The EA... Fit for purpose?

I did say 'ideally...'.

My point being that when a boat is obviously about to sink, the right thing to do is stop it sinking.

Not to stand, sucking teeth and umming about legislation, or passing the buck, or saying why it can't be stopped from sinking, if that is what the Gods intend.

Where is the public good in its sinking?

Now, if the legislative, professional custom-and-practice, or bluddy-minded, framework of behaviour says 'let it sink and then deal with it', then there's something horribly wrong with that infrastructure, and it needs to change.

Will the owner be billed for the salvage attempts? ...and would his reasonable defence be: "The EA were told it was about to sink, I didn't know, and they didn't tell me, and then they did nothing about it..."?

(Obviously it wouldn't, but does this not make an interesting moral dilemma?).
 
Last edited:
*if* the ea had no contact details for the owner , or no contact telephone number supplied on the licence form ( assuming it was licenced ) , what then ?

I think you'll find in most public organisations nowadays a lack of people willing to put their neck ( and job ) on the line and say ' yes , break into it and have a go at pumping it out ' ... Different if there was life in a danger , but there isn't.

If the people who saw it about to sink were that concerned about it going down , just get on and get on with it surely. Do you not think that by asking ea to validate what they were proposing that they were covering themselves too ?
 
We're in danger of vehement agreement here. I didn't say that the EA should have saved it. There is a duty attached to putting out to be in charge of something, of course, as the EA puts out to be in charge on the river. But there is also (or in my mind, should be) a duty which arises on seeing something wrong and being able to prevent it worsening, whether you're an EA employee, worker for a river-based business, or member of the public.
 
Back to the original question...

I'm renaming my boat before recommissioning her; she's out of the water.

I phoned the EA on Monday to check that the new name was available.

The person I spoke to said she had to email the 'team' dealing with names. I asked if I could email them myself and was told no. I asked if I could phone them; again, no. I explained that I hoped to launch my boat at the end of the week and needed to order vinyl names etc, and asked how long it would take to confirm the name was available. The answer: up to ten working days, but a note would be put on the email asking for a reply same day.

I still haven't heard anything.

Now, another forumite told us (I recall) that the EA has a list of names.

Does it really take ten days for someone to look at it?

The experience is certainly helping me make up my mind about the original question... And the replication of effort truly indicates an organisation that doesn't know its call centre from is functions.
 
iCs said:
Back to the original question...

I'm renaming my boat before recommissioning her; she's out of the water.

I phoned the EA on Monday to check that the new name was available.

The person I spoke to said she had to email the 'team' dealing with names. I asked if I could email them myself and was told no. I asked if I could phone them; again, no. I explained that I hoped to launch my boat at the end of the week and needed to order vinyl names etc, and asked how long it would take to confirm the name was available. The answer: up to ten working days, but a note would be put on the email asking for a reply same day.

I still haven't heard anything.

Now, another forumite told us (I recall) that the EA has a list of names.

Does it really take ten days for someone to look at it?

The experience is certainly helping me make up my mind about the original question... And the replication of effort truly indicates an organisation that doesn't know its call centre from is functions.
Click to expand...

That has certainly changed then, used to discuss names over the phone or you just went into the desk at the EA in Reading and did it there and then. Maybe you just got unlucky with a newbie.
 
Chris_d said:
That has certainly changed then, used to discuss names over the phone or you just went into the desk at the EA in Reading and did it there and then. Maybe you just got unlucky with a newbie.
Click to expand...
Sadly not so easy now with reorganisation and staff cuts.
I have drawn EA's attention to this post/thread and asked if someone can help expedite.
 
B1, sincere thanks for your help. Yes, I had a phone call shortly after your post.

However, the point remains that this process, at least, is clunky and unfriendly to the user. No-one should have to step in to put a work-around in place, if the basic system works.

Work-arounds are symptomatic of poor organisation.

It seems that the old system worked and was friendly, and was also probably much cheaper because there weren't multiple levels of bureaucracy. But, its simplicity was probably its downfall... "What, you let CUSTOMERS actually talk directly to BUREAUCRATS..?" I can hear Sir Humphrey now (and believe me, I know of what I speak).

So, whilst my own problem is resolved, the system is still broken. An Elastoplast has been applied to the broken limb, if you will.

Out of interest, this difference drives a need for more staff, not fewer; greater costs, not lesser.

...and I've joined, and look forward to being an active member of, the TMBA.
 
I agree, just like the shopping trolley thread doesn't sit right with me.
EA should have sorted this out long ago without uncle tone getting involved.
 
Came up river today, Saturday, and a priority A lock was not manned during lunch time. 13.00 to 14.00 hrs. I was told that there were two lock keepers on duty but both had taken lunch together. Ok it was quiet and not many boats out and about and they were probably saving their strength to cope with the afternoon rush. However, it does make a mockery of the so called Customer Charter. I felt sorry for any hire boat trying to negotiate the vagaries of the "public power" buttons and the ropes.
 
To be fair, Lock Keepers should be able to eat lunch at lunchtime like everybody else and if you didn't want to operate the lock yourself, you wouldn't have had to wait too long for assistance.
i find that operating a lock for myself can be part of the fun.
 
Last edited:
Big John said:
Came up river today, Saturday, and a priority A lock was not manned during lunch time. 13.00 to 14.00 hrs. I was told that there were two lock keepers on duty but both had taken lunch together. Ok it was quiet and not many boats out and about and they were probably saving their strength to cope with the afternoon rush. However, it does make a mockery of the so called Customer Charter. I felt sorry for any hire boat trying to negotiate the vagaries of the "public power" buttons and the ropes.
Click to expand...

Who told you has to be the first question ....
 
Actionmat said:
To be fair, Lock Keepers should be able to eat lunch at lunchtime like everybody else and if you didn't want to operate the lock yourself, you wouldn't have had to wait too long for assistance.
i find that operating a lock for myself can be part of the fun.
Click to expand...

That is far far to reasonable for a Saturday night on a forum.......have a few bevvies,come back and try again:);)
 
Big John said:
Came up river today, Saturday, and a priority A lock was not manned during lunch time. 13.00 to 14.00 hrs. I was told that there were two lock keepers on duty but both had taken lunch together. Ok it was quiet and not many boats out and about and they were probably saving their strength to cope with the afternoon rush. However, it does make a mockery of the so called Customer Charter. I felt sorry for any hire boat trying to negotiate the vagaries of the "public power" buttons and the ropes.
Click to expand...

Even if the informant was correct the 2nd "lock keeper " may have been a volunteer in training. It isn't likely IMHO that two fully signed off employees would abandon the lock.

Paul
 
Lots of interesting comments on this particular thread. I think there are mixed up threads within. From my experience (on a previous stint on the river, all will be explained) the lock keepers have been brilliant and help wherever they can. I have only recently come back on to the river and have yet to go out (properly) so making good use of my expensive licence (not) but glad I'm subsidising those who who choose not to buy a licence (also 'not'). Regarding dealings with HQ, my licence took quite a long time to come through, they had scanned colour copies of the paperwork which they acknowledged but would not start the process off without the posted originals through snail mail (which I couldn't understand). The staff were pleasant enough albeit having to hide behind a process. As it happens the long weekend that the licence was required for we missed due to poor weather and last minute work commitments so it was stacked against us anyway.
I have some knowledge of the migration from the EA site to the mandated .gov.uk and for many reasons it was never going to be easy and the EA, as for many of the organisations, the .gov.uk template does not suit all. You can tell that just by looking at many of the other organisations who have been forced to migrate whose sites are now fragmented and difficult to navigate.
The funding for the EA has been slashed. The folk on the ground do the best they can under the circumstances too and some of the comments in this thread have been personal and to some extent unfair although as a fellow boater the perception is that fees are going up and service is going down so I can understand and empathise the frustration.
A lot of the symptoms are endemic of an underlying cause so should not be directed at those who are doing the best they can probably with very little reward. Although my mother, bless her, used to use an expression 'reasons aren't excuses' so that would negate some of my comments in an attempt to bring this thread back to a look at the underlying organisation and some of the strange ways they are mandated to operate under rather than the poor old lock keepers and back office staff in Reading or wherever.
 
So who pumped it out and raised it last time ?

And like earlier on in the thread , it's not down to the ea to prevent it sinking ... It's down to the owner.
 
Last edited:
to use the thames the licence is good value, compared to other leisure pursuits, the EA have no control on rain levels in the winter, the locks are generally easy to operate, when no operator , or out of hours. good value for the cash laid out, too many require wet nursing up and down the river.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

Share this page

Top