Denial of Access to the boats - legal position and compensation ?

[bedouin]

I don’t know how this works law wise. There is two sides to every dispute.

Just a thought. While the land owner may or may not be annoyed.
You have officially informed the land owner the steps and acces over his land is unsafe.
This probably creates a problem for him. He now is aware of a safety concern about the access. Surly if he allowed you or anyone else to continue to use the access. The land owner would risk being liable if you slipped and fell.

Simple solution for him shut of the access due to safety concerns. Far more simple than dealing with possible risks for what could possibly be considered a commercial business.

Or resolve safety concerns which may be more costly than the revenue. So the risk of being a nice guy letting people continue to use the access is seen by him as unacceptable.

A different case a different situation in a different jurisdiction. Chap I know, used to allow local people to cross his land using a dirt track for his tractor to access to a local beach.
Until. Someone fell and sued him.
Now there is a locked gate with a sign private no trespassing.

I was thinking along the same lines - if you are paying him he has a duty of care to provide safe access and these days really needs liability insurance. That is a lot of hassle. Could perhaps turn a blind eye "I didn't know it was unsafe".

As soon as someone asserts there is a problem he has no option but to take action immediately or be liable for damages that could run to tens of thousands - what would you do in his position?

 

[MikeCC]

Assuming some of you are members, RYA legal dept or a solicitor. If the reason it's unsafe is due to landlord's lack of maintenance (that you have paid for) then breach of contract at least.

 

[Concerto]

Use a bolt cutter to remove the lock. and keep doing so if he puts a new one on.

If someone was on their boat when this happened, it could become a dangerous situation.

I do expect that the landowner's insurance company is behind the closure. Some years ago I had a risk assessor complain about a compressor built to UK standards with a ¼ inch wall thickness and wanted it change to a euro standard one with 3mm wall thickness, yet could not advise if a sign should be placed by a single step between 2 rooms.

 

[Yellow Ballad]

Simple answer, find somewhere else to launch from. He's obviously upset and doesn't want to continue the agreement, trying to enforce it will only end up in acess till March (if it doesn't drag on till after then) and then it'll be stopped. It'll only cost money and cause upset.

If you just want to get your dinghy and check on the boats, hop the fence early one morning. Tresspass is a civil matter isn't it?

 

[A1Sailor]

The fact you have been unable to visit your boats on the moorings since mid-September is concerning. Are you insured to stay afloat on a mooring all winter?
I sincerely hope you don't find out but should a boat sink is the landlord liable?

Assuming some of you are members, RYA legal dept or a solicitor. If the reason it's unsafe is due to landlord's lack of maintenance (that you have paid for) then breach of contract at least.

+1

 

[dom]

I do expect that the landowner's insurance company is behind the closure. Some years ago I had a risk assessor complain about a compressor built to UK standards with a ¼ inch wall thickness and wanted it change to a euro standard one with 3mm wall thickness, yet could not advise if a sign should be placed by a single step between 2 rooms.

They wanted the compressor walls halved in thickness?

 

[Blue Sunray]

Use a bolt cutter to remove the lock. and keep doing so if he puts a new one on.

...if you want to get arrested for criminal damage.

It is an easy one for the cops to trace and follow up on, virtually no time needed spent on it and still a result for the books. Police love having middle class people as suspects, because middle class people are far more likely to run their mouths in indignation.

:encouragement:

 

[dom]

...if you want to get arrested for criminal damage.

Suspect the police wld be disinclined to get involved in what is essentially a civil dispute, esp if the cost of the £20 padlock was reimbursed.

Moreover, we only know the barest outline of the contract under dispute. I would start by talking to the landowner, perhaps posting a few more details on here, followed if necessary by specific legal advice. This is inevitably more useful than general comments based upon upon similar but subtly different circumstances.

 

[chrishscorp]

I was thinking along the same lines - if you are paying him he has a duty of care to provide safe access and these days really needs liability insurance. That is a lot of hassle. Could perhaps turn a blind eye "I didn't know it was unsafe".

As soon as someone asserts there is a problem he has no option but to take action immediately or be liable for damages that could run to tens of thousands - what would you do in his position?

I agree putting it in writing is what has precipitated this.
I am presuming you are not paying big bucks for launch and landing access? how many other boat owners involved ?

 

[Skeffles]

Suspect the police wld be disinclined to get involved in what is essentially a civil dispute, esp if the cost of the £20 padlock was reimbursed.

.

You know what the police call an offer of reimbursement? A confession of guilt. It isn't worth getting a record over a £20 padlock. Let the lawyer handle things, that is what they are paid for.

 

[dom]

You know what the police call an offer of reimbursement? A confession of guilt. It isn't worth getting a record over a £20 padlock. Let the lawyer handle things, that is what they are paid for.

You are assuming that the police treat this as criminal damage which they almost certainly won't.

 

[Joker]

Under the cover of darkness, you cut the padlock. You fade into the distance.

How are they going to know it's you? [if CCTV then hoodies].

 

[Skeffles]

You are assuming that the police treat this as criminal damage which they almost certainly won't.

I can 100% assure you that if the landlord called them in, which they may well do, then the police would. It is the very textbook definition. Believe me when I say that. And the rather high handed attitude you are showing over it is exactly what I talked about when I said police officers love dealing with middle class suspects. All indignation and talking about throwing some money to solve a problem they created, that is comedy gold in the canteen; I assure you of that.

OP. I implore you, do not give your lawyer more work by tampering with the locks. Let them hash it out with writing, and remember a caution or fine (or if you really tick off the cops and magistrate, a three month spell inside; unlikely but seen it happen even for very minor offences when the suspect really went for it in terms of being obnoxious) for criminal damage only weakens your negotiating position later.

 

[scotty123]

Yes you might have to pay for a new lock. What chance do you think he/she will have in getting any police to follow the up?

The landlord has already taken the old lock, so guilty of theft/criminal damage.
Report it to the police, then put your own on.

 

[CLB]

Buy the same lock that is on the gate. Cut the old one off and replace with yours. The gate owner is unlikley to try and unlock the gate if he doesn't use the moorings, but if he does he will wonder why his key suddenly doesn't work. You, in the meantime, can come and go as you please

Edit: it's ok skeffles, you don't need to make your point again. We have heard it and I'm sure we have all given it due consideration.

 

[Binnacle]

Forcing an entry or damaging the gate/lock is not on our agenda.

There's not much more to tell. We have a series of letters and emails with the landlord asking for a meeting. He refuses to take part, saying that as the agreement is at an end, he will not discuss the matter.

There's a suggestion that as the access agreement has renewed for several years, we may have a proper lease. In which case, the landlord cannot tear up the agreement on the grounds of safety, when that is his well-documented responsibility. As tenants if there is deemed to be a lease problem, then we think the landlord must give us the opportunity to remedy any purported breaches, but we cannot get him to say exactly what breach(es) of the access agreement are grave enough to give him the right to serve notice and terminate the agreement (lease ?) so abruptly. and without discussion. In the meantime, he has our money for access and maintainance till March next year

We genuinely believe we have done nothing wrong, and are looking for some lever to make the landlord at least have a meeting and talk. Getting heavy with injunctions against continued denial of access as a form of nuisance is not an instant option. Its nearly seven weeks since the lock was changed, and the boats and moorings need checking and the keen people are not able to go out for a day sail becuase of the access problem.

The safety problems of the steps really are very minor, almost cosmetic; certainly less risky than being on a moving boat !

 

[dom]

I can 100% assure you that if the landlord called them in, which they may well do, then the police would. It is the very textbook definition. Believe me when I say that. And the rather high handed attitude you are showing over it is exactly what I talked about when I said police officers love dealing with middle class suspects. All indignation and talking about throwing some money to solve a problem they created, that is comedy gold in the canteen; I assure you of that.

OP. I implore you, do not give your lawyer more work by tampering with the locks. Let them hash it out with writing, and remember a caution or fine (or if you really tick off the cops and magistrate, a three month spell inside; unlikely but seen it happen even for very minor offences when the suspect really went for it in terms of being obnoxious) for criminal damage only weakens your negotiating position later.

Lots of technical problems with this post and for example the class point is a red herring: cutting the lock would be perfectly reasonable if done to protect a right of interest required to for example protect property in immediate danger, provided the means of protection adopted (i.e. cutting the lock) was reasonable having regard to all the circumstances.

This emphasises why well-meaning internet advice on legal matters is generally a bad idea as I suggested in post #28.

 

[lw395]

The landlord has already taken the old lock, so guilty of theft/criminal damage.
Report it to the police, then put your own on.

Not really, it is on his land.
I suspect it all come down to whether the boat owners had some right to continue the arrangement in perpetuity, which I doubt. I'd suggest seeing a solicitor or talking to the RYA legal dept.
And looking for new moorings or arranging access via another route.

 

[Concerto]

They wanted the compressor walls halved in thickness?

Mike. That was correct. I declined, then he wanted the tank to be water pressure tested annually at a cost close to a new compressor. I declined and asked for it to be excluded from the insurance policy. The compressor was run for 1 to 2 hours a week and the only person present would have been me. According to the Health and Safety Executive, 4 people a year die from compressors exploding. This was a small compressor compared to what a local garage would use. Knowing the condition of many back street garages who run equipment all day and every day until it breaks, the above numbers does not suprise me as I expected it would be higher. I still have that compressor now and it still runs perfectly some 15 years later.

 

[Seajet]

You have a right of access, that you have paid for. Get a pair of bolt croppers and remove his lock.

Absolutely, ideally add a combination lock - then if you are in contact with the other owners tell them the number.