|
Post by Telemachus on May 8, 2018 22:06:46 GMT
There is a £5 charge for mooring on the River Severn at Worcester, payable to the local council via the car park pay and display machine, although curiously this charge does not apply to green boats with a yellow coachline. Rivers are different.
|
|
|
Post by kris on May 9, 2018 7:25:26 GMT
In Sheffield the VMs are administered by CV Marine. Are they charged for?
|
|
|
Post by kris on May 9, 2018 7:44:04 GMT
Just because something illegal has been going on for a long while doesn't make it legal.
|
|
|
Post by peterboat on May 9, 2018 8:14:10 GMT
In Sheffield the VMs are administered by CV Marine. They are by Geordie Paul, they still have visitors for is it 72 hours? Things for me have improved there now its no longer a used boat salesroom
|
|
|
Post by peterboat on May 9, 2018 8:15:56 GMT
In Sheffield the VMs are administered by CV Marine. Are they charged for? You get so long free I thought it was 72 hours but it may be less, I am sure it used to be that in BW days
|
|
|
Post by NigelMoore on May 9, 2018 8:16:02 GMT
It’s not that uncommon on the system further south, that BW/CRT have sold /rented out a stretch of towpath to a for-profit commercial enterprise. Nigel and Tony will tell you that it has no basis in law but since it has been normal practice, and afaik unchallenged for a very long time, I think it would be an uphill struggle to change it. It is not just that there is no basis in waterways legislation; the practice runs directly contrary to the proclaimed effect of charity law as ‘explained’ by Nigel Johnson, former head of legal – whereby it is forbidden to use public facilities for private gain – but you are correct of course, it is hugely improbable that they would ever be held to account and compelled to change the practice. Such corporations thrive on the general placid acceptance that big brother must be right.
|
|
|
Post by kris on May 9, 2018 8:27:27 GMT
It’s not that uncommon on the system further south, that BW/CRT have sold /rented out a stretch of towpath to a for-profit commercial enterprise. Nigel and Tony will tell you that it has no basis in law but since it has been normal practice, and afaik unchallenged for a very long time, I think it would be an uphill struggle to change it. It is not just that there is no basis in waterways legislation; the practice runs directly contrary to the proclaimed effect of charity law as ‘explained’ by Nigel Johnson, former head of legal – whereby it is forbidden to use public facilities for private gain – but you are correct of course, it is hugely improbable that they would ever be held to account and compelled to change the practice. Such corporations thrive on the general placid acceptance that big brother must be right. So I was right in thinking that there is no legal basis for Bw/crt's to give permission for a private company to charge for mooring on the towpath?
|
|
|
Post by NigelMoore on May 9, 2018 8:30:02 GMT
In my opinion, yes. But they have been doing this for many decades.
|
|
|
Post by kris on May 9, 2018 8:34:59 GMT
In my opinion, yes. But they have been doing this for many decades. I'd like to do some research into it, where would you suggest I start looking?
|
|
|
Post by NigelMoore on May 9, 2018 10:00:51 GMT
Research into what, exactly?
If you are going to be looking into how many private bodies have had towpath and even canal/riverbed leased to them for mooring purposes [even in public navigable rivers], and the terms under which the agreements have been signed, then you have a major task ahead of you. Others will have more useful advice on such a search than I could possibly vouchsafe.
Here in Brentford, long-standing 'leases' have been in place for both Weydock Ltd alongside the Ham, and Hither Green Ltd for half the river at the entrance of the Brent alongside the Ferry Quays development. Doubtless similar examples exist all over the system.
|
|
|
Post by naughtyfox on May 9, 2018 13:38:18 GMT
I've been moored in Nottingham over the weekend and noticed the peculiar situation of Castle Marina charging boats to moor on the towpath outside of the marina. Talking to local boaters its something that's been happening for a while. How about asking Castle Marina how they are allowed to do this, and ask to see the contract / written agreement?
|
|
|
Post by kris on May 9, 2018 15:18:08 GMT
Research into what, exactly? Sorry if I wasn't very clear, I'm not really interested in all the private bodies and their agreements. But Id be interested in gening up on the relevant parts of the wayerways legislation and wondered if you could point me in the general direction.
|
|
|
Post by kris on May 9, 2018 15:19:23 GMT
I've been moored in Nottingham over the weekend and noticed the peculiar situation of Castle Marina charging boats to moor on the towpath outside of the marina. Talking to local boaters its something that's been happening for a while. How about asking Castle Marina how they are allowed to do this, and ask to see the contract / written agreement? do you think they would show me the agreement they have?
|
|
|
Post by NigelMoore on May 9, 2018 16:48:35 GMT
Research into what, exactly? Sorry if I wasn't very clear, I'm not really interested in all the private bodies and their agreements. But Id be interested in gening up on the relevant parts of the wayerways legislation and wondered if you could point me in the general direction. Well, the 'problem' there is the sheer amount of legislation you would have to wade through, looking for any instance wherein a canal authority was enabled to charge for use of the towpath. As there are about 500 plus Acts affecting CaRT's network, that is a lot to source and investigate - and the enabling Acts will apply only to their relevant portion of the waterway. Bear in mind also, that often many successive Acts followed the first, as additional powers, controls and charges etc were sought, as those became apparently desirable in the course of experience. What you would essentially be looking for, is for any exception to the general principle that the primary condition imposed on the construction of any new canal, was that [subject to specific imposed tolls] the waterways [and necessarily the towpath] were to be available for all members of the public to use in common. Offside land could usually be purchased by the canal company for chargeable purposes, but I have never come across any exception to the universal rule that the PRN itself and the towpath enabling such use, was freely available to all comers. There may, of course, be exceptions - the only sure way to be confident of saying NO canal company was ever authorised to charge for exclusive use of the towpath for any purpose, would be to search through every one of those hundreds of Acts - really, it would be for CaRT to demonstrate that, on any particular section, they inherited the power to remove towpath use from the genral public in favour of an individual or business. Even then, according to Johnson, the charities law would seek to prevent that even if waterways legislation permitted it. All I can suggest is using Google searches for relevant legislation. Narrowing it down to sites such as A2A [Archive 2 Archive] can be helpful. Most results, though, will require a visit in person to the relevant archive, and those can be all over the country. The single most reliable source will be the Parliamentary Archives - but you will need to have sourced the item and ideally the reference before asking permission to visit and look at it [though they can be very helpful in assisting a search beforehand if you have failed to locate something specific].
|
|
|
Post by kris on May 9, 2018 16:52:18 GMT
Well, the 'problem' there is the sheer amount of legislation you would have to wade through, looking for any instance wherein a canal authority was enabled to charge for use of the towpath. As there are about 500 plus Acts affecting CaRT's network, that is a lot to source and investigate - and the enabling Acts will apply only to their relevant portion of the waterway. Bear in mind also, that often many successive Acts followed the first, as additional powers, controls and charges etc were sought, as those became apparently desirable in the course of experience. What you would essentially be looking for, is for any exception to the general principle that the primary condition imposed on the construction of any new canal, was that [subject to specific imposed tolls] the waterways [and necessarily the towpath] were to be available for all members of the public to use in common. Offside land could usually be purchased by the canal company for chargeable purposes, but I have never come across any exception to the universal rule that the PRN itself and the towpath enabling such use, was freely available to all comers. There may, of course, be exceptions - the only sure way to be confident of saying NO canal company was ever authorised to charge for exclusive use of the towpath for any purpose, would be to search through every one of those hundreds of Acts - really, it would be for CaRT to demonstrate that, on any particular section, they inherited the power to remove towpath use from the genral public in favour of an individual or business. Even then, according to Johnson, the charities law would seek to prevent that even if waterways legislation permitted it. All I can suggest is using Google searches for relevant legislation. Narrowing it down to sites such as A2A [Archive 2 Archive] can be helpful. Most results, though, will require a visit in person to the relevant archive, and those can be all over the country. The single most reliable source will be the Parliamentary Archives - but you will need to have sourced the item and ideally the reference before asking permission to visit and look at it [though they can be very helpful in assisting a search beforehand if you have failed to locate something specific]. thank you for the reply Nigel.
|
|