Jump to content

District enforcement mooring fine Reading


Featured Posts

1 minute ago, jonathanA said:

Yeah right course they did.... ?

Yup. They’d had dealings with the same company in the past. 

Edited by WotEver
Link to comment
Share on other sites

30 minutes ago, Wanderer Vagabond said:

I think you may be mis-reading the sign. CRT do not send anyone a 'bill', the job has been outsourced to District Enforcement who are a private company (they are not part of CRT). Issuing the MOCN and enforcement is entirely down to District Enforcement, CRT have no involvement other than giving DE the contact details of offending boaters.

But surely CRT make some money out of it - they must get their cut (pun).

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Just now, Horace42 said:

But surely CRT make some money out of it - they must get their cut (pun).

What makes you think that? They have outsourced enforcement so either they are paying District Enforcement for their services (a waste of money I would suggest) or District Enforcement make money through collecting the MOCN's, the one thing that is certain is that DE, being a private company, wont be doing anything for nothing.

  • Greenie 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

2 hours ago, Wanderer Vagabond said:

What makes you think that? They have outsourced enforcement so either they are paying District Enforcement for their services (a waste of money I would suggest) or District Enforcement make money through collecting the MOCN's, the one thing that is certain is that DE, being a private company, wont be doing anything for nothing.

Don't know, just a guess. But it's the way businesses work. CRT have a monopoly on management of waterways - they can sell a license to DE to operate a mooring management scheme - and charge DE whatever profitable terms they like - who in turn charge boaters whatever they like (or more likely whatever they can get away with).

 

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

7 hours ago, Horace42 said:

Don't know, just a guess. But it's the way businesses work. CRT have a monopoly on management of waterways - they can sell a license to DE to operate a mooring management scheme - and charge DE whatever profitable terms they like - who in turn charge boaters whatever they like (or more likely whatever they can get away with).

 

 

I don't think that is how it works, they have given a contract to DE to enforce moorings, much the same as they as they give Kier a contract to maintain the waterways. Either DE make it self financing through MOCN's (if enough people pay the charge) or CRT pay them to run the contract.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

13 hours ago, Robbo said:

This isn’t a speeding or parking offence, this is a contract.  

But the contract appears to be with 'you, the person or persons in control of the boat'.  That suggests to me that the Enforcement Agency have no right to harass the person in whose name the licence to cruise was made out and with the latest data protection regulations I think you could even sue the EA for passing your details on.  Your best friend could have been in control of the boat at the time, but they don't have his address.

 

We experienced something similar at Marlow a few years ago.  No sign of a notice but a hefty 'fine' was slapped on.  We simply refused to pay and wrote a stinging letter advising them that their communication was badly worded and had clearly never been past a legal eye, that they had absolutely no grounds for charging a fee as the notice was obscured and on a different stretch of the bank from where we were moored, that it did not state exactly what the length of restricted moorings were etc etc.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Some tears ago I received a letter from a 'Bailiff's Collection Agency' referring to a debt of several £100s for a mobile telephone account with a provider I had never used.
I asked them for evidence and they simply re-sent the letter with the threats of escalating charges for any further correspondence.
 
After some Googling I found that these firms buy-up bad debts do a search of the electoral register and send out the letter to everyone of the same name hoping to get a 'bite'.
 
I ignored several every increasing threatening letters, until one day having taken advice I wrote to them quoting all sorts of legalese and threatening to have the company directors arrested for harassment unless they immediately 'ceased and desisted' and issued a letter confirming I was the 'wrong person' and that they had sent letters to me by mistake.
 
I subsequently received a letter saying that "due to the small sum involved they were closing the case and no further action would be taken" which I assumed would be the best I'd get.
 
Nothing to do with Mooring fees - but an example of sharp-practice.
Edited by Alan de Enfield
  • Greenie 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

I have phoned Reading Council. Very helpful and understanding that the wording could be clearer. The chap I spoke to walked the tow path during good weather lunchtimes. Seen the signs but not read them. He will now. Expecting a call back from a 'manager' later.

The more of us call and explain our confusion the better the situation will become. 

 

TESCO are not happy about it. But the TESCO site is only one of hundreds of locations where this company are causing a rumpus.

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

7 minutes ago, Nightwatch said:

I have phoned Reading Council. Very helpful and understanding that the wording could be clearer. The chap I spoke to walked the tow path during good weather lunchtimes. Seen the signs but not read them. He will now. Expecting a call back from a 'manager' later.

The more of us call and explain our confusion the better the situation will become. 

 

TESCO are not happy about it. But the TESCO site is only one of hundreds of locations where this company are causing a rumpus.

So perhaps more people writing to the land owners or businesses being affected, pointing out the sharp practices of the “fines” company as well as to the EA and CRT, might stop this in its tracks?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

2 minutes ago, Stilllearning said:

So perhaps more people writing to the land owners or businesses being affected, pointing out the sharp practices of the “fines” company as well as to the EA and CRT, might stop this in its tracks?

Possibly not, but well worth a try. The more headache this causes to who ever brought in this bloomin' company the more likely it'll get sorted. 

Anyone know who decided on using District Enforcement. If you look at their site it's just like going back to the bad days of wheelclamping companies getting away with murder and making lots of money. I got my bosses car clamped once. The 'sign' was twenty foot above the ground on the wall of Argos. A guy ran off to his van and got some bolt croppers. Never heard anymore. It was a long time ago, perhaps early 90s. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

15 minutes ago, Nightwatch said:

A guy ran off to his van and got some bolt croppers. Never heard anymore. It was a long time ago, perhaps early 90s. 

Gerry Kelly, a convicted IRA terrorist who is now a Sinn Fein MLA at Stormont and who is on the Policing Board had his car clamped outside the gym he was using.  He simply cut the clamp off with bolt cutters.  Unfortunately for him the whole event was captured on CCTV.  Cost him quite a bit of dosh and embarrassment not that I think it bothered him.

i don’t think anyone was surprised by the actions of the murdering scum bag.  For the very first time in my life I wanted to pat a clamper on the back.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

2 hours ago, Nightwatch said:

Either way, it's causing concern and should be reviewed. It's just not clear what the intension is.

I think its very clear, if you are mooring on a long term mooring that you are not paying for they are going to chase you.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

6 minutes ago, ditchcrawler said:

I think its very clear, if you are mooring on a long term mooring that you are not paying for they are going to chase you.

But if it is this DE organisation that tries it on, it seems to be close to demanding money with menaces, and we should be doing our best to stop them, through complaints to the navigation authorities and land owners.

  • Greenie 2
Link to comment
Share on other sites

2 hours ago, Nightwatch said:

 If you look at their site it's just like going back to the bad days of wheelclamping companies getting away with murder and making lots of money. I got my bosses car clamped once. The 'sign' was twenty foot above the ground on the wall of Argos. A guy ran off to his van and got some bolt croppers. Never heard anymore. It was a long time ago, perhaps early 90s. 

 

Careful, you’ll have JonathanA accusing you of criminal damage :D

Edited by WotEver
Link to comment
Share on other sites

It would appear that there are multiple levels of protection, organisations, laws and tribunals to deal with parking issues and complaints however there appears to be a distinct lack of protection where mooring is concerned. IF MOORING CHARGES ARE TO BE ENFORCED BY PARKING COMPANIES THEN THE SAME SET OF STANDARDS, OPERATOR APPROVALS AND DISPUTE RESOLUTION PROCESSES SHOULD APPLY. 

It appears to me as a layman  that these are not being met by this Enforcement Agency. 

 

Is District Enforcement and approved operator? they don't appear on the BPA list here

http://www.britishparking.co.uk/BPA-Approved-Operators

 

If they are approved then who has approved them? In fact is there an independent approval body for mooring enforcement?

 

Are there any independent appeals processes and independent tribunals handling mooring disputes in line with those for motorist as shown here 

 

http://www.knowyourparkingrights.org/News/how-to-appeal-a-parking-ticket

 

It appears to me that we as boaters do not have the same level of protections that motorist now, after some hard fought battles,have. 

 

Maybe its Watchdog might want to get there teeth into this as in the past they have with motorist parking

 

On a personal level I must add that I recognise the problem CRT are trying to address. I have no knowledge of the none CRT waters situation. My beef is with the methods and lack of protections that seem to of been introduced by the use of District Enforcement as their 'agents'. Im happy to play fairly but so must they. If motorist type enforcement is to be introduced then motorist type protections must also be in place before these methods are introduced. 

 

 

Edited by reg
Link to comment
Share on other sites

6 minutes ago, Lily Rose said:

With motorists numbering millions and boaters numbering a few tens of thousands I can't see anyone but us giving a damn about this issue.

 

 

And that is I think what they are relying on. Maybe we can get someone to give a dam the question is Who and How. I get the impression that District Enforcement modus operandi is to seek confrontation and use the courts to define their role even warning that this is the case and that not accepting their existing methods may prove costly to you, me or we if we take them on. Wonder if they all have blond comb over hair and fake tans. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

2 hours ago, reg said:

Is District Enforcement and approved operator? they don't appear on the BPA list here

OK can answer my own question here from District Enforcement Web site

"

We are proud to be one of the limited number of operators accepted on to our Trade Association's Accredited Operator Scheme, which puts us in the privileged position of being able to request Registered Keeper details from the Driver and Vehicle Licensing Agency via their electronic KADOE (Keeper at Date of Event) system, in connection with notifying vehicle keepers of unpaid parking charges."

 

However the Trade Association's Accredited Operator Scheme Code of practice makes No Mention of anything to do with mooring

 

Logically then I would content that in matters to do with mooring and waterways their accreditation has No validity whatsoever. 

Their accreditation allows them to obtain driver details from DVLA for driving offences but what accreditation do they have to obtain boaters details? 

What accreditation do they have to demand fees from Moorers? Certainly not the AOS accreditation. 

 

From the OPS perspective this could be important as it would appear that the rights and privileges of AOS accreditation do not apply to MOORING fees therefore that are not accredited to perform the same actions on boaters as they can on vehicle drivers

Edited by reg
Link to comment
Share on other sites

2 minutes ago, reg said:

 

 

Logically then I would content that in matters to do with mooring and waterways their accreditation has No validity whatsoever. 

Would be happy if they wanted to clarify where their accreditation comes from with regards to mooring. 

As very few boaters objected when they signed away their data protection rights in the latest terms and conditions revision, all they have to do is ask CRT and they will be sent your contact details 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

3 minutes ago, reg said:

OK can answer my own question here from District Enforcement Web site

"

We are proud to be one of the limited number of operators accepted on to our Trade Association's Accredited Operator Scheme, which puts us in the privileged position of being able to request Registered Keeper details from the Driver and Vehicle Licensing Agency via their electronic KADOE (Keeper at Date of Event) system, in connection with notifying vehicle keepers of unpaid parking charges."

 

However the Trade Association's Accredited Operator Scheme Code of practice makes No Mention of anything to do with mooring

 

Logically then I would content that in matters to do with mooring and waterways their accreditation has No validity whatsoever. 

Would be happy if they wanted to clarify where their accreditation comes from with regards to mooring. 

Not only that, but the legislation which allows them to pursue a registered keeper of a vehicle, that has been parked by an unknown driver is 'the protection of freedoms act 2012' and it only talks about car parking and motor vehicles. So with this in mind, if the owner of the boat which has moored subject of this post, informs the company, district enforcement that they were not the person who moored there, and as such no contract was made with them. DE may then requested the name of the person who did moor the boat, but the law does not require this to be provided.

  • Greenie 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

11 minutes ago, Tuscan said:

As very few boaters objected when they signed away their data protection rights in the latest terms and conditions revision, all they have to do is ask CRT and they will be sent your contact details 

So that just adds to my previous contentions that we as boaters appear tochave none of the protections afforded to drivers. That to me is fundementaly wrong question is, and I'm not qualified to answer, is it legally wrong. 

Edited by reg
Link to comment
Share on other sites

5 hours ago, ditchcrawler said:

I think its very clear, if you are mooring on a long term mooring that you are not paying for they are going to chase you.

Is there long term moorings outside TESCOS then. I thought they were visitor moorings.

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.