Enforcement in marinas.

Flynnbarr said:
Scratching my head at this!
I thought everyone on here wanted a court case,clear up the confusion,or would everyone prefer that the EA were allowed to do as they please?
But because some on here didn't get the result they wanted they've got the hump and are going to take their toys home and sulk:)
Whatever the final result,and as B1 has said it may not be over yet,surely no one wants a large government department riding roughshod over the laws of this land,whatever your stance on the matter.
Click to expand...

I agree with all of that and as for Chris's comment re this forum not being a very nice place, he should try being where I have been on this issue. I hope that most would agree that I have always been respectful of other peoples views even though needing to counter them with reasoned arguments and facts, this includes OG, although I admit to resenting his preaching to others about paying their share when he does not buy an annual registration himself ah! I remember "the moon provides his water".
Stand by for the it's 'Thames Water response'.
 
TT_WO said:
You are correct, this decision will not affect the registration requirement for boats using the Thames at all.

Some boat owners who are in the same position i.e. keep an unused boat in an adjacent water marina, will have paid an annual registration charge. This is clearly not because they choose to help fund the river even though they are not using it (not even OG does this and he does use it) but because the EA claimed that they gained this power as a result of the IWO2010 and when challenged, then claimed that although they did not gain all the power they needed these private marinas were always part of the Thames and under their authority. This part the Judge disagreed with, so some will have paid for a registration when there was no legal requirement to do so.
Click to expand...

Keep fighting TT WO, after reading whole thread you have to win this case. Government agency can not run over people and make laws up themselves. When the river floods again they will want to charge home owners for pumping their water out. Would also like to add who was the person that questioned the Judge's ability to hear the case? This is not about boats and knots, its about the law and the EA have been judged to have got it wrong
 
oldgit said:
The Thames Forum



A place to discuss boating issues specific to the Thames and other inland waterways :)







It depends entirely of course on a the interpretation of the wording in a particular sentence.
Does it not strike you as odd that of the 8000 or more boaters on the Thames and the thousands of other boaters on other waterways who could be affected,many of whom will be in exactly the same position as the defendants have choosen not to avoid paying a contribution towards the running of the river.
The main argument appears to be that the The Thames is an awfully expensive place to boat,marina fees etc and can we please have a little relief,as though locating your boat on the Thames was compulsory.
By now you would have thought that this cause celebre would have been all over the local press,plucky little boaters against a big bad organisation,perhaps even similar to the Barons against the nasty old King. Letters to the letters page,petitions signed,MP lobbied...nope not a whisper all being kept very sotto voiced and not single person prepared to stand up and say its me being affected merely a couple of voices cheering from the side lines.
Click to expand...

Steady on OG, Maybe they don't want to claim celebrity status. Maybe they just want the correct administering of the Law of the Land. Not much to ask is it? And why so keen to put a name to the people? Does it really affect you? I understand that the court was full of defendants and supporters so it's hardly a couple of voices in the wind.
 
SSN 13 unlucky for some said:
Keep fighting TT WO, after reading whole thread you have to win this case. Government agency can not run over people and make laws up themselves. When the river floods again they will want to charge home owners for pumping their water out. Would also like to add who was the person that questioned the Judge's ability to hear the case? This is not about boats and knots, its about the law and the EA have been judged to have got it wrong
Click to expand...

SSN 13 thank you for your comments and welcome to the forum.

I would like to make it clear that I am not one of the defendants in this case but I took part in the objections process to the proposed legislation in the TWA order from2004 onward. As a result I fully support the defendants who quite rightly thought that that the EA did not have the claimed rights over these private marinas.

Interesting point about water on private property, when it is on private land it is private water and I guess the EA would be entitled to charge if they pumped it, If it remained Thames water I imagine a lot of home owners would expect the EA to repair the damage to their homes.

I think many on here would like the EA to spend more of our money on an appeal but the grounds for appeal would need to be more than a concern that the Judge did not understand the river or take into account that the EA will lose some expected revenue.
 
No old boy, I live in France where the canals are wide and spacious. Law is my game and ensuring government organisations follow them. I think you will find that a full disclosure of the case to the press will happen when the Fat Lady has finished her last verse and then the public will know how much of their money has been spent trying to convict 20 people. If you get hold of a transcript of the hearing it will make your toes curl up while reading it. It has cost the EA £50k plus already by their figures; you need to keep paying registration for the appeal Actionmat. The rate the EA are going they may well be putting it up again. TT WO sounds like good company for logical conversations though:encouragement:
 
Hello TT WO, thanks for the welcome. I was staring to feel the chilly shoulders. Check out the Tesco thread. interesting line on private land which tickled me. The judge goes to press on Friday? Hope the EA's contemptuous attitude is still ringing in her knowledgeable ears.:)
 
Re: Your still Floating on Thames water.

oldgit said:
A frequent visitor,the mystery deepens,a RCC club member perchance ?....and still not the slightest trace of embarressment with cuts of 30% or 40% heading your way which will impact on 8000 odd other boaters with the curious exception of 23 boaters in two particular locations. ?:):):)
All RCC boats pay the same fees with no exceptions whatever for those not using their boats for whatever reason.
Unless everyone chips in equally there is no club.
Surely 23 resourceful chaps could get together,form their own club,rent a bit of river bank and get your costs down,no need to pay another marina bill,you might need EA permission tho !
Click to expand...

Hey OG, they have a bit of space they can moor in which is outside the EA authority as proved in a court of law. Why would they need a second one?
 
Re: Your still Floating on Thames water.

oldgit said:
All RCC boats pay the same fees with no exceptions whatever for those not using their boats for whatever reason.
Click to expand...

Presumably those who aren't going to use the non-tidal Thames don't pay the EA anything ... or are they expect to register just in case they do?
 
Last edited:
boatone said:
Thanks for posting this Phil. It is pretty much what I expected. However, I am somewhat puzzled by the report stating We must now wait while the EA decide whether they will appeal.
Click to expand...

Edited to say it seems you can't have a quote in a quote !
"The defendants claim the marinas are "counsel pits on privately owned land" ........

It's a typo.. The signed copy of the judgement corrects "counsel" to "gravel" as in gravel pit
 
Last edited:
Actionmat said:
She threw out the Police case against the Occupy London protesters, ruling that their arrests were unlawful. I await the appeal decision with interest.
Click to expand...

What grounds should the appeal be on, other than your opinion that the Judge is too liberal for your liking.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

Other threads that may be of interest

T
Notices to Mariners - Week 51
Replies
4
Views
722
Shaz77
S

Share this page

Top