Enforcement in marinas.
- Thread starter TT_WO
- Start date
boatone
Well-Known Member
TT_WO
Well-Known Member
Re: Your still Floating on Thames water.
Why has the name of this thread changed from 'Enforcement in marinas.' to 'Your still Floating on Thames water' are you making a statement?
Why has the name of this thread changed from 'Enforcement in marinas.' to 'Your still Floating on Thames water' are you making a statement?
boatone
Well-Known Member
Re: Your still Floating on Thames water.
Nothing to do with me, ask YBW. I simply replied to thread.
Actionmat
Well-Known Member
Re: Your still Floating on Thames water.
Could you tell whoever changed it that it's 'You're'
If they want float on water from the Thames but not pay for the privelage, could the EA not charge them for an abstraction licence?
Could you tell whoever changed it that it's 'You're'
If they want float on water from the Thames but not pay for the privelage, could the EA not charge them for an abstraction licence?
Last edited:
djm
Active Member
Re: Your still Floating on Thames water.
No, but it would be a privilege to help someone else with spelling.
Could you tell whoever changed it that it's 'You're'
If they want float on water from the Thames but not pay for the privelage, could the EA not charge them for an abstraction licence?
No, but it would be a privilege to help someone else with spelling.
TrueBlue
Well-Known Member
Re: Your still Floating on Thames water.
Difficult to prove that they're abstracting anything (other than the 'proverbial') - but floating on EA's water, yes and that's what it's all about.
Could you tell whoever changed it that it's 'You're'
If they want float on water from the Thames but not pay for the privelage, could the EA not charge them for an abstraction licence?
Difficult to prove that they're abstracting anything (other than the 'proverbial') - but floating on EA's water, yes and that's what it's all about.
TT_WO
Well-Known Member
It is only Thames water when in is within the confines of the Thames, the judge decided that these marinas are not the Thames.
Flynnbarr
Well-Known Member
Re: Your still Floating on Thames water.
Some on here maybe should be turning their guns on the EA.
Would anyone on here pay for something they didn't have to?
'Floating on the EA's water',well the Secretary of State and now a judge disagrees with some on here and the EA!
How much money has the EA wasted on legislation they helped draft?
I wonder if anyone from the EA management will carry the can for this expensive debacle which is all of their own making!
We all know the answer to that one,no one will hold their hands up,it's a government organisation,taxpayers money,they don't give a toss.
Some on here maybe should be turning their guns on the EA.
Would anyone on here pay for something they didn't have to?
'Floating on the EA's water',well the Secretary of State and now a judge disagrees with some on here and the EA!
How much money has the EA wasted on legislation they helped draft?
I wonder if anyone from the EA management will carry the can for this expensive debacle which is all of their own making!
We all know the answer to that one,no one will hold their hands up,it's a government organisation,taxpayers money,they don't give a toss.
JumbleDuck
Well-Known Member
Re: Your still Floating on Thames water.
Perhaps the riparian owners of tributaries could charge the EA for water supply. After all, a negligible proportion of the water coming down the Thames actually falls on the river.
Perhaps the riparian owners of tributaries could charge the EA for water supply. After all, a negligible proportion of the water coming down the Thames actually falls on the river.
JumbleDuck
Well-Known Member
Re: Your still Floating on Thames water.
There does seem to be an element of "I don't want to pay a fair share of the costs of maintaining the river on which I go boating, so I think people who don't use the river should subsidise me".
There does seem to be an element of "I don't want to pay a fair share of the costs of maintaining the river on which I go boating, so I think people who don't use the river should subsidise me".
Actionmat
Well-Known Member
Re: Your still Floating on Thames water.
Perhaps anyone who owns something the size of a caravan and doesn't use it as a boat, could just buy a caravan?
Perhaps anyone who owns something the size of a caravan and doesn't use it as a boat, could just buy a caravan?
JumbleDuck
Well-Known Member
Re: Your still Floating on Thames water.
Perhaps they could buy a motor caravan, keep it permanently on private land and then pay road tax voluntarily?
Perhaps they could buy a motor caravan, keep it permanently on private land and then pay road tax voluntarily?
Actionmat
Well-Known Member
Re: Your still Floating on Thames water.
Wouldn't that be the equivalent of a lift out? In which case, there wouldn't be any argument over a river licence,
Wouldn't that be the equivalent of a lift out? In which case, there wouldn't be any argument over a river licence,
Ramage
Well-Known Member
Re: Your still Floating on Thames water.
The first time 'Re:Your still Floating on Thames water' appears is above a posting from SSN13 (to Oldgit).
Boatone is innocent!!
The name of the thread is still 'Enforcement in marinas.'
The first time 'Re:Your still Floating on Thames water' appears is above a posting from SSN13 (to Oldgit).
Boatone is innocent!!
JumbleDuck
Well-Known Member
Re: Your still Floating on Thames water.
If your car is parked off road within the London congestion charge zone during operating hours, you don't have to pay the charge. That seems like quite a close parallel.
If your car is parked off road within the London congestion charge zone during operating hours, you don't have to pay the charge. That seems like quite a close parallel.
Jegs
Well-Known Member
Re: Your still Floating on Thames water.
Why not the boating equivalent of a SORN?
ATB,
John G
Why not the boating equivalent of a SORN?
ATB,
John G
Pump-Out
Well-Known Member
Re: You're NOT still Floating on Thames water.
I was so trying not to join in, but....
Whiulst I recognise the EA (and all other departments) are currently fearing the up-coming Autumn Statement, and that funding across the board will be hit, the fact remains that the EA have re-invented the wheel here.
No EA funds were used in digging T&K Marina, the basin exists only because third parties made it so. The ground does not belong to the EA, nor does the access to the facility. The "its our water" argument does not, er, hold water.
Take Thames Ditton Marina - who have a lock gate. If the gate is shut, and the level is different - who's water is it now? Any boat inside the basin is no longer subject to Thames flow, ergo the EA are not supplying any service. Likewise, if a boat is upstream of Blake's lock are the EA entitled to a registration fee? Rhetorical.
If there is flooding do the EA pay rent to riparian owners whilst the water is on their lawns? Further Rhetorical.
Does a boat moored in the weir stream below Teddington pay? Why not? Its "The EA's" water coming over the weir into the half-tide reach that keeps them afloat. It just don't stand up, sorry.
I would be the first to insist that any vessel using The Queens Highway that is the River Thames should be subject to charge. But, and I hope the next court sees this, water falls from the sky. Yes the EA maintain locks and weirs, but if a boat is in a private basin, and remains there, I don't see how the EA can pretend a service is being provided over that which they are obliged to do in order to maintain safe navigation.
I think JumbleDuck, with his/her Congestion Zone analogy, is pretty close to the mark.
I was so trying not to join in, but....
Whiulst I recognise the EA (and all other departments) are currently fearing the up-coming Autumn Statement, and that funding across the board will be hit, the fact remains that the EA have re-invented the wheel here.
No EA funds were used in digging T&K Marina, the basin exists only because third parties made it so. The ground does not belong to the EA, nor does the access to the facility. The "its our water" argument does not, er, hold water.
Take Thames Ditton Marina - who have a lock gate. If the gate is shut, and the level is different - who's water is it now? Any boat inside the basin is no longer subject to Thames flow, ergo the EA are not supplying any service. Likewise, if a boat is upstream of Blake's lock are the EA entitled to a registration fee? Rhetorical.
If there is flooding do the EA pay rent to riparian owners whilst the water is on their lawns? Further Rhetorical.
Does a boat moored in the weir stream below Teddington pay? Why not? Its "The EA's" water coming over the weir into the half-tide reach that keeps them afloat. It just don't stand up, sorry.
I would be the first to insist that any vessel using The Queens Highway that is the River Thames should be subject to charge. But, and I hope the next court sees this, water falls from the sky. Yes the EA maintain locks and weirs, but if a boat is in a private basin, and remains there, I don't see how the EA can pretend a service is being provided over that which they are obliged to do in order to maintain safe navigation.
I think JumbleDuck, with his/her Congestion Zone analogy, is pretty close to the mark.
Flynnbarr
Well-Known Member
Re: Your still Floating on Thames water.
The EA in their infinite wisdom did come up with a scheme for boats that didn't comply with the BSS etc,called a red licence.Sort of SORN
You couldn't use your boat,use the river,locks,anything,it was purely so you could float on The Thames........it was the same cost as a normal licence......The EA management........coming to a comedy store near you soon
The EA in their infinite wisdom did come up with a scheme for boats that didn't comply with the BSS etc,called a red licence.Sort of SORN
You couldn't use your boat,use the river,locks,anything,it was purely so you could float on The Thames........it was the same cost as a normal licence......The EA management........coming to a comedy store near you soon
Chris_d
Well-Known Member
Re: Your still Floating on Thames water.
Lots of talk about water, but the judge didn't say anything about whether the marinas were part of the Thames or not, just that the EA didn't have the correct primary legislation in place to enforce registration in the marinas due to the out dated TC act. The TC act referred to works and not marinas, marinas didn't exist in 1932 of course. Its only an opinion on wording.
The EA's defence that all boats in use on the waterways should be registered, to ensure insurance is in place and minimum safety standards are maintained has to be in the best interest of all boaters.
Just wondering what the marinas stance is on all this, surely they require all boats on their premises to be registered, insured and meet BSS standards, how do they get insurance if not? Do they require residential boats to have carbon monoxide alarms, fire extinguishers, proper gas and generator installations etc...
the EA and BSS does if registered. Do they inspect boats periodically?
Its all not so simple really is it? The EA are to blame as historically they haven't sorted this legislation out, but eventually these boats will have to pay, its inevitable.
Lots of talk about water, but the judge didn't say anything about whether the marinas were part of the Thames or not, just that the EA didn't have the correct primary legislation in place to enforce registration in the marinas due to the out dated TC act. The TC act referred to works and not marinas, marinas didn't exist in 1932 of course. Its only an opinion on wording.
The EA's defence that all boats in use on the waterways should be registered, to ensure insurance is in place and minimum safety standards are maintained has to be in the best interest of all boaters.
Just wondering what the marinas stance is on all this, surely they require all boats on their premises to be registered, insured and meet BSS standards, how do they get insurance if not? Do they require residential boats to have carbon monoxide alarms, fire extinguishers, proper gas and generator installations etc...
the EA and BSS does if registered. Do they inspect boats periodically?
Its all not so simple really is it? The EA are to blame as historically they haven't sorted this legislation out, but eventually these boats will have to pay, its inevitable.