Anchoring charges - legal?

[ QUOTE ]
- compare with St Mawes - £30.

[/ QUOTE ]
Sorry to rub this in, but to put it in persective:

2 nights at anchor at St. Mawes = approx. 1 month visitor's marina fees (electricity etc. included) for a 10m yacht in Germany - at a private marina, not a municipal one.

I know St. Mawes have to cover the costs etc., but...
 
[ QUOTE ]


But at leat they don't abuse it. They only charge you £5 a night to anchor or be on a bouy. - compare with St Mawes - £30.

[/ QUOTE ]

They don't abuse it? THEY DON'T ABUSE IT??? /forums/images/graemlins/mad.gif

ANY charge for anchoring using your own gear is abusing it! /forums/images/graemlins/mad.gif
 
What I think would be really useful...

I suspect that some of these 'harbours' may not actually have the right to impose these anchoring charges. Especially if historically they haven't in the past.

I'm unlikely to be visiting these areas in the foreseeable future, but what I think would be really useful would be if people on this forum, next time asked to pay an anchoring fee, agree to do it, but on condition that they provide in writing a copy of the authority on the basis of which they are levying the charge. If they refuse, then offer to pay them provided they provide a written and signed statement that they refuse to provide you with a copy of the authority on which they are levying the charge.

Assuming they don't just go away frightened at that point, then post a copy of the results on this forum.
 
Along a similar vein of charging for anchoring, a few years ago, ABP suddenly started charging everyone with a swinging mooring on the Orwell for dues as they managed the river. I don' t remember the details, but there were a few brave souls took them to court to challenge this. Any East Coasters on this forum remember the details and outcome?
 
Think you're right about the northern end but not sure about the other end.

Thank goodness my main mooring is in LEMA control and not Powderham!
 
Getting back to Ilfracombe and their apparent policy of charging or blacklisting even if you don't go ashore. I don't know if I'm on their blacklist or not, but I've only ever gone ashore from the anchorage on one occasion...why?...because my dinghy is usually packed away when on passage. If they really want their money, then at least they should come out and collect it!! Anyway, recently, I've given Ilfracombe a miss and gone a few miles away to Combe Martin instead.
 
There\'s a very interesting article about this

on the RYA website here, which reckons that in many cases even the levying of charges for laying moorings is dodgy, let alone anchoring.

The whole article is interesting, eg.:

"A growing body of yachtsmen are starting to question the charging of fees for regulating moorings and anchorage, especially where there is no statute permitting such a charge to be made. It has been argued that the High Court judgment in Fowley Marine v Gafford overlooked the ancient public right to lay and maintain a mooring to facilitate the navigation of a vessel. This judgment is significant given that an earlier judgment of the Court of Appeal, Attorny-General v. Wright (1897), specifically and unanimously stated that the laying of a mooring for navigational purposes was a public right. Clubs should tread very carefully over the issue of negotiating an fees for laying their own moorings as it is possible that a major test case in the near future could re-establish the pre-1968 position of mooring in tidal waters being treated as a common law right for all. "
 
quote: Which doesn't necessarily mean they do have the right to charge. The sad thing is, if no one objects, they eventually will acquire the right to do it by use/custom.
_______________________________________________
You will recall the case recently of the charges imposed by Ipswich on the River Orwell, also thought to be well founded in time, but overturned on appeal.

There is a general legal principle that you cannot charge for nothing. There is no such contract. Charging for nothing is taxation and only the government can do that. If you hang to your own gear that is nothing and is therfore no basis, as such, for demanding payment.

But it gets murky where the local council provides a harbour, an element of protection, at its expense which you benefit from when taking shelter there. You hang to your own gear but can you say you derive no benefit of the situation? And are therefore free from impost? Um..

But where crown rights are involved - an ancient right - then a demand can be raised. It is a form of taxation.

PWG
 
What about Tarbert Loch Fyne? If you hang on the hook can they charge you. They've been taking the pi*s recently with charges. This is one place I would like to give a couple of fingers to.
 
[ QUOTE ]
There is a general legal principle that you cannot charge for nothing. There is no such contract. Charging for nothing is taxation and only the government can do that. If you hang to your own gear that is nothing and is therfore no basis, as such, for demanding payment.

[/ QUOTE ]

I think you're thinking of the doctrine of 'consideration' which is one of the necessary elements of a contract. To have a valid contract, consideration has to move from the promisee. In other words, they have to give something in return for there to be a contract. If they had the right to stop you anchoring there, then allowing you to do so would be the consideration. But mostly they don't have that right...

But we're not really talking about contract law at all here, it's a question of exercising property rights. Rights over property can arise by custom (like public rights to graze sheep on the village common), which is why it's important that historically the widespread custom has apparently been to allow anchoring without payment (see the link I gave to the RYA website). Unfortunately, unless do something about this very soon, then the fact that yachtsmen have meekly agreed to paying anchoring charges for a number of years will mean that THAT has become the accepted custom, and the right to anchor free of charge will be lost.

I guess the people who are levying these charges are hoping that no one brings an objection in the near future, soon the new 'custom' will be established.

At least yachtsmen are taking it lying down.
 
[ QUOTE ]
Along a similar vein of charging for anchoring, a few years ago, ABP suddenly started charging everyone with a swinging mooring on the Orwell for dues as they managed the river. I don' t remember the details, but there were a few brave souls took them to court to challenge this. Any East Coasters on this forum remember the details and outcome?

[/ QUOTE ]

There is truth in your statement, but it is not accurate.

ABP had always charged, and have the right to do so. It was the Ipswich Borough Council which started to impose charges as well, so we were paying 2 different authorities for the right to occupy a mooring in the river.

2 private mooring owners refused to pay, and it eventually went to the High Court where IBC lost and had to repay all the charges they had levied over about 10 years - can't remember the exact period - and it is believed the total of that and legal costs was around £750,000.

We still pay an annual licence fee to ABP.
 
I'm happy to help. Can't refuse to pay the charges myself as I'm not going anywhere near the area. But I can cast a lawyer-ly eye...

I'm a bit surprised that the RYA don't seem to be more interested in it. You would have thought it was right up their alley... bringing test cases and so forth.
 
[ QUOTE ]
"At least yachtsmen are taking it lying down"

I'm not - who's with me?

[/ QUOTE ]

Me neither. If every yachtsman/mobo'er refused to pay for one season, I reckon the point will be well made. Out of interest, what could a harbourmaster legally do if one refused to pay? Assuming one wasn't anchored in a fairway etc, would they be allowed to move a boat or take other direct action? /forums/images/graemlins/confused.gif

My guess is that those who refuse to pay - and I'm one of 'em - are left alone and the jobsworth moves on to easier prey. /forums/images/graemlins/grin.gif

Another thought in a similar vein, is a harbour allowed to charge if one is forced in there through 'stress of weather', for example when sheltering from a gale? Or is reducing the risk of loss of life also chargeable these days?!! /forums/images/graemlins/mad.gif /forums/images/graemlins/mad.gif
 
[ QUOTE ]
Assuming one wasn't anchored in a fairway etc, would they be allowed to move a boat or take other direct action?

[/ QUOTE ]
No. At least not legally. They might try to stop you using their facilities eg. landing jetty, but that's about it.
 
That's one of my main points - if I am using a natural anchorage I do not intend to pay. If I am using a "harbour" which has been created by construction investment then a charge could be reasonably levied: I may well grumble but I am prepared to pay if I am using the facilities provided.

If "harbour limits" include a traditional anchoring site then that charge can't be reasonable eg Dartmouth, Ilfracombe, Salcombe are three that I have experience of.
 
Interesting one. I don't know your situation, but you might be interested in asking the collector to show you/point you to the authority for making charges. If yours is one of those ancient crown rights...ah.

There can't be many of these situations. Would be useful for the RYA to list them: all other claims could then go hang...on their own hook!

PWG
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

Share this page

Top