Sub-letting a marina berth for a few months

[Sandy]

I don't think this practice of marinas would withstand legal scrutiny. Marinas are trying hard to represent the nature of the agreement as a provision of service, so that they then can argue that there is no need to provide the service when the boat is not there. This way they rent the berths short-term to others and make money which actually you should be making as you have paid to occupy a berth for the whole year.
I think the way to go is to leave behind a spare dingy when leaving the berth, ideally with a Wifi webcam in a water-protected casing, attached to a battery, so to make sure the marina does not and cannot rent it to others in your absence. If enough people would do this, marinas would eventually come up with revenue-sharing offers.

You have signed a contract, if there is a clause in that contract allowing them to use your berth as a visitor berth while you are not using it then what is the problem? Some even give you, as the berth holder a percentage of the income.

If every contracted berth holder was to insist that while they were away that their berth was not be used for visitors then that would really mess up the summer trade and the ability for boats to visit other places.

Some multi marina companies have all sorts of schemes that allow you, their customer, to have 'free nights' in their other marinas. OK, we all know there are not free, but you are using your contract in one of their marinas and will be spending your cash in their facilities.

The impact of not allowing others to use your berth would be either prices went up or the marina needed to be extended for visitor berths to be added; witch will mean in increase in prices to pay for the additional infrastructure.

 

[Sticky Fingers]

Few marinas in the UK have a lot of (or any) dedicated visitor berths. If berthholder’s annual berths were kept empty and unused whilst the berthholder was away, then where would that berthholder go for his visitor berth? The system relies on reuse whilst berthholders are away. Some marinas eg Lymington have a revenue share model but that’s relatively uncommon.

 

[westernman]

In the UK I expect , as said above, we do not in most cases rent a particular berth. In theory we can be put in any berth in the marina. In my case that does not happen and we keep the same berth all of the time.
The boat owner has no rights to sub let.
I heard of one marina, where a friend keeps his boat, that gives the bertholder some cashback if they allow their usual berth to be let to a short term visitor , which seems very fair.

That was my case in France. 20% cash back.
No subletting possible.

 

[mediterrano]

You have signed a contract, if there is a clause in that contract allowing them to use your berth as a visitor berth while you are not using it then what is the problem? Some even give you, as the berth holder a percentage of the income.

If every contracted berth holder was to insist that while they were away that their berth was not be used for visitors then that would really mess up the summer trade and the ability for boats to visit other places.

Some multi marina companies have all sorts of schemes that allow you, their customer, to have 'free nights' in their other marinas. OK, we all know there are not free, but you are using your contract in one of their marinas and will be spending your cash in their facilities.

The impact of not allowing others to use your berth would be either prices went up or the marina needed to be extended for visitor berths to be added; witch will mean in increase in prices to pay for the additional infrastructure.

"You have signed a contract, if there is a clause in that contract allowing them to use your berth as a visitor berth while you are not using"
exactly thatswhy my suggestion to leave behind a dingy to keep the berth occupied UNLESS the marina agrees to either let you to sublet it or to at least to give you the lion's share of the revenue generated by renting out to others the space which they have already rented to you for the whole year.

Sometimes, to improve things, you first have to make things worse.

FYI Being a SW-developer, I had the idea of creating a website for boat-owners to sublet their berths. That was until I found out that marinas do not let you sublet. This way they are making the money, boat-owners should be making. Also, while cruising, renting transitory berths from their tenants would likely be cheaper than renting from the marina. So boat-owners are getting screwed twice.

 

[doug748]

I knew that they had a 25% price increase and were only offering annual contracts after I left, but without inclusive parking it is not an easy place to get crew and kit to, that must be putting a lot of people off staying long term.

To my mind King Point is in one of the prime location in Plymouth, well sheltered, quick access to the open sea and away from the hurly-burly of The Barbican. While it is one of the 'finishing yards for Princess Yachts', I always found their workforce polite and their skippers would always give you priority.

I believe they include parking in their annual contracts but if you come as a visitor (for a day, week or month) car parking is not offered.
They do have some visitor pontoon space early and late season but, as you say, it's useless for many people without easy car access.

.

 

[Tranona]

"You have signed a contract, if there is a clause in that contract allowing them to use your berth as a visitor berth while you are not using"
exactly thatswhy my suggestion to leave behind a dingy to keep the berth occupied UNLESS the marina agrees to either let you sublet it or to at least give you the lion's share of the revenue generated by renting out to others the space which they have already rented to you for the whole year.

Sometimes, to improve things, you first have to make things worse.

The marina would be entitled to remove your dinghy. Not sure why you think such contracts would not stand up to "legal scrutiny". The contract is perfectly legal and if you agree to it then you are legally bound to observe the term.

Others have explained why this arrangement is commonly used. The marina owns the berths and can set whatever terms it wants. If you want exclusive use then buy a lease which gives you that as well as any income from letting it when you are not using it.

Really not sure what your beef is,

 

[Sticky Fingers]

He’s inexperienced and angry, looking for an argument.

 

[mediterrano]

The marina would be entitled to remove your dinghy. Not sure why you think such contracts would not stand up to "legal scrutiny". The contract is perfectly legal and if you agree to it then you are legally bound to observe the term.

Others have explained why this arrangement is commonly used. The marina owns the berths and can set whatever terms it wants. If you want exclusive use then buy a lease which gives you that as well as any income from letting it when you are not using it.

Really not sure what your beef is,

I don't think marinas have the right to dictate to boat-owners not to leave behind their dingys. Maybe the davits are broken or your crane doesn't work or somebody else will come and use the dingy for an hour or maybe somebody will come to repair it or to check the outboard engine etc etc. Actually, I really don't think a boat-owner owes any explanation to the marina why he leaves behind the dingy in the berth he rented for the whole year.
E.g. when you rent a parking space for your car, if your car is small enough, you can park your bike there too, as long as it does not occupy more space than allotted to you.

"The contract is perfectly legal and if you agree to it then you are legally bound to observe the term"
I do not know US law but I am very familiar with contract law in Germany, Austria and Switzerland and in these countries, it happens quite often that a contracting party disputes the legality of contract terms and the courts then check the contract and decide whether the terms agreed upon by the parties are abusive and if so, then such clauses are retrospectively declared as void.

 

[westernman]

I don't think marinas have the right to dictate to boat-owners not to leave behind their dingys. Maybe the davits are broken or your crane doesn't work or somebody else will come and use the dingy for an hour or maybe somebody will come to repair it or to check the outboard engine etc etc. Actually, I really don't think a boat-owner owes any explanation to the marina why he leaves behind the dingy in the berth he rented for the whole year.
E.g. when you rent a parking space for your car, if your car is small enough, you can park your bike there too, as long as it does not occupy more space than allotted to you.

"The contract is perfectly legal and if you agree to it then you are legally bound to observe the term"
I do not know US law but I am very familiar with contract law in Germany, Austria and Switzerland and in these countries, it happens quite often that a contracting party disputes the legality of contract terms and the courts then check the contract and decide whether the terms agreed upon by the parties are abusive and if so, then such clauses are retrospectively declared as void.

All the below assumes you have an annual rental berth contract.

The way it works in my marina contract (and I think this is similar to many others), is that if you plan to be away from your home berth for more than 2 days (or 3 days depending on contract), then you are required to notify the capitainerie.
Then they may rent out your berth and you get 20% of the proceeds as motivation.

This I think is perfectly reasonable. There is nothing abusive about it. It also frees up berths for visitors and I am sure you would be peed off if you came up to an empty marina only to be told that there were no berths free.

The question is whether you can or should be able to swap berths with a mate in another marina.

I think the general answer is no.
However, you might find that the marinas might let you do that if you ask them nicely although there is no obligation for them to do so.

 

[Sandy]

"You have signed a contract, if there is a clause in that contract allowing them to use your berth as a visitor berth while you are not using"
exactly thatswhy my suggestion to leave behind a dingy to keep the berth occupied UNLESS the marina agrees to either let you to sublet it or to at least to give you the lion's share of the revenue generated by renting out to others the space which they have already rented to you for the whole year.

Sometimes, to improve things, you first have to make things worse.

FYI Being a SW-developer, I had the idea of creating a website for boat-owners to sublet their berths. That was until I found out that marinas do not let you sublet. This way they are making the money, boat-owners should be making. Also, while cruising, renting transitory berths from their tenants would likely be cheaper than renting from the marina. So boat-owners are getting screwed twice.

Good luck with that...

As you will know a contract is binding in law. Breach of contract, and I am no lawyer, will see the contract either terminated or not renewed.

I don't consider boat owners are being screwed, they have taken a decision based on their needs or wants and have chosen to park their boat in a marina for a set amount of cash. Some people never move their boats as it is their cottage by the sea, others prefer the flexibility to move between marinas, I suspect the market you are aiming at, while a much smaller sub-section are more like sea gypsies.

I'd like to see the logic and business case for such a software application. Any marina company will have invested a significant amount of money into infrastructure and ongoing costs, and will be looking for payback at some point in the future. They are in business to make a return on their investment.

Out of interest, do you own a boat? If so is it berthed in a marina and what does your contract say in regard of subletting?

 

[Sandy]

However, you might find that the marinas might let you do that if you ask them nicely although there is no obligation for them to do so.

Or provide a service to all the marina's as a free berth booking service, if one does not already exist - I tend to telephone ahead to book a berth.

 

[westernman]

Or provide a service to all the marina's as a free berth booking service, if one does not already exist - I tend to telephone ahead to book a berth.

Some one already tried that.

portbooker.com

It never really worked. And it seems that it is offline at the moment. May be permanently.

Best is simply to turn up. Second best, phone ahead.

 

[Tranona]

I don't think marinas have the right to dictate to boat-owners not to leave behind their dingys. Maybe the davits are broken or your crane doesn't work or somebody else will come and use the dingy for an hour or maybe somebody will come to repair it or to check the outboard engine etc etc. Actually, I really don't think a boat-owner owes any explanation to the marina why he leaves behind the dingy in the berth he rented for the whole year.
E.g. when you rent a parking space for your car, if your car is small enough, you can park your bike there too, as long as it does not occupy more space than allotted to you.

"The contract is perfectly legal and if you agree to it then you are legally bound to observe the term"
I do not know US law but I am very familiar with contract law in Germany, Austria and Switzerland and in these countries, it happens quite often that a contracting party disputes the legality of contract terms and the courts then check the contract and decide whether the terms agreed upon by the parties are abusive and if so, then such clauses are retrospectively declared as void.

In that case, if you want to keep the dinghy there for somebody to service the engine then just be reasonable and make arrangements with the marina office. The marina has every right to set out terms on which it rents out its space - after all it owns the space. If you don't like the terms go elsewhere or enter into a contract like a lease that does give you exclusive rights.

I expect US law is similar to here in the UK, and UK law on these matters is little different from European law. You can of course challenge the terms of the contract, but challenging this term would not be successful as it would not meet the threshold for "unfair" (or abusive) contract. It is a term that is well established and used widely for the reasons given.

There is a very clear distinction between a rental contract which relates to the use of the space and a lease which gives the leaseholder additional rights which may include exclusive use and the right to sub let.

 

[mediterrano]

I still am convinced that a boat-owner who has a rental contract, entitling him to occupy a berth for 365 days/year, does not owe the marina any explanations or has to make with them any prior arrangements to leave behind his dingy while cruising.
And I am further convinced that if enough people did that, more if not all marinas would eventually come up with revenue-sharing schemes to incentivize the boat-owners to vacate their berths while cruising.
Just because so far, most people accept the status quo, does not make it fair. If it was fair, there wouldn't be those other marinas which do offer a percentage of the revenues generated. They do so exactly because they know that otherwise the legality of this practice would be questionable.

 

[Sticky Fingers]

So assuming you were successful in getting this to be changed, what’s your solution to the supply of visitor berthing?

 

[madabouttheboat]

I actually own my marina berth. I bought the lease for x number of years. I am registered with land registry as owning that bit of pontoon/water. The marina are not allowed to put visitors in there when I’m away. Despite this, even I am not allowed to sub let it. It’s in the lease.

 

[Sticky Fingers]

I actually own my marina berth. I bought the lease for x number of years. I am registered with land registry as owning that bit of pontoon/water. The marina are not allowed to put visitors in there when I’m away. Despite this, even I am not allowed to sub let it. It’s in the lease.

If you lease it then you don’t own it. You own a right to use it as lessee, in return for payment to the lessor, who can set any terms they like. Those terms in your case include no sub-letting, perfectly reasonable if that’s what you expected when you signed up.

 

[AntarcticPilot]

.
I think the way to go is to leave behind a spare dingy when leaving the berth, ideally with a Wifi webcam in a water-protected casing, attached to a battery, so to make sure the marina does not and cannot rent it to others in your absence. If enough people would do this, marinas would eventually come up with revenue-sharing offers.

In all the marinas I've been in, the berthing agreement was tied to a specific, named boat. Dinghies and tenders were explicitly disallowed from obstructing the berth; if you had a tender that didn't fit on deck or on davits, you had to keep it in a dinghy park; one place in the dinghy park is a common part of berthing agreements.

 

[westernman]

I still am convinced that a boat-owner who has a rental contract, entitling him to occupy a berth for 365 days/year, does not owe the marina any explanations or has to make with them any prior arrangements to leave behind his dingy while cruising.
And I am further convinced that if enough people did that, more if not all marinas would eventually come up with revenue-sharing schemes to incentivize the boat-owners to vacate their berths while cruising.
Just because so far, most people accept the status quo, does not make it fair. If it was fair, there wouldn't be those other marinas which do offer a percentage of the revenues generated. They do so exactly because they know that otherwise the legality of this practice would be questionable.

Ask a lawyer.
I am pretty sure that the practice is 100% legal.

 

[Mister E]

Is it not the case that you pay a marina for a berth but not a specific one.
One that your boat safely fits into but you can be asked to move as and when needed for operational reasons.