Sub-letting a marina berth for a few months

[mediterrano]

Is it not the case that you pay a marina for a berth but not a specific one.
One that your boat safely fits into but you can be asked to move as and when needed for operational reasons.

I would be ok with that, as long as it's communicated in advance and the concrete operational reason is expressed. In that case, I would, of course, move the boat to another berth, provided that the new berth is not significantly worse than my current one (noise and air pollution, exposure to wind and swells, maneuverability etc)

 

[Mister E]

You can object all you want but the marina can move your boat or require you to do so and not tell you the reason.
You only rent a parking space it is the marina who decides where and when.
It you want them to be nice and look after your boat then being a gabby pain is probably not the best.

 

[mediterrano]

Ask a lawyer.
I am pretty sure that the practice is 100% legal.

so you mean that the marinas which do let boat-owners participate at revenues generated, do it without any legal necessity and purely for customer satisfaction and that in a market where the supply is limited and the demand is increasing by the year?

 

[KompetentKrew]

EDIT: forget it. This whole discussion is just disruptive and pointless.

 

[johnalison]

I find it very strange that anyone should want to upset an arrangement that has worked perfectly well for almost all boat owners for the last fifty years or so while marinas have developed. I have never considered that I ‘own’ my berth, and apart from the occasional nuisance from visitors leaving my lines to get soggy in the water, prefer the marina to remain profitable without the need to increase its fees if deprived of visitor income. Our marina used to have a paper notification system but now it’s really easier just to give them a radio call when out for more than a day, and have the benefit of a radio check into the bargain.

 

[mediterrano]

You can object all you want but the marina can move your boat or require you to do so and not tell you the reason.
You only rent a parking space it is the marina who decides where and when.
It you want them to be nice and look after your boat then being a gabby pain is probably not the best.

if they do such a thing then they would better make a photo of every inch of the boat, incl. the bottom because as sure as hell, I would claim that any damage I find out after my return, was caused during moving the boat in my absence.

A sensible marina administration wouldn't dare such a thing, except to avert a danger and an obvious damage to the boat.

 

[westernman]

so you mean that the marinas which do let boat-owners participate at revenues generated, do it without any legal necessity and purely for customer satisfaction and that in a market where the supply is limited and the demand is increasing by the year?

Yes. They don't have to do it, unless they wrote it into the contract.

They do it to encourage you to let them know your plans, so they can plan the use of your berth when you are not there.
They would rather have your usual berth free when you get back. By telling them it helps them make best use of berths and staff.

 

[mediterrano]

Fair would be for the marinas to say:
.) you won't sub-let and we won't rent it out to others in your absence
or
.) you won't sub-let, we however will try to make some extra cash in your absence but we'll share that money with you
or
.) you are allowed to sub-let but you will let us have a cut of that money
or
.) you are allowed to sub-let, anyway we'll profit from it by charging for help for docking, electricity, water, grey/black water pump out, fuel, bottom cleaning etc etc

 

[Boathook]

if they do such a thing then they would better make a photo of every inch of the boat, incl. the bottom because as sure as hell, I would claim that any damage I find out after my return, was caused during moving the boat in my absence.

A sensible marina administration wouldn't dare such a thing, except to avert a danger and an obvious damage to the boat.

You would have to prove that they caused the damage as they would say the damage was already there caused by weather and or maybe another boat. My berth contract just says that I have a berth at my marina and not where. I am lucky that it is a small marina and they don't do daily rentals as it would cost more to administer so I always go back to the same berth and my fixed mooring lines.

I rather assume that you don't have a boat in an UK marina.

 

[KompetentKrew]

Fair would be for the marinas to say:
.) you won't sub-let and we won't rent it out to others in your absence
or
.) you won't sub-let, we however will try to make some extra cash in your absence but we'll share that money with you
or
.) you are allowed to sub-let but you will let us have a cut of that money
or
.) you are allowed to sub-let, anyway we'll profit from it by charging for help for docking, electricity, water, grey/black water pump out, fuel, bottom cleaning etc etc

This would seem to assume that there's one "fair" and "correct" price for a marina berth or that the only terms on which marinas can provide services is a lease whereby one customer "owns" the berth outright.

One of these is badeconomics and the other is badlegal.

The price of marina berths is dictated by supply and demand - Manky Marina is much cheaper than Posh Marina because Posh Marina has much better facilities, comfortable showers etc, but Posh Marina has to compete with Premium Marina which has similar facilities and the two will have similar prices.

Prices may fall after a new marina opens in the harbour or, alternatively, the publicity and additional facilities may stimulate demand for berthing in the roadstead and, contrary to expectations, cause prices to rise.

And, in the contract law of England and Wales, marinas and bertholders can surely strike any kind of arrangement they like? If the marina wishes to offer a contract whereby they rent you a berth for any 40 days of July and August, plus the full other 10 months of the year then that's a transparent arrangement which most people would regard as fair. You can offer to buy a contract for the full 12 months if you like and the marina is freer to decline.

If marinas were forbidden from renting out "your" berth whilst you were away then surely marina prices would rise across the board because they would lose this visitor berthing revenue and have to find some other way to affray these costs.

It's true to say that marinas will make as much profit from you as they can, but it's false to represent them as if their profits are unlimited - if they charge too much then you will berth at Manky Marine or sell your boat.

I guess maybe conspiracy theories about trade ignore the cost of capital? Like, once the cigar-smoking man in a suit owns the marina then it doesn't matter how much money he makes because the profits are all "free" to him? But that's false because the reality is that the marina owner has to borrow the capital to buy and build the marina from somewhere (even if it's from himself) and the interest he pays is a cost to the marina. If I win £5,000,000 in the lottery then I'm not going to buy a marina if it earns me only 1% or 2% profit a year, because I can get 0.8% (above inflation) in the bank or money markets. According to JP Morgan "since 1901, investing in equities for a long term has produced an annual, after-inflation return of 4.9%"¹ so I'm nit going to buy a marina unless I can beat those returns (by enough margin to compensate me for taking the undiversified risk). In reality, the companies that are building marinas are probably doing it with about £2,000,000 of their own money and some kinda mortgage for the other £3,000,000, then paying interest on that mortgage (probably 4% or 5% above the risk free rate?).

Thank you for coming to my TED Talk.

 

[mediterrano]

Sure, I would trying hard to prove that while they would have to try to prove the opposite.
It is always risky to touch someone's property. If they moved the boat to a new berth and misfortune struck, they would have to prove that the same misfortune would have happened at the previous berth too.

My legal expenses insurance covers a few legal disputes a year without complaining about the high case frequency.
The legal expense insurance of the marina would likely act similarly. The difference is that I have one boat berthed in one marina, while a marina has to deal with many boat-owners.
Therefore, it's risky for a marina to employ unfair practices. Therefore the smart ones are sharing their revenues with the boat-owners and the greedy ones are thinking that they have invented the fire, until one day they find themselves bogged down in disputes.

 

[mediterrano]

This would seem to assume that there's one "fair" and "correct" price for a marina berth or that the only terms on which marinas can provide services is a lease whereby one customer "owns" the berth outright.

One of these is badeconomics and the other is badlegal.

The price of marina berths is dictated by supply and demand - Manky Marina is much cheaper than Posh Marina because Posh Marina has much better facilities, comfortable showers etc, but Posh Marina has to compete with Premium Marina which has similar facilities and the two will have similar prices.

Prices may fall after a new marina opens in the harbour or, alternatively, the publicity and additional facilities may stimulate demand for berthing in the roadstead and, contrary to expectations, cause prices to rise.

And, in the contract law of England and Wales, marinas and bertholders can surely strike any kind of arrangement they like? If the marina wishes to offer a contract whereby they rent you a berth for any 40 days of July and August, plus the full other 10 months of the year then that's a transparent arrangement which most people would regard as fair. You can offer to buy a contract for the full 12 months if you like and the marina is freer to decline.

If marinas were forbidden from renting out "your" berth whilst you were away then surely marina prices would rise across the board because they would lose this visitor berthing revenue and have to find some other way to affray these costs.

It's true to say that marinas will make as much profit from you as they can, but it's false to represent them as if their profits are unlimited - if they charge too much then you will berth at Manky Marine or sell your boat.

I guess maybe conspiracy theories about trade ignore the cost of capital? Like, once the cigar-smoking man in a suit owns the marina then it doesn't matter how much money he makes because the profits are all "free" to him? But that's false because the reality is that the marina owner has to borrow the capital to buy and build the marina from somewhere (even if it's from himself) and the interest he pays is a cost to the marina. If I win £5,000,000 in the lottery then I'm not going to buy a marina if it earns me only 1% or 2% profit a year, because I can get 0.8% (above inflation) in the bank or money markets. According to JP Morgan "since 1901, investing in equities for a long term has produced an annual, after-inflation return of 4.9%"¹ so I'm nit going to buy a marina unless I can beat those returns (by enough margin to compensate me for taking the undiversified risk). In reality, the companies that are building marinas are probably doing it with about £2,000,000 of their own money and some kinda mortgage for the other £3,000,000, then paying interest on that mortgage (probably 4% or 5% above the risk free rate?).

Thank you for coming to my TED Talk.

We are both talking about marinas but we are not talking about the same marinas. The marinas I'm talking about are those along Côte d'Azur, in Sardinia and Balearics.
The marina costs here are 6-10 times higher than those in the Caribbean.
There is no competition among the marinas as they are all full, their waiting lists for annual contracts have people waiting since 1990s.
They already charge astronomical rates and still try to make extra money by renting out one's berth in his absence, without giving him a dime.

 

[Tranona]

They do so exactly because they know that otherwise the legality of this practice would be questionable.

No, they do it to encourage people to tell them when the berth is empty so that they can use it as a visitors berth. Absolutely nothing to do with the legality of the contract. Simple business decision. They want to maximise the revenue from the berth and if they have a high visitor demand they will incentivise berth holders to vacate their berth and advise them. In marinas where there is low demand for visitors berths there is no need for incentives.

You really are wasting your time trying to make a case that such agreements are illegal. You may consider them unfair but they are quite clear about what is on offer and you either accept it or take your business elsewhere.

As for the western med marinas you talk about that is simply supply and demand. What business does not seek to maximise the return on its assets? If as you wish you had exclusive use of the berth then they would simply charge a higher price to compensate for the loss of visitor revenue. Maximising the usage of the berth leads to lower prices for annual renters. You seem to have little knowledge of how such businesses work - you would already getting a share of income from visitors by way of lower annual renting cost. If you want the right to benefit from that directly then buy a lease.

I keep my boat in a club owned marina and we operate in the same way as a commercial marina. We pay an annual licence fee for a berth, usually the same one each year and when I am not using it I either because I am away or the boat is out of the water the club charges visitors for use, or in the winter it offers the berth to club members who do not have a licence for a berth, but for a swinging mooring. The income from both of these streams is credited to the marina account and reduces the cost of the annual licence.

 

[Sandy]

Sure, I would trying hard to prove that while they would have to try to prove the opposite.

I'm still interested in your response to my final question in post #30 I will also add where are you based, as this is a UK centric forum.

Lets follow this example through:

What happens when you return to your marina, after privately sub-leasing their berth to somebody.

You are welcomed by the dock-master/marina manager who instructs you that you have breached your contract and need to find an alternative place to park the boat. Just for good measure it is a Public Holiday weekend and every marina in town is rafting boats three deep and have been telephone to informed them about what you have done – leaving it up to them to decide about offering you a berth or not.

At that point your mobile phone rings, its the skipper, who happens to be a partner in a law firm, of the boat that you sub-let your berth is giving you an ear bashing for ruining his family's summer holiday and is informing you that they have started proceedings to sue you for costs and compensation.

You are now in the position of having a boat load of kit, a crew of five thirsty men keen to get into pub for a pint or three of their favourite ale after a 24 hour passage before sleeping for a few hours and getting the train home and no berth.

I am beginning to think that this might be somebody being very naught and is trolling the forum.

 

[KompetentKrew]

We are both talking about marinas but we are not talking about the same marinas. The marinas I'm talking about are those along Côte d'Azur, in Sardinia and Balearics.
The marina costs here are 6-10 times higher than those in the Caribbean.
There is no competition among the marinas as they are all full, their waiting lists for annual contracts have people waiting since 1990s.
They already charge astronomical rates and still try to make extra money by renting out one's berth in his absence, without giving him a dime.

But the capital cost is high, because the land to build the marina is expensive.

You're not going to make unlimited money if you want to buy one of those marinas today, because you'll have to pay so much to buy the marina in the first place. No doubt this has crept up over many years since the land was so cheap in the middle of last century, but this is the capital cost of marinas' profits today.

I discussed that in the final paragraph of the comment you replied to - did you read it? I think probably you don't really care what anyone else says here, you are just here (with a brand new account) to advance your political agenda. And this is a political discussion, so I urge the mods to lock the thread already.

 

[mediterrano]

I'm still interested in your response to my final question in post #30 I will also add where are you based, as this is a UK centric forum.

Lets follow this example through:

What happens when you return to your marina, after privately sub-leasing their berth to somebody.

You are welcomed by the dock-master/marina manager who instructs you that you have breached your contract and need to find an alternative place to park the boat. Just for good measure it is a Public Holiday weekend and every marina in town is rafting boats three deep and have been telephone to informed them about what you have done – leaving it up to them to decide about offering you a berth or not.

At that point your mobile phone rings, its the skipper, who happens to be a partner in a law firm, of the boat that you sub-let your berth is giving you an ear bashing for ruining his family's summer holiday and is informing you that they have started proceedings to sue you for costs and compensation.

You are now in the position of having a boat load of kit, a crew of five thirsty men keen to get into pub for a pint or three of their favourite ale after a 24 hour passage before sleeping for a few hours and getting the train home and no berth.

I am beginning to think that this might be somebody being very naught and is trolling the forum.

I never said I would sublet against the stipulations of the contract.I said that unless they allowed me to sublet or let me participate in the revenues they make from the space I've rented, I would not let them to earn that extra money. In the worst case, I would only make occasional day cruises with the boat and would buy me a bigger and faster rib and drive around with that. Unless I can, at least partly, pay for transitory berths with the money I make from my permanent berth, I would use my boat mostly as a floating condo and would do most cruising with the rib.

 

[Sandy]

I never said I would sublet against the stipulations of the contract.I said that unless they allowed me to sublet or let me participate in the revenues they make from the space I've rented, I would not let them to earn that extra money. In the worst case, I would only make occasional day cruises with the boat and would buy me a bigger and faster rib and drive around with that. Unless I can, at least partly, pay for transitory berths with the money I make from my permanent berth, I would use my boat mostly as a floating condo and would do most cruising with the rib.

Then you have not read the posts on this thread. In the UK we sign contracts that do not allow sub-letting of berths. The usual agreement is for the marina to share some of the income from visitors using a berth holders berth while they are away from them.

In the UK your proposed software would need to be sold to the marina companies. As stated above one company has already done this and appears to have failed; the usual practice is for boats to turn up or ring and book.

 

[Mister E]

I have decided that someone wants to complain and argue about a nothing.
So any further discussion is not worth the bother.

 

[Sticky Fingers]

I’ve not heard anything remotely convincing from @mediterrano so far. I’m out.

 

[Refueler]

I never said I would sublet against the stipulations of the contract.I said that unless they allowed me to sublet or let me participate in the revenues they make from the space I've rented, I would not let them to earn that extra money. In the worst case, I would only make occasional day cruises with the boat and would buy me a bigger and faster rib and drive around with that. Unless I can, at least partly, pay for transitory berths with the money I make from my permanent berth, I would use my boat mostly as a floating condo and would do most cruising with the rib.

Blimey - you really have a problem with it !!

So where are you going to keep this big RIB ??

You've also missed the point that unless you buy a property which includes an OWNED berth - you have no say in the matter of subletting at all !!

As to Marina moving a boat - all the berth agreements I had in UK allowed Marina / Berth providing yard to move the boat if necessary. This covers them in event of a boat catching fire - unusual circumstances such as pontoon damage / berth problems etc. Usually if Marina wants boat moved - they would if time available - contact you or your designated person and inform them of the need. Most times asking you to move the boat.
Should you refuse and especially become 'difficult' - they would reserve the right to terminate your agreement .....

I read your posts and I must say - I am glad I am not your berth provider !!