jerrytug
N/A
Campaign on Twitter, BoatersRights
Their old project... MFV Wylam
- Thread starter MYStargazer
- Start date
Seajet
...
OK count me in too, signed; I hope I have explained the original doubts...I do not mean to sound negative but I hope someone is thinking of a Plan B landing pad in case this does not go well ? The last thing they need is more stress...
clyst
Well-known member
To save me reading through all the links what started the ill feeling and hassle in the beginning.
Rod Taylor
New member
Thanks to those who are supporting us. To those of you who are jumping to the wrong conclusions let me put you straight. We have paid our mooring at the new residential rate from the first of Jan 2014 for the full year. My complaints to the Ombudsman were very simply that A/ The PDCA had negotiated an addendum to the T&C back in 2008 that because Poplar Dock was built as a barge marina and we were paying more in mooring fees than any of the other BWML marinas that there would be no widebeam charges in Poplar Dock. B/ That by classifying Poplar Dock as an Inland Marina, BWML were wrong. Poplar Dock is by all the criteria and custom and practice a Coastal Marina. It is part of the Port of London. C/ That BWML are in breach of their own T&C which state that 'If a vessel occupies more than one berth they reserve the right to make a widebeam charge' No vessel in Poplar Dock occupies more than one vessel. So far both the Ombudsman who said that most of my complaint were outside his jurisdiction and to take the matters to a court to rule on and the court then not finding in my favour I am now in the process of asking for leave to appeal. The Ombudsman did force BWML to honor a 3 year contract which BWML were terminating after 2 years.
Rod Taylor
Rod Taylor
Black Monkey
New member
In simple terms, broken promises affecting about 70 boaters, stating that widebeam charges would not apply at Poplar Docks marina, (owing to being a dock with sea-going craft on it). Defining the marina as being "Inland" hence applying upwards of 30% widebeam charge for all craft wider than 3 mtrs - despite the fact that no craft takes up more than one berth and they are directly off the tidal Thamesway with no access to the inland waterways. If it had been classified as "Coastal", (in line with all the other authorities that they've consulted - PLA etc), the widebeam charge would only apply to craft wider than 4.5 mtrs. Only something like 12 boats would then have been affected by the 30% widebeam charge - do the maths! Never-the-less, a repeated promise would still have been broken and desperately unfair given that no boat actually takes up more than one berth and without a significant investment, the marina would not be able to accommodate more craft anyway - regardless. Smacks of total profiteering to the detriment of its loyal, high-fee-paying, long-standing customers. Affordable, sustainable housing in London in line with government policy?... doesn't sound "affordable" to me with approx annual mooring fees starting at around £13k for an average sized craft and some moorers facing 100% increase in mooring fees as a result of "Inland" classification.
JumbleDuck
Well-known member
As far as I can see, Poplar Dock has developed a thriving community of interesting liveaboard people over the years. CART now want to make more money from it and have whacked their mooring prices up enormously, by a factor of two or three. They are charging owners of boats over 3m wide for double berths, even though nobody is actually occupying two berths. The chap referred to in the OP took them to the Waterways Ombudsman who said it needed to be decided by a court, so he took them to court through the Small Claims track where he lost. CART now want to evict him and his wife after many years for making these challenges.
It seems like a completely different situation from the previous Bath eviction(s) and deserves our support.
clyst
Well-known member
Sad but that's the joys of liveaboards of which I am one and have been for many years. If the marinas that I stay at changed or hiked the prices I. Have only two choices pay up or seek another berth else where . Unfortunately liveaboards only have a 12month contract ,and no guarantee of a specific permanent berth, after which both parties review their options of renewing .
It's all part of life afloat . Keep your head down and don't make waves is my advice to any liveaboard .
TommyPop
New member
You are not right in saying they are being evicted for not paying the mooring fees. They are paying the mooring fees, as am I, who has just seen my fees go up by 46% and in 2 years time, another 40% so that from 2011, my fees wll have gone up over 80%. And we don't know the final figure. The reason why they are being evicted is because Rod challenged these extortinate mooring fee increases on behalf of the whole community. First by making a formal complaint, then by following BWML's complaint proceedure, by taking a complaint to the Ombudsman. The Ombudsman report indicated that only a court could adjudicate on many of the matters we raised. And the Judge made it clear that the case was not vexatious. Please support our campaign and help campaing to get Rights for ALL Boaters.
MYStargazer
Active member
Spot-on!
longjohnsilver
Well-known member
Having read all the comments on here I have signed and wish them good luck with their struggle.
Sandy
Well-known member
Signed. That MDs letter was a farce!
clyst
Well-known member
If the owners have major health issues why stand and fight and continue/prolong the stress ? Surely it's better just to bury ones pride and move on and have a stress free life ? (.if that's possible as a liveaboard )
MYStargazer
Active member
Oh probably just for fun.
Or maybe, just maybe, because it's the life they've always known. They live in a community they've known for 15 years. And they don't have anywhere else to live.
We're talking about an elderly couple FFS.
JumbleDuck
Well-known member
And perhaps because moving house, even when no change of lifestyle is involved, is one of he most stressful things you can do. I can quite understand why an elderly couple with health issues wouldn't want to put themselves through that.
clyst
Well-known member
Then instead of bleating on about it why don't you phyically help them . BTW what exactly are you doing ?? Do you think a petition will change anything for the couple in the imediate future . I think not .
Seajet
...
+1, have some compassion.
clyst
Well-known member
As a fellow liveaboard I have compassion for the couple but the facts are he has been given notice to leave the marina within 28days that will not change no petition will help at this late stage .The marina has acted within their T & C however harsh that maybe . Sadly the poor couple have no choice now . Legally they haven't a leg to stand on that was why I suggested practical help .
It seems short sighted that a plan B wasn't put in place in case the court case didn't go in their favour . Since the poor chap put his head on the chopping block for the rest or the liveaboard and had it cut off by the court and marina are the remainder berth holders going to show solidarity and also threaten to leave ? I guess not .
I guess at the end of the day the marina have hiked the prices up to what the market forces will stand , their web site seems to indicate that they have no current vacancies . Their T &C indicate that liveaboards are forbidden but have probably turned a blind eye as most marinas do now this has hit the headlines so to speak I suspect other liveaboards will come under fire .
Hope it all turns out well for all concern but I'm afraid my glass is half empty on this one and That the poor couple will need all the practical help they can get .
BTW WFT the petition ..... I don't think broadcasting on here that people have been putting false addresses has helped .
mersey
Member
Poplar has planning permission for 50% residential.
JumbleDuck
Well-known member
Plan B, as I understand it, was to continue paying the higher mooring fees. It seems unnecessary and spiteful for CART to respond to the court challenge by throwing the couple out altogether.
clyst
Well-known member
Absolutely agree. On the face of it , unless there is something we don't know ,it appears that the marinas response is heavy handed and unnecessary but that is little comfort because sadly their fate has been decided even though as I understand it they have paid the hiked charges .