist Neil.

 

 

 

So how do you explain the Flintstones then.

[Jason Wilson and Family]

So how do you explain the Flintstones then.

The flintstones was acually about the future after genetics bring back the dinosaurs and the rich people finally have their way and move us all into stone shanty towns.

Edited June 25, 2007 by Jason Wilson and Family

[Hekaterine]

Would disabled people have to pay extra too? I mean would they have to pay over the odds to secure a particular mooring especially if it met their needs?

 

Is this scheme by BW in contravention of the DDA?

 

The DDA says that disabled people can be charged more for a service, but only if the service costs more to provide to them because they are disabled. For example, if a disabled person needed a computer with speech facility and that cost more to put on, then the cost can be passed on to the person.

 

I think if a disabled person failed to get a mooring because they had not submitted the highest bid, they would be unlikely to have a case. I'm not sure how it would be if suitable moorings were more limited because of the person's disability though.