Jump to content

District enforcement mooring fine Reading


Featured Posts

12 minutes ago, Horace42 said:

There is no need for legitimate mooring to be a criminal offence

I'm assuming you  meant illegitimate in the above? 

 

Just to make clear I am not calling for bad mooring  to be made a criminal in the quote you gave, that was a response to the raising of the idea that it should be made a criminal offence, which I do not agree with. 

 

General thought

Just a thought maybe its time to split this thread into 2 as the whole 

TVM - EA

DE-Reading Council

Confusion is still creeping in. 

Anyone agree? 

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

6 hours ago, Horace42 said:

There is no need for legitimate mooring to be a criminal offence.

 

Assuming here that all boaters think that there is a necessity for moorings to controlled in some simple way, and that a charge is a realistic way to manage it, especially to pay for proper landings and facilities at designated sites, a simple clearly worded sign is all that is required - most boaters will respect the intent and comply.

 

Such as:

 

SHORT TERM MOORING SITE RESERVED for PERMIT HOLDERS ONLY ..... (ID of Registered site)

1      To obtain a permit please contact us in advance or on arrival (by telephone/text/email) at 'Name/address/number'

2      Mooring is charged at £10 per day ..........(or free for first 24/48 hrs or whatever the rate is). 

3      Mooring WITHOUT a PERMIT or in excess of the PERMITTED time incurs a penalty of £100 per day. 

 

Boaters turn up, ring up, (and if not already reserved), moor up, pay up, and at time up - leave

 

Monitoring for non-compliance and later enforcement for a minority of boaters (who know all their rights but none of their obligations) who refuse to comply, is a separate issue for the site managers to obtain evidence to fight it out (in court if necessary), whilst the majority of boaters can be left to moor in peace.

 

No need for vague threatening signs first posted at the outset of this thread, which could be the work of a novice who knows very little of the law but trying to be helpful - or ominously could also be the result of careful legal expert thinking - out to generate a lot of confusion and legal work for their law departments.

 

All well and good except you say "the site managers  to obtain evidence". That is the problem they do not and have not for years. As we are talking about the Thames those sites where the site managers do this regularly and collected mooring fees seem to suffer few overstay problems. I list Leachlade meadow, Wallingford town moorings, Henley, Marlow & Windsor. In those locations there was no need to possess a phone or computer to moor, just pay your money or vacate the moorings by the designated time.

 

All this has come abut by the "site managers" abrogating their responsibilities in order to save money and then finding they got swamped with CMs. As I said at one time the navigation Officers would have been able to do this (and they had a nice smart uniform so looked the part) but they are no more.

 

 

  • Greenie 4
Link to comment
Share on other sites

But there is no need to fear criminalisation for serious breaches of the rules relating to moorings. 

 

Firstly, those rules have to be made absolutely clear, i.e. in proper byelaws, as do the penalties.  Then it will only be for a court to impose any such penalties (not some ex-wheel clamping outfit whose business model is just to screw boaters!)  

 

Bear in mind that there are already 70 offences prescribed within the 1993 Thames Navigation and General Byelaws each carrying the possibility on conviction of fines of Scale 3 (up to £1000) and a criminal record.  Prosecutions for those offences are very, very rare indeed; a warning and the threat of possible action is usually more than enough.  That is certainly the case on some other EA-managed waterways where appropriate byelaws are in place.

 

Probably the only significant (and growing) problem that is not covered by the current byelaws is moorings abuse.  Why not?

 

Edited by erivers
  • Greenie 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

6 minutes ago, erivers said:

Probably the only significant (and growing) problem that is not covered by the current byelaws is moorings abuse.  Why not?

 

I'd say it is because virtually all mooring abuse is by people living aboard and several decades ago when thew laws were drafted, living on a boat was not a mainstream activity (I like to squeeze in the odd pun). Moorings were easier to find anyway, so no problem was perceived at the time by the draftsmen. (Or is it draughtsmen?)

 

Nowadays as the population rises and supply of housing is fiercely capped, demand for accommodation is forcing people to live in things other than houses. Boats, vans, garages, garden outbuildings are all being pressed into use these days. Next I predict, it will be the remote farm industrial units being converted in to accommodation. 

 

Im not intending this to be a political post, just having an initial stab at answering your question 'why not?'. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

6 minutes ago, Mike the Boilerman said:

 

 Moorings were easier to find anyway, so no problem was perceived at the time by the draftsmen. (Or is it draughtsmen?)

 

Nowadays as the population rises and supply of housing is fiercely capped, demand for accommodation is forcing people to live in things other than houses. Boats, vans, garages, garden outbuildings are all being pressed into use these days. Next I predict, it will be the remote farm industrial units being converted in to accommodation. 

 

Same situation as obtained with BW. The British Transport Commission Act of 1954 s.16(2) gave power to “make byelaws . . . for all or any of the following purposes: -“  (c) for regulating the . . . mooring of vessels using the canal.” Only 2 were passed, however, which are of no import as to times of mooring.

 

As explained by BW’s Legal Director [when drafting proposed new byelaws in 2010] : -

 

This is a new byelaw in that a similar provision does not exist in the GCB but it is a familiar provision to other canal and dock byelaws. Indeed section 16 (2)(c) BTC Act 1954 provides that regulation of the mooring of vessels is one of the specified purposes of canal byelaws (as opposed to a generic purpose). Whilst provisions of this nature may not have been considered necessary in the 1960’s (when the GCB were introduced) the very significant growth in use of the network since then and the difficulties with congestion that can now occur at certain locations in busy periods gives rise to the need for such a byelaw.”  [my emphasis]

 

CaRT retain the power to promote such byelaws, so the question must be - as it is with the EA with their similar powers - why they do not. It can only be inferred that they see utilisation of outside contractors to call people's bluff over controlling mooring sites, is a lot less bother, at far less cost.

  • Greenie 2
Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • 2 weeks later...

My opinion is

 

TVM = A very good scheme which gives boaters the option of staying up to three days ( which was never allowed before )

 

DE ( and Reading Borough Council ) = A very ill thought out scheme which is over priced for the locality and, outside Tesco at least, should be free between 9 am and 3 pm. Thameside Promenade should also be available for mooring, I can't see any reason why it shouldn't be.

 

Keith

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 hour ago, Steilsteven said:

My opinion is

 

TVM = A very good scheme which gives boaters the option of staying up to three days ( which was never allowed before )

 

DE ( and Reading Borough Council ) = A very ill thought out scheme which is over priced for the locality and, outside Tesco at least, should be free between 9 am and 3 pm. Thameside Promenade should also be available for mooring, I can't see any reason why it shouldn't be.

 

Keith

 

TVM is limited initially to EA owned moorings and because EA can't get its blurry act together in deciding what to do next after the trial period, he's not able to find other business. He's doing well, the test sites are policed daily and folks do pay up / follow the rules. No threats, just register arrival and pay your £5 if staying for more than one night.

 

DE as well discussed on here have unreasonable terms and more expensive overnight charges (though the rate may well have been dictated by Reading council - who must have had a serious problem to employ DE in the first place...). I wonder who benefits from the 'fines'.....

 

I don't think RBC and Tesco care a jot that boaters want to stop and shop. The former had a problem - whatever it really was and DE provided a solution - completely ignoring the custom and practice of boaters who behave reasonably.
 

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

2 minutes ago, OldGoat said:

I don't think RBC and Tesco care a jot that boaters want to stop and shop.

 

Nor do I.

 

That Tesco superstore has a line of about 26 tills (last time I counted them) each taking I estimate about £2,000 an hour. That's about £0.6 million a day.  I'm sure Tesco's directors lose no sleep about the £500 a day boaters used to spend in there, but no longer do.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

20 minutes ago, OldGoat said:

TVM is limited initially to EA owned moorings and because EA can't get its blurry act together in deciding what to do next after the trial period, he's not able to find other business. He's doing well, the test sites are policed daily and folks do pay up / follow the rules. No threats, just register arrival and pay your £5 if staying for more than one night.

 

DE as well discussed on here have unreasonable terms and more expensive overnight charges (though the rate may well have been dictated by Reading council - who must have had a serious problem to employ DE in the first place...). I wonder who benefits from the 'fines'.....

 

I don't think RBC and Tesco care a jot that boaters want to stop and shop. The former had a problem - whatever it really was and DE provided a solution - completely ignoring the custom and practice of boaters who behave reasonably.
 

 

Which 'Sites' are Test ones? .  3 days has always been allowed at EA Sites ,simply arranged by paying the Lock Keeper for the Extra 2.

Am fairly certain that TVM will wither ,not enough Money in it for them.....Which will create a Vacuum that will probably be filled be Ummm..let me think.... 

Edited by cereal tiller
Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 hour ago, OldGoat said:

 

 

I don't think RBC and Tesco care a jot that boaters want to stop and shop. The former had a problem - whatever it really was and DE provided a solution - completely ignoring the custom and practice of boaters who behave reasonably.
 

 

I dont think Tesco come into it

Link to comment
Share on other sites

TVM has some mooring sites and DE have theirs, but there is also some overlap with both claiming them on their websites - Walton Towpath Moorings just one - so who knows what is going on.

 

I really don't like any of these mooring schemes and just wish the EA could run their own website and do their own enforcement.

 

  • Greenie 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

18 minutes ago, Paringa said:

TVM has some mooring sites and DE have theirs, but there is also some overlap with both claiming them on their websites - Walton Towpath Moorings just one - so who knows what is going on.

 

I really don't like any of these mooring schemes and just wish the EA could run their own website and do their own enforcement.

 

My View exactly.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

22 minutes ago, Paringa said:

TVM has some mooring sites and DE have theirs, but there is also some overlap with both claiming them on their websites - Walton Towpath Moorings just one - so who knows what is going on.

 

I really don't like any of these mooring schemes and just wish the EA could run their own website and do their own enforcement.

 

Aha - DE's site suffers from the age old RTFM syndrome - if you look at Walton it correctly states 'owned by EA' and you can't book it through them. To be fair their site is "where2moor" not "book with us", but then who reads websites in detail...

To repeat - TVM lists and manages EA owned sites and - subject to being corrected - no others.

OTOH, W2M lists what could be copied from TVM and those few that he has managed to arrange to date - "the whole of Reading, Hampton Court Palace, and Kingston"  (correct me if I'm wrong). There are problems with the HCP moorings on their system at the moment, which doesn't bode well. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I was just pointing out that there is overlap on the two sites...or is that three? I have only used TVM and DE.

 

But I say again, if the EA were to offer a credible mooring website with enforcement if needed on their own sites AND could offer other landowners the same service, there would be no need for any outside contractors - you never know they might even make some money.

Edited by Paringa
Link to comment
Share on other sites

25 minutes ago, Paringa said:

I was just pointing out that there is overlap on the two sites...or is that three? I have only used TVM and DE.

 

But I say again, if the EA were to offer a credible mooring website with enforcement if needed on their own sites AND could offer other landowners the same service, there would be no need for any outside contractors - you never know they might even make some money.

Neither TVM or DE offer "Enforcement" ,they simply demand monies from Overstayers or Non -payers ,who....Will not bother to pay them.

So ,once again ,what is the point of this whole Charade? the EA are still trying to get rid of Lock Keepers ,who were best at dealing with Mooring matters.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

21 hours ago, cereal tiller said:

Which 'Sites' are Test ones? .  3 days has always been allowed at EA Sites ,simply arranged by paying the Lock Keeper for the Extra 2.

Am fairly certain that TVM will wither ,not enough Money in it for them.....Which will create a Vacuum that will probably be filled be Ummm..let me think.... 

Well that's news to me and all the old TC signs that are still in existence at many locations which state 24 hours maximum stay.

 

Keith 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Be wary of stopping longer than 24hrs at the District Enforcement moorings at Barge Walk Kingston and probably any other of their moorings. The website they use for payment - Parkonomy - doesn't work to take payments for longer stays and only issues E receipts for the free 24hr period. You won't find this out until too late. It will let you try though.

 

The only way to make contact with DE is email as the phone number mailbox is full and disconnects so no leaving a message - I spent two days doing this, don't waste your time.

 

If you leave contact details in your email they call you back and will take payment over the phone. You will feel like you have complied and relax but it is short lived as the website won't update despite the office saying it does.

 

The website is the point of reference for the wardens and they will ticket you as if you have overstayed and not made payment - £100 reduced to £60 for early payment - thanks very much.

 

If like me you have managed to pay - and that isn't easy - it is a stressful experience to then be penalised.

 

After supplying evidence of payment and full compliance my ticket was annulled and no further action taken. So make sure you photograph, keep any emails and get receipts for transactions.

 

I have had 5 days of this and sleepless nights with stress dealing with the nonsense. I couldn't move elsewhere as I was working and other moorings were full. I even checked in advance but the theory doesn't translate in practice.

 

Be warned. This is a very unpleasant situation to find yourself in.

  • Horror 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

18 hours ago, cereal tiller said:

Neither TVM or DE offer "Enforcement" ,they simply demand monies from Overstayers or Non -payers ,who....Will not bother to pay them.

So ,once again ,what is the point of this whole Charade? the EA are still trying to get rid of Lock Keepers ,who were best at dealing with Mooring matters.

It's all part of David Cameron's ''Big Society where everything is outsourced or done by volunteers.

 

Keith

Link to comment
Share on other sites

9 minutes ago, Paringa said:

Be wary of stopping longer than 24hrs at the District Enforcement moorings at Barge Walk Kingston and probably any other of their moorings. The website they use for payment - Parkonomy - doesn't work to take payments for longer stays and only issues E receipts for the free 24hr period. You won't find this out until too late. It will let you try though.

 

The only way to make contact with DE is email as the phone number mailbox is full and disconnects so no leaving a message - I spent two days doing this, don't waste your time.

 

If you leave contact details in your email they call you back and will take payment over the phone. You will feel like you have complied and relax but it is short lived as the website won't update despite the office saying it does.

 

The website is the point of reference for the wardens and they will ticket you as if you have overstayed and not made payment - £100 reduced to £60 for early payment - thanks very much.

 

If like me you have managed to pay - and that isn't easy - it is a stressful experience to then be penalised.

 

After supplying evidence of payment and full compliance my ticket was annulled and no further action taken. So make sure you photograph, keep any emails and get receipts for transactions.

 

I have had 5 days of this and sleepless nights with stress dealing with the nonsense. I couldn't move elsewhere as I was working and other moorings were full. I even checked in advance but the theory doesn't translate in practice.

 

Be warned. This is a very unpleasant situation to find yourself in.

Do you mean Riverside Walk?

 

Keith

Link to comment
Share on other sites

20 minutes ago, Steilsteven said:

Do you mean Riverside Walk?

 

Keith

No, Barge walk is opposite on the Hampton Wick Side. Where2moor call it Hampton Court Kingston Side moorings but it would be better named Hampton Court Kingston End.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

About this issue - I wrote to Reading Council to complain about DE and their very poor attitude and service. Here is there reply dated 3rd July 2018 -

Thank you for your email regarding the provision of moorings in reading and their management.

 

The Council adopted its current policy position in respect of moorings in 2011. The policy identifies 3 formal sites for leisure mooring, as follows:

1.       Chestnut Walk

2.       Christchurch Meadows

3.       Kings Meadow (Tesco)

 

Mooring is permitted at each of the sites for up to 24hrs on payment of a fee, currently £9.50 (inclusive of vat), with no return allowed within 72hrs.

No mooring, regardless of length of stay, is permitted at any other riverside location and there is no provision for residential mooring in the Reading area.

 

Whilst the policy was adopted in 2011, it was not regularly enforced due to a lack of staff resource to regularly inspect and police the moorings. As a result of the inconsistent collection of mooring fees and enforcement action, the riverbanks in Reading soon became a haven for live-aboard boaters whom were unable / unwilling to secure a suitable residential mooring for their boat. This created a number of issues for the Council, predominantly linked to the anti-social behaviour of boaters and the negative impact this had on neighbouring residential property owners. It also made it difficult for legitimate leisure boaters to find available mooring space within the borough.

 

The legal process for regaining possession of the riverbank and moving overstaying boaters on was labour intensive, costly and slow, exacerbating the negative impact upon the Council’s neighbouring residents. The costs associated with enforcement were also a drain on the Council’s limited resources at a time when cuts to central government grant funding required service related savings to be made.

 

The summer of 2016 saw an unprecedented rise in reports of ASB, noise, fires and fly tipping from boats across the Council’s riverside estate, leading a number of highly vociferous residents to rightly raise their concerns with their local Councillors and MP’s. The moorings most adversely affected by this behaviour were those to the rear of Tesco and I am sure the Council’s efforts to address the associated issues are appreciated by the Tesco management team, although I am unable to speak for them.

 

The need for an efficient and sustainable method of mooring management became a priority for the Parks Service and officers sought to identify best practice amongst other local authorities and partner agencies that could be replicated by the Council. In May 2017 Council considered a series of options for the effective and financially sustainable management of the Council’s moorings. Following this consideration lead Councillors agreed a 12 month trial arrangement with an established mooring enforcement company, District Enforcement (DE).

DE are currently managing the Council’s leisure moorings under a twelve month contract and due to the success of this there is an intention to extend the arrangement for a further period of 12 months. It should be noted that the arrangement with DE did not change the Council’s policy in respect of mooring provision and the associated fee charged, but has made application of the policy and the collection of fees more robust.

 

Reading Borough Council’s fees are benchmarked with its nearest neighbour ‘Henley’ to ensure that neither party displaces the issues associated with the abuse of moorings to the other local authority’s estate. Regular contact is maintained with officers in Henley through participation in the cross Council networking activity provided through membership of The River Thames Alliance and best practice is regularly exchanged.

 

The trial with DE is considered a success with the number of reported incidents of misuse / abuse of moorings and the associated ASB reducing to a negligible level. Residents neighbouring the Council’s riverside estate have made contact to express their satisfaction with the pilot scheme.

 

The fee of £9.50 for stay of up to 24hrs on any of the Council’s moorings and the rationale for this:

 

In summary - the Council provide leisure moorings at 3 sites; Chestnut Walk, Christchurch Meadows & Kings Meadow (Tesco). Stay is permitted at each of these sites for up to 24hrs upon payment of the stated fee of £9.50 (inclusive of VAT). No return is permitted to any of the moorings within a 72hr time frame.

 

The fee charged by Reading Borough Council is set to be consistent with its nearest local authority riverside neighbour of Henley on Thames. The Council has an agreement with Henley to manage moorings in a consistent manner so that neither party displaces issues associated with misuse and or abuse of moorings to the others estate. Henley currently charge £10 (inclusive of VAT) for stay of up to 24hrs, but do permit stay of up to 7 days at a discounted rate of £55.

 

Reading Borough Council agrees its fees and charges by committee for implementation on 1st April and 1st October in each year.

The adopted method of mooring enforcement does not permit free stay for a period of 24hrs and the Council does not plan to introduce such a period of free stay.

Reading Borough Council has however identified a need to accommodate stays of less than 24hrs in a manner that is cost appropriate to the boat owner and that permits effective enforcement by the Council’s appointed agent. The Parks Service is therefore currently considering the introduction of a short stay mooring fee mirroring that charged by Hampshire Council of £4 for a stay of up to 4hrs. This proposal will feature within the Councils mid-year review of fees and charges presented to Committee in September for implementation from 1st October 2018.

 

The introduction of the revised fees and charges referenced above will be accompanied by updated public information, in the following formats;

•        Updated and enhanced signage at each mooring site making clear the appropriate fee and method of efficient payment.

•        A mooring information page on the Council’s website which makes clear the Council’s provision, policy position, management regime including fees and charges and rationale.

•        Distribution of Frequently Asked Question (FAQ) data on moorings to call centre staff to permit them to clearly and concisely respond to enquiries.

 

This public information will be developed over coming weeks and introduced as soon as available, allowing for update as soon as the revised fee schedule is approved by Council.

I have arranged for an inspection of signage at each of the three permitted leisure mooring sites and will ensure that any/all signs that make reference to a period of free stay are removed.

 

Unprofessional service:

 

I am sorry to hear that from your experience of contact with District Enforcement you have found them to be rude and lacking in customer service skills.

This is not reflective of our experience to date or that of the Environment Agency whom had recommended them to Reading Borough Council.

We are in regular contact with the management team at District Enforcement and will alert them to this feedback so that they can conduct an appropriate internal review of their customer management practices.

 

Please do not hesitate to contact me if you have any further questions.

 

Yours sincerely

Marcus Hermon

Business Development Manager

Email:Marcus.hermon@reading.gov.uk

 

Am I the only one that thinks that DE are rude and only interested in collecting fines????

  • Greenie 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

16 minutes ago, Rosslynx said:

About this issue - I wrote to Reading Council to complain about DE and their very poor attitude and service. Here is there reply dated 3rd July 2018 -

Thank you for your email regarding the provision of moorings in reading and their management.

 

The Council adopted its current policy position in respect of moorings in 2011. The policy identifies 3 formal sites for leisure mooring, as follows:

1.       Chestnut Walk

2.       Christchurch Meadows

3.       Kings Meadow (Tesco)

 

Mooring is permitted at each of the sites for up to 24hrs on payment of a fee, currently £9.50 (inclusive of vat), with no return allowed within 72hrs.

No mooring, regardless of length of stay, is permitted at any other riverside location and there is no provision for residential mooring in the Reading area.

 

Whilst the policy was adopted in 2011, it was not regularly enforced due to a lack of staff resource to regularly inspect and police the moorings. As a result of the inconsistent collection of mooring fees and enforcement action, the riverbanks in Reading soon became a haven for live-aboard boaters whom were unable / unwilling to secure a suitable residential mooring for their boat. This created a number of issues for the Council, predominantly linked to the anti-social behaviour of boaters and the negative impact this had on neighbouring residential property owners. It also made it difficult for legitimate leisure boaters to find available mooring space within the borough.

 

The legal process for regaining possession of the riverbank and moving overstaying boaters on was labour intensive, costly and slow, exacerbating the negative impact upon the Council’s neighbouring residents. The costs associated with enforcement were also a drain on the Council’s limited resources at a time when cuts to central government grant funding required service related savings to be made.

 

The summer of 2016 saw an unprecedented rise in reports of ASB, noise, fires and fly tipping from boats across the Council’s riverside estate, leading a number of highly vociferous residents to rightly raise their concerns with their local Councillors and MP’s. The moorings most adversely affected by this behaviour were those to the rear of Tesco and I am sure the Council’s efforts to address the associated issues are appreciated by the Tesco management team, although I am unable to speak for them.

 

The need for an efficient and sustainable method of mooring management became a priority for the Parks Service and officers sought to identify best practice amongst other local authorities and partner agencies that could be replicated by the Council. In May 2017 Council considered a series of options for the effective and financially sustainable management of the Council’s moorings. Following this consideration lead Councillors agreed a 12 month trial arrangement with an established mooring enforcement company, District Enforcement (DE).

DE are currently managing the Council’s leisure moorings under a twelve month contract and due to the success of this there is an intention to extend the arrangement for a further period of 12 months. It should be noted that the arrangement with DE did not change the Council’s policy in respect of mooring provision and the associated fee charged, but has made application of the policy and the collection of fees more robust.

 

Reading Borough Council’s fees are benchmarked with its nearest neighbour ‘Henley’ to ensure that neither party displaces the issues associated with the abuse of moorings to the other local authority’s estate. Regular contact is maintained with officers in Henley through participation in the cross Council networking activity provided through membership of The River Thames Alliance and best practice is regularly exchanged.

 

The trial with DE is considered a success with the number of reported incidents of misuse / abuse of moorings and the associated ASB reducing to a negligible level. Residents neighbouring the Council’s riverside estate have made contact to express their satisfaction with the pilot scheme.

 

The fee of £9.50 for stay of up to 24hrs on any of the Council’s moorings and the rationale for this:

 

In summary - the Council provide leisure moorings at 3 sites; Chestnut Walk, Christchurch Meadows & Kings Meadow (Tesco). Stay is permitted at each of these sites for up to 24hrs upon payment of the stated fee of £9.50 (inclusive of VAT). No return is permitted to any of the moorings within a 72hr time frame.

 

The fee charged by Reading Borough Council is set to be consistent with its nearest local authority riverside neighbour of Henley on Thames. The Council has an agreement with Henley to manage moorings in a consistent manner so that neither party displaces issues associated with misuse and or abuse of moorings to the others estate. Henley currently charge £10 (inclusive of VAT) for stay of up to 24hrs, but do permit stay of up to 7 days at a discounted rate of £55.

 

Reading Borough Council agrees its fees and charges by committee for implementation on 1st April and 1st October in each year.

The adopted method of mooring enforcement does not permit free stay for a period of 24hrs and the Council does not plan to introduce such a period of free stay.

Reading Borough Council has however identified a need to accommodate stays of less than 24hrs in a manner that is cost appropriate to the boat owner and that permits effective enforcement by the Council’s appointed agent. The Parks Service is therefore currently considering the introduction of a short stay mooring fee mirroring that charged by Hampshire Council of £4 for a stay of up to 4hrs. This proposal will feature within the Councils mid-year review of fees and charges presented to Committee in September for implementation from 1st October 2018.

 

The introduction of the revised fees and charges referenced above will be accompanied by updated public information, in the following formats;

•        Updated and enhanced signage at each mooring site making clear the appropriate fee and method of efficient payment.

•        A mooring information page on the Council’s website which makes clear the Council’s provision, policy position, management regime including fees and charges and rationale.

•        Distribution of Frequently Asked Question (FAQ) data on moorings to call centre staff to permit them to clearly and concisely respond to enquiries.

 

This public information will be developed over coming weeks and introduced as soon as available, allowing for update as soon as the revised fee schedule is approved by Council.

I have arranged for an inspection of signage at each of the three permitted leisure mooring sites and will ensure that any/all signs that make reference to a period of free stay are removed.

 

Unprofessional service:

 

I am sorry to hear that from your experience of contact with District Enforcement you have found them to be rude and lacking in customer service skills.

This is not reflective of our experience to date or that of the Environment Agency whom had recommended them to Reading Borough Council.

We are in regular contact with the management team at District Enforcement and will alert them to this feedback so that they can conduct an appropriate internal review of their customer management practices.

 

Please do not hesitate to contact me if you have any further questions.

 

Yours sincerely

Marcus Hermon

Business Development Manager

Email:Marcus.hermon@reading.gov.uk

 

Am I the only one that thinks that DE are rude and only interested in collecting fines????

 

Good clear and concise response that is hard to argue against.

  • Greenie 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!

Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.

Sign In Now
  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    • No registered users viewing this page.
×
×
  • Create New...

Important Information

We have placed cookies on your device to help make this website better. You can adjust your cookie settings, otherwise we'll assume you're okay to continue.