Hampton Court Place Moorings BEWARE

[Old Crusty]

Note that below Staines Bridge the river bed is owned by the Crown, managed by the EA. DE would struggle to enforce a penalty charge on any boat holding station over the bed at HRP as they have no authority.

Then there is the ancient public right of navigation across all parts of the river as enshrined in Magna Carta never mind the TCA.

Seems to me that DE have failed to do the DD on this one.

 

[Old Crusty]

So if you slow down to "stationary" without touching the bank, in order that you can read the notice and decide whether to moor, you could get hit with the £100


I get the feeling if I were boating on the Thames right now, I would have the boat name covered up. Does it say anywhere in your river licence that you must display the boat name?

Here's the detail:

https://www.gov.uk/government/publi...equirements-october-2016#display-of-boat-name

 

[ProDave]

I do hope one of the boating organisations is going to take a case of this charge to court to try and get a ruling on the legailiy of a charge for not registering even when no fee was due, or charging a fee just for you to stop and read the notice.

 

[normskib]

I spoke to what I would describe as three responsible boaters on Sunday morning at the Hampton Court moorings and not one of them had a clue that you had to register on arrival assuming naturally I think as well that if you are not staying for an extended period there would be no point in announcing your arrival I rather suspect that DE Get most of their revenue from there totally in adequate signage .

 

[Outinthedinghy]

A boat version of this might be handy

 

[rotrax]

I remember seein a narrow boat on the Grand Union around Uxbridge which was painted in different colours and names each side.

You can only see the towpath side. Unless you can walk on water, and Jesus never worked for the BWB.

The lady living aboard used to get away with staying on the short term moorings just by winding it on the lines every few days.

Clever....................................

 

[djm]

The Environment Agency has finally responded to three questions I asked in relation to its disclosure of River Thames boat registration information to the private company District Enforcement Ltd.


I have sought advice in order to respond to your questions, as follows:


1. In the last 12-months, has the Environment Agency ever given Boat Registration Data to District Enforcement Ltd or any other private company or individual other than directly in respect of the management of Agency-owned moorings?

2. Is it Environment Agency policy to provide such data to third-parties providing mooring management services?

3. If so, please provide the instructions given to Environment Agency staff by which they can decide if any such request is made on 'reasonable grounds'

1. Yes, the Environment Agency has provided boat registration details to District Enforcement Ltd and to other bodies with a legitimate need for the details. Since October 2018 the Thames Waterway team has received 19 email requests from District Enforcement Ltd relating to 106 boats. We also receive requests made by the Police investigating crime, by HMRC or DWP investigating fraud or tax evasion, and by Local Councils seeking an address for someone evading Council Tax. All of these purposes are exempt from the usual non-disclosure rules by relevant provisions in the Data Protection Act 2018.

2. Yes, it is Environment Agency policy to disclose personal data in accordance with the law.

3. The guidance to staff processing requests for such information is attached.


The reason we believe this to be a lawful use of personal data is that the legislation governing registration of boats is the Environment Agency (Inland Waterways) Order 2010, which provides at paragraph 10 that where the Environment Agency considers that another body “reasonably requires” the data, it can be passed on.

The enforcement bodies operate under contract law, where by stopping and staying on a mooring, a moorer accepts the terms of the contract described on the signage.



Under the GDPR 2018 we must set out how we process personal data, and give to those applying to register boats a notice listing the purposes of that processing. The Privacy Notice included on our Boat Registration forms will be updated to include a statement about provision of personal data where this is allowed by law.



I hope that this is useful and provides assurance that personal data is handled appropriately and lawfully in respect of registered boat owners who moor their vessels on the River Thames.

My own view, for what it's worth, is that this is actually an admission that, up to now at least, data has been supplied unlawfully because of the GDPR legislation that requires data controllers to provide a statement about sharing personal data. Up to now, that has clearly not been the case. In their own typical weasely words:

" Under the GDPR 2018 we must set out how we process personal data, and give to those applying to register boats a notice listing the purposes of that processing. The Privacy Notice included on our Boat Registration forms will be updated to include a statement about provision of personal data where this is allowed by law."

Anyone who has been charged a penalty on the Thames by this outfit as a result of disclosure of their personal details would be well-advised to take the matter up with the Information Commissioner.

 

[No Regrets]

I have now received an apology and assurance that the EA will change their registration form.

I suggest anybody affected report this to the ICO.

The EA have clearly failed at every step.

 

[djm]

And the guidance given to EA staff referenced in answer to Q3 is here:


CONSIDERATION OF REQUESTS FOR NLS DATA UNDER IWO ARTICLE 10 (“ PROVISION OF INFORMATION” )

Extract from the Environment Agency (Inland Waterways) Order 2010
Article 10. Provision of information
(1) This article applies to information which is held by or on behalf of the Agency for the purposes of this Order
(including information obtained by or on behalf of the Agency before the coming into force of this article).
(2) Information may be supplied to a responsible authority for the purposes of facilitating the exercise of the
Agency’s functions under this Order or any functions of that authority.
(3) Information may be supplied to any person who can show to the satisfaction of the Agency or the
Secretary of State reasonable cause for wanting the particulars to be made available to that person.
(4) Information obtained by virtue of this article must not be further disclosed except to a responsible authority for the purposes mentioned in paragraphs (2) and (3).
(5) In this article, “responsible authority” means any of the following—
(a) the chief officer of police for any police area in which the waterways are situated; (b) the fire authority for any area in which the waterways are situated;
(c) the enforcing authority within the meaning given by section 18 of the Health and Safety at Work etc Act 1974(9) for any area in which the waterways are situated;
(d) the local planning authority within the meaning given by the Town and Country Planning Act
1990(10) for any area in which the waterways are situated;
(e) the local authority by which statutory functions are exercisable in any area in which the waterways are situated in relation to minimising or preventing the risk of pollution of the environment or of harm
to human health;
(f) in relation to a vessel—
(i) navigation authority within the meaning of section 221(1) of the Water Resources Act
1991(11);
(ii) the British Waterways Board; or
(iii) the Secretary of State.
(6) In this article, “statutory function” means a function conferred by or under any enactment.

SIMPLIFIED PROCESS (NB. Every enquiry is taken case-by-case on its merits)
1) Does the request ONLY relate to data held in the Navigation Licensing System (“NLS”)? This system holds data necessary to properly manage the registration and licensing of boats on the non-tidal River Thames. All vessels are required to be registered under the Environment Agency (Inland Waterways) Order 2010).
2) Is the data available from another source, possibly in the public domain? For example, simple registration
data is published on gov.uk & is adapted by third-party websites to provide a quick check of whether a boat is registered & details of the vessel – but not the registered owner).
3) Is there a more appropriate form of request? Consider DPA in the case of a public or law enforcement body
(DP Team have sanctioned use of IWO Art 10 as a valid alternative to a DPA request).
4) Is there no other route available? Such as a private individual – in which case refer to BoatReg. If the data is
required because of an insured ‘ incident’ we will only provide data to the insurance company.
5) Why is the data being requested? Normally this is to identify a boat’s registered owner, or other information
about the vessel.
6) Is the data requested limited to what is needed to achieve that purpose? Such as to confirm an owner’s
name only as the registered owner, or a registered address for the issue of mooring charges, legal papers etc.
7) Is it part of a legal process, or for a legal purpose? Normally as evidence in a criminal investigation or
prosecution (by police or other agency), part of another legal process (such as delegated mooring management, which may result in civil action) or something else (like insurance fraud, or returning a boat to its owner).
8) If not a public service or prosecuting agency, are we satisfied as to the enquirer’s legal status? Such as a
mooring management company being directly employed as an agent by the EA, a council or other landowner &
legally charged with collecting mooring charges & seeking to recover debts from defaulters. Recognised entity?
9) Does the enquirer fall within one of the categories outlined in Article 10, or otherwise have “reasonable cause for wanting the particulars to be made available”?
10) Have we have had any previous dealings with the enquirer regarding Registered Owners? We may have established the bona fides and working practices of a contracted commercial company.
11) Is the enquirer aware that the data is supplied under the Order?
12) Does the enquirer understand & agree to abide by Art 17 (4) stating that any data received should not be further disclosed? Except in the cases detailed in the Article.
13) In what form/format do they require the information? If their application for data is accepted. Is it secure?
14) Should the request be referred to higher management, or would it be more appropriate to refuse or refer to the Boat Registration Team (NCCC)?

 

[normskib]

After sending in a very detailed Appeal to District Enforcement outlining the very strong mitigating circumstances as to why I was more for a very short period of time I have now received their response in The form of
a bog standard reply letter stating that the moring charge should stand because they have studied the photographic evidence and that from the said photographic evidence it was clear that there were mitigating circumstances But that signage is clear and the charge must stand ! One slight problem here not only have they included in their photographic evidence that they have reputedly examined pictures of a boat that is clearly not mine and what’s more From there photographic evidence


the photographs show quite clearly that my boat is not even on the moorings where they say the contravention took place ! As I noted in an earlier posting I did in touch with DE and asked who judged the appeals and their answer we do!,

So my question is why even bother to send in a detailed appeal when the people issuing the fines are the judge and jury and clearly do not bother to read them answers on a postcard .














I

 

[No Regrets]

Don't roll over and pay. Let them go to court, and then take a photo of your own boat, and watch the case get thrown out of court on the basis of the evidence you both have :nonchalance:

They won't take this to court, this is a shambolic cowboy outfit more used to screwing Motorists. They are out of their depth here with River regulations allowing you to stop for mitigating circumstances.

 

[Old Crusty]

Here's some legal guidance from Watchdog:

https://m.youtube.com/watch?v=IU_OGmQHqQo

 

[Captain Coochie]

That advice looks like its from 2011 . The law has changed and if there is a sign then the owner of the vehicle has a contract with who ever put the sign up . The owner could have been on the other side of the world at the time but still has a contract . Thats how it works with car parking and i cant imagine any other sign for any other thing would be any different now the blood suckers have found a way to get the law to work for them .
Ive had this for the past year with a free car park wanting to fine me . I made sure it went to court because i was told it would cost them more money than what they could get but that £60 fine ended up costing me £225 . I think i wasted more than £225 worth of their time though .

 

[Lower Limit 1909]

That advice looks like its from 2011 . The law has changed and if there is a sign then the owner of the vehicle has a contract with who ever put the sign up . The owner could have been on the other side of the world at the time but still has a contract . Thats how it works with car parking and i cant imagine any other sign for any other thing would be any different now the blood suckers have found a way to get the law to work for them .

Correct but there is a heavy emphasis on the sign being 'unmissable' In a car park that normally means something you have to drive past on the way in or you can see (indeed can't miss) from where you park. Sounds like in this case this test fails as the OP joining the mooring someway down/upstream of the notice had no visibility of it so could not be agreeing to it's terms and indeed those terms had changed materially and recently since his previous mooring there and historic practice placing an extra responsibility on the operator to bring this to the attention of any user of the facility.

If the OP want's to crowd fund fighting this all the way on behalf of all of us I'll happily chuck a tenner in and I'd hope between the rest of us here we could underwrite any exposure to this turning into £225.

 

[Lucky Duck]

The law changed to allow keeper liability (rather than the it being the driver alone entering into the contract) provided the notices complied with certain requirements. With a boat there is no such thing.

Even now a parking company can be put to proof that they have authority from the land owner to operate and commence proceedings.

There are several forums dedicated to defending again private car park charges, it might be worthwhile posting on them.

 

[Old Crusty]

Here's the advice from Martin Lewis's Money Saving Expert website:

https://www.moneysavingexpert.com/reclaim/private-parking-tickets/

 

[Big John]

Here's the advice from Martin Lewis's Money Saving Expert website:

https://www.moneysavingexpert.com/reclaim/private-parking-tickets/

Good advice. I hope I never have to use it.

 

[Captain Coochie]

This registering to moor thing is now at Kingston ( Hampton court side ) I didnt check the kingston side but wish i had now . I just stopped there to wash the hull and checked the sign , free for 24hours but if you stop you have to register or get a £100 fine . The only way to register is via the website . Thank god for smart phones !

 

[TrueBlue]

Did you see - or more importantly WERE there any signs visible if not you have a good case should anything further happen.
Whe you state the "Kingston side" - exactly where? Some near the bridge are managed by the council.
Those which supposededly managed by "the parking mob" belong to HCP, but it's not clear where the mooring extend to...

I'm all for fair parking and so forth but it should be done on a reasonable basis - looking at their website it's an unholy mess.

I notice that at Reading the sighns have been replaced and extended, but the website sayt mooring length "60" - what? - boats, metres, feet. Either deceitful or incompetance??

 

[Captain Coochie]

No idea really , i've been mooring at the kingston side to have lunch , go shopping for years and its always been free mooring . Why would i check if the signs have been changed ? On the other side , never been there so i checked if it was ok . I noticed loads of boats turning up to have a picnic but they didnt invite me so sod them .