lock keepers cottages
- Thread starter bumperdump
- Start date
TrueBlue
Well-Known Member
This is old ! - The giveaway is the interview with Eileen McKeever who left 3 years (or more ago)......
The equivalent position has been held by Angela Quale for some time. The battle was won - well for the time being anyway, but current rumours give me (at least) some concern.
Ramage
Well-Known Member
Yep, uploaded to youtube in May 2008......
cereal tiller
Well-Known Member
more nonsense with lock keepers houses!
i have been told,from a source i consider to be reliable,that lock houses are to be rented out!
as lock keepers retire,their houses will not be occupied by another resident member of e.a. staff,the will be leased to gain "income" for the e.a.
the "gateway"locks i.e. teddington,blakes,shepperton,and kings,are probably the only ones to have a resident.
some current incumbent lockies ,will be relocated if they wish to remain their resident status.
the houses of course,are not actually being "sold".
loks like another s.o.s. campaign is due?
i have been told,from a source i consider to be reliable,that lock houses are to be rented out!
as lock keepers retire,their houses will not be occupied by another resident member of e.a. staff,the will be leased to gain "income" for the e.a.
the "gateway"locks i.e. teddington,blakes,shepperton,and kings,are probably the only ones to have a resident.
some current incumbent lockies ,will be relocated if they wish to remain their resident status.
the houses of course,are not actually being "sold".
loks like another s.o.s. campaign is due?
cereal tiller
Well-Known Member
so,this information is not important enough to merit a response?
boatone
Well-Known Member
Last edited:
boatone
Well-Known Member
Does anyone have any photographs of lock cottages with 'To Let' notices outside? I understand there may be one at Chertsey?
If anyone has, or can take a pic when they see one I would be grateful if you would send them to me.
The poll re this issue on the TMBA website is open to anyone, not just members. Over 80% of those voting want to retain resident lock keepers. Please do vote if you haven't already done so.
You can vote HERE
If anyone has, or can take a pic when they see one I would be grateful if you would send them to me.
The poll re this issue on the TMBA website is open to anyone, not just members. Over 80% of those voting want to retain resident lock keepers. Please do vote if you haven't already done so.
You can vote HERE
oldgit
Well-Known Member
"so,this information is not important enough to merit a response?"
A response.......The renting out of a lock cottage could bring in a considerable amount of income.Suspect around £500-£1000 pounds a week as holiday let.
A welcome addition after the 60% cuts to river funding I would have thought.The lockeeper will still be be present during peak periods and the quiet ones and not far away during the night.Part of the T & Cs of renting the let would be to not get too grumpy when somebody bangs on the door a 1am asking for help.
Am well aware of the "what if there is an emergency" arguement,but I do not feel too unsafe by not having a fire/police/ambulance/gas/electricity man right next door.
At the send of a phone line seems to work just fine for every other emergency senario ?
A response.......The renting out of a lock cottage could bring in a considerable amount of income.Suspect around £500-£1000 pounds a week as holiday let.
A welcome addition after the 60% cuts to river funding I would have thought.The lockeeper will still be be present during peak periods and the quiet ones and not far away during the night.Part of the T & Cs of renting the let would be to not get too grumpy when somebody bangs on the door a 1am asking for help.
Am well aware of the "what if there is an emergency" arguement,but I do not feel too unsafe by not having a fire/police/ambulance/gas/electricity man right next door.
At the send of a phone line seems to work just fine for every other emergency senario ?
cereal tiller
Well-Known Member
to let, former lock keepers reidences
old windsor lock(main house)has already been let,so has chertsey.
this dreadful situation is happening NOW!
if a strong reaction from river user groups is not speedily implemented,it will become a lost cause,and it will certainly be a one-way transition.
old windsor lock(main house)has already been let,so has chertsey.
this dreadful situation is happening NOW!
if a strong reaction from river user groups is not speedily implemented,it will become a lost cause,and it will certainly be a one-way transition.
boatone
Well-Known Member
My information is that the SECOND cottage at Old Windsor has been let but the main lock cottage is still occupied by the resident lock keeper.
Still trying to find out about Chertsey but thought it twas still boarded up?
Last edited:
Ramage
Well-Known Member
At the end of the phone did not work when Ian's boat Perchance caught fire.... the Fire Brigade could not find him (they went to the wrong side of the river), and the EA incident line wanted to know which river Old Windsor Lock was on!!!
watson1959
Well-Known Member
Sonning Lock
The second cottage at Sonning has had people (sporadically) working to renovate it for the past couple of years.
It looks very much like it has been sold off; the people doing the work look more like a couple who are taking their time to do it up.....definitely not a concerted building project done by contractors.
It would be a damned shame of the lock-keeper and his coffee shop in the garden disappear.......they make bloody good coffee & walnut cake.
The second cottage at Sonning has had people (sporadically) working to renovate it for the past couple of years.
It looks very much like it has been sold off; the people doing the work look more like a couple who are taking their time to do it up.....definitely not a concerted building project done by contractors.
It would be a damned shame of the lock-keeper and his coffee shop in the garden disappear.......they make bloody good coffee & walnut cake.
shades
Well-Known Member
Sonning Lock
The second house (and the land around it) changed hands several years ago and has been in private ownership ever since.
The second house (and the land around it) changed hands several years ago and has been in private ownership ever since.
oldgit
Well-Known Member
Suspect that even if everyone concerned had known the exact location of the boat ,the end result would have been little different as fires in marinas frequently leave little above the waterline.
Getting any appliance anywhere near the fire must be the major problem.
boatone
Well-Known Member
Don't know how many houses there are at Teddington but heard earlier today that one is let and another has a 'To Let' sign up.
Worth remembering that after the furore a couple of years back it was agreed that the principal lock cottage at each lock would not be sold but that secondaries at/near the lock could be sold if they were not required for operational purposes, and that also applied to other properties which were not lockside.
The issue is not just about the lock cottages - it's also about them being actually occupied by resident lock keepers.
One could argue that, as long as we get the service promised by the customer charter, then we should be satisfied with that. However, this gradual erosion of the traditional is a bit like gradually getting rid of the Beefeaters at the Tower.
There's something comforting and secure about seeing a lockie going about his business that in many ways is the face of the river.
Worth remembering that after the furore a couple of years back it was agreed that the principal lock cottage at each lock would not be sold but that secondaries at/near the lock could be sold if they were not required for operational purposes, and that also applied to other properties which were not lockside.
The issue is not just about the lock cottages - it's also about them being actually occupied by resident lock keepers.
One could argue that, as long as we get the service promised by the customer charter, then we should be satisfied with that. However, this gradual erosion of the traditional is a bit like gradually getting rid of the Beefeaters at the Tower.
There's something comforting and secure about seeing a lockie going about his business that in many ways is the face of the river.
DWT
Well-Known Member
Lock cottages
I do think there is some scaremongering going on here based upon what appears to be limited and misleading information.
I was not aware that the second house at Sonning was already in private ownership, but it is apparent that it serves no operational purpose so I see nothing wrong with that at all. It sounds like this is the same situation at Old Windsor. Provided it does not affect the lockkeepers on site then it just seems to me that the EA is simply seeking to manage its resources in an appropriate manner.
If anyone has information that the sale or letting of houses is going beyond this then of course we should all be concerned, but otherwise this seems to be a non issue.
I do think there is some scaremongering going on here based upon what appears to be limited and misleading information.
I was not aware that the second house at Sonning was already in private ownership, but it is apparent that it serves no operational purpose so I see nothing wrong with that at all. It sounds like this is the same situation at Old Windsor. Provided it does not affect the lockkeepers on site then it just seems to me that the EA is simply seeking to manage its resources in an appropriate manner.
If anyone has information that the sale or letting of houses is going beyond this then of course we should all be concerned, but otherwise this seems to be a non issue.
boatone
Well-Known Member
I have no issue with the sale or letting of non operational properties. However, there appears to be a definite intent to not replace resident lockies at some locks and to then let the principal lock house. This, as you say, is something that I think we should be concerned about.
TrueBlue
Well-Known Member
It's more insidious -
Smacks to me of a Baldrik fiendish plan, bear with me -
AFAIK the spare house at Old Windsor was occupied by a relief and thus no longer the principal residence. I suspect that the spare houses at Teddington (was it two or three) were similarly "non strategic", so when whatever tenancy agreements there were fell in, then EA could declare them as no longer operational.
I am also mindful of the fact that several houses - in the the original EA plan were described as non operational because the houses were not lockside - there being at footpath / road between the house of the lock. For example,
Sunbury,
Chertsey,
Bell Weir.
All this is long forgotten.
Now the lock keepers house are not subject to Council Tax (? is that because of the Thames Conservancy Acts etc?) and presumably rent free and not taxable as a benefit to the incumbent (IIRC for SchE tax). So these points make employment a bit more attractive.
However, if these dwellings are no longer available to new applicants does the loss of tax advantages make the job much less attractive?? I can see EA saying "we have xx vacancies, but no applicants, what a shame".
Result, staff reduction.
Fiendish plan?
I hear tales of 7 for 5 not working too well, inasmuch as in some situations a lockie may take as much as 3 hours to attend a weir, removing them from their own lock where they were scheduled to be on duty.
If this becomes impossible to operate practically, then I can see EA hastening the "flying pickets" option.
Thus from a point of it not being boaters place to comment on how EA decides to organise its staff, it now becomes a reduction of the Service that "we" expect and is an "Issue" and we should be vigilant.
Of course, I could be totally wrong, reading too much into unconnected events?
Hmmm.
Smacks to me of a Baldrik fiendish plan, bear with me -
AFAIK the spare house at Old Windsor was occupied by a relief and thus no longer the principal residence. I suspect that the spare houses at Teddington (was it two or three) were similarly "non strategic", so when whatever tenancy agreements there were fell in, then EA could declare them as no longer operational.
I am also mindful of the fact that several houses - in the the original EA plan were described as non operational because the houses were not lockside - there being at footpath / road between the house of the lock. For example,
Sunbury,
Chertsey,
Bell Weir.
All this is long forgotten.
Now the lock keepers house are not subject to Council Tax (? is that because of the Thames Conservancy Acts etc?) and presumably rent free and not taxable as a benefit to the incumbent (IIRC for SchE tax). So these points make employment a bit more attractive.
However, if these dwellings are no longer available to new applicants does the loss of tax advantages make the job much less attractive?? I can see EA saying "we have xx vacancies, but no applicants, what a shame".
Result, staff reduction.
Fiendish plan?
I hear tales of 7 for 5 not working too well, inasmuch as in some situations a lockie may take as much as 3 hours to attend a weir, removing them from their own lock where they were scheduled to be on duty.
If this becomes impossible to operate practically, then I can see EA hastening the "flying pickets" option.
Thus from a point of it not being boaters place to comment on how EA decides to organise its staff, it now becomes a reduction of the Service that "we" expect and is an "Issue" and we should be vigilant.
Of course, I could be totally wrong, reading too much into unconnected events?
Hmmm.
