Enforcement in marinas.
- Thread starter TT_WO
- Start date
Actionmat
Well-Known Member
Re: Enforcement in marinas
Appreciative of what?
Appreciative of what?
Pump-Out
Well-Known Member
Re: Enforcement in marinas
Quite possibly, I bow to your greater knowledge.
But I was not suggesting not paying, on the contrary, if you view my earlier post I am in full support of paying for use of The River proper. My point (for the context when submitted) is that the EA might struggle to deny a marina-full of people the right to navigate the Queens Highway by putting in some form of obstruction. After all, the EA themselves allow for payment at the first lock at which a boat arrives.
And the point of having the fish-weirs removed was to allow unimpeded navigation, I believe.
Quite possibly, I bow to your greater knowledge.
But I was not suggesting not paying, on the contrary, if you view my earlier post I am in full support of paying for use of The River proper. My point (for the context when submitted) is that the EA might struggle to deny a marina-full of people the right to navigate the Queens Highway by putting in some form of obstruction. After all, the EA themselves allow for payment at the first lock at which a boat arrives.
And the point of having the fish-weirs removed was to allow unimpeded navigation, I believe.
534l4rk
Well-Known Member
Re: Enforcement in marinas
I wonder how much the High Court appeal reported in the Thames News will cost ?
I wonder how much the High Court appeal reported in the Thames News will cost ?
Big John
Well-Known Member
boatone
Well-Known Member
savageseadog
Well-Known Member
Re: Enforcement in marinas
It's pretty rare that the side with less resources wins in Court, the higher the Court the less likely the smaller people will win too, the trend in recent times is that the judgement goes with the money. There's been some very strange rulings coming out of the Supreme Court recently.
It's pretty rare that the side with less resources wins in Court, the higher the Court the less likely the smaller people will win too, the trend in recent times is that the judgement goes with the money. There's been some very strange rulings coming out of the Supreme Court recently.
Actionmat
Well-Known Member
Re: Enforcement in marinas
not yet love.......
not yet love.......
Big John
Well-Known Member
TT_WO
Well-Known Member
Re: Enforcement in marinas
You are probably right but these defendants did win in the Magistrates court with a judge presiding and were awarded costs. Their costs were limited to mainly Barrister's fees and these were only claimable at the legal aid rate of about £41 per hour and then not until the appeal, if granted, is heard. The EA's costs are of course claimable at the full cost. Not very equitable and a sad reflection on the legal system in the year of the anniversary of Magna Carta.
You are probably right but these defendants did win in the Magistrates court with a judge presiding and were awarded costs. Their costs were limited to mainly Barrister's fees and these were only claimable at the legal aid rate of about £41 per hour and then not until the appeal, if granted, is heard. The EA's costs are of course claimable at the full cost. Not very equitable and a sad reflection on the legal system in the year of the anniversary of Magna Carta.
Last edited:
savageseadog
Well-Known Member
Re: Enforcement in marinas
An ex Solicitor friend of mine told me today that the Supreme Court has swung to the right politically and is coming out with law very unlike the previous generation who tended to look at earlier legal precedents and Common Law. A Thatcherite generation of Law Lords was his opinion. The judgments generally side with government and big business and given the prevailing climate at the top, judges are tending to conform in the lower Courts. As costs these days are astronomic and the award of costs is virtually a lottery it's potentially very expensive.
An ex Solicitor friend of mine told me today that the Supreme Court has swung to the right politically and is coming out with law very unlike the previous generation who tended to look at earlier legal precedents and Common Law. A Thatcherite generation of Law Lords was his opinion. The judgments generally side with government and big business and given the prevailing climate at the top, judges are tending to conform in the lower Courts. As costs these days are astronomic and the award of costs is virtually a lottery it's potentially very expensive.
CJL
Well-Known Member
Re: Enforcement in marinas
But the EA will be going to the Court of Appeal not the Supreme Court.
But the EA will be going to the Court of Appeal not the Supreme Court.
CJL
Well-Known Member
Re: Enforcement in marinas
Public bodies tend not to claims costs against individuals for such cases so the cost will come out of the pot of money set aside for waterways.
Public bodies tend not to claims costs against individuals for such cases so the cost will come out of the pot of money set aside for waterways.
TT_WO
Well-Known Member
Re: Enforcement in marinas
The EA informed the defendants, a few days before the trial, that their costs were in excess of £45,000 not including their legal fees and trial costs, and that they intended to claim this back from the defendants when they won. The only way the defendants could recover their full costs would be to start a legal action against the EA for cost recovery.
Costs awarded to defendants in such cases are paid by another Government body so funded through taxation, so what have the EA got to lose?
As I said not very equitable.
The EA informed the defendants, a few days before the trial, that their costs were in excess of £45,000 not including their legal fees and trial costs, and that they intended to claim this back from the defendants when they won. The only way the defendants could recover their full costs would be to start a legal action against the EA for cost recovery.
Costs awarded to defendants in such cases are paid by another Government body so funded through taxation, so what have the EA got to lose?
As I said not very equitable.
Last edited:
savageseadog
Well-Known Member
Re: Enforcement in marinas
Most unlikely, I think you need to take the rose tinted glasses off
Most unlikely, I think you need to take the rose tinted glasses off
SSN 13 unlucky for some
New Member
Re: Enforcement in marinas
Hello TT WO, been off grid, sorry for not aiding you in defending the case, not that you need it of course. Did I tell you how much the lovely gates at the T&K hard standing cost by the way? The EA forked out £250,000. Very secure though, you only have to walk around the back to waltz through. That's a good solid use of licence fees if ever there was one.
Hello TT WO, been off grid, sorry for not aiding you in defending the case, not that you need it of course. Did I tell you how much the lovely gates at the T&K hard standing cost by the way? The EA forked out £250,000. Very secure though, you only have to walk around the back to waltz through. That's a good solid use of licence fees if ever there was one.
SSN 13 unlucky for some
New Member
Re: Enforcement in marinas
Just to let you know in water world that the Barristers opinion which was not used in court BTW cost nearly £6000. When the case is done you have to be looking at £100K plus. Then the fun starts when people start to demand rebates on the unlawful tariff levied on them by the EA. The EA was warned that this would be the case way back in 2010 at a meeting with the then area director. (I can give you more details but I'm not sure on the legal position here on naming names) So why has the EA gone after a few boaters? Would it be to get access to funds from marina and land owners? Industry wide implications here people. We will all end up paying some where but in order to get 23 sets of fees on a case they knew was a little shady they may well break their own organisation. Question for all is who will carry the can at the EA? Does anyone think that the EA prosecutor, CEO or any of the legal team will fall on their swords? I guess the CEO will get a knighthood and moved to the next cushy number in government. Lets face it if these people were worth their salt they would be working in the private sector. All very sad.
Move to France people, it's fantastic over here and problems seem less daunting with a glass of local red and a chunk of cheese!!!
Just to let you know in water world that the Barristers opinion which was not used in court BTW cost nearly £6000. When the case is done you have to be looking at £100K plus. Then the fun starts when people start to demand rebates on the unlawful tariff levied on them by the EA. The EA was warned that this would be the case way back in 2010 at a meeting with the then area director. (I can give you more details but I'm not sure on the legal position here on naming names) So why has the EA gone after a few boaters? Would it be to get access to funds from marina and land owners? Industry wide implications here people. We will all end up paying some where but in order to get 23 sets of fees on a case they knew was a little shady they may well break their own organisation. Question for all is who will carry the can at the EA? Does anyone think that the EA prosecutor, CEO or any of the legal team will fall on their swords? I guess the CEO will get a knighthood and moved to the next cushy number in government. Lets face it if these people were worth their salt they would be working in the private sector. All very sad.
Move to France people, it's fantastic over here and problems seem less daunting with a glass of local red and a chunk of cheese!!!
apollo
...
Re: Enforcement in marinas
Oh thats certainly the plan, almost there....
Oh thats certainly the plan, almost there....
Phill
Well-Known Member
Re: Enforcement in marinas
I guess I'm not alone in my thoughts, but I'm not very happy at the thought of the EA spending their already dwindling revenues on chasing a few people who think it's not very fair to pay like the rest of us. As far as I'm concerned, if you're in a marina on hard standing, you pay the marina the fees for that, if you're floating in the marina, you pay marina fees and the EA registration fee. If you live aboard in a marina, don't venture out on the river, but your boat floats and you don't want to pay for a Licence, perhaps you should pay council tax, again like the majority of us do. Like others have said, pay up or get out.
Like I said, it's only my view, but it's the view of a sane and fair human being:encouragement:
I guess I'm not alone in my thoughts, but I'm not very happy at the thought of the EA spending their already dwindling revenues on chasing a few people who think it's not very fair to pay like the rest of us. As far as I'm concerned, if you're in a marina on hard standing, you pay the marina the fees for that, if you're floating in the marina, you pay marina fees and the EA registration fee. If you live aboard in a marina, don't venture out on the river, but your boat floats and you don't want to pay for a Licence, perhaps you should pay council tax, again like the majority of us do. Like others have said, pay up or get out.
Like I said, it's only my view, but it's the view of a sane and fair human being:encouragement:
JumbleDuck
Well-Known Member
Re: Enforcement in marinas
It's not your concerns that count, thought, it's what the law says.
It's not your concerns that count, thought, it's what the law says.