Jump to content

Disguised £100 Thames mooring sign?


Dave123

Featured Posts

Moored at what looked like a standard EA 24h mooring site below/around the corner from Chertsey bridge/Dumsey Meadow today. Nearly didn't read the sign as it looked the same as others, fortunately we did as it is instead asking for £100 per night. Needless to say we quickly moved on but I'm curious as to the logic here? Why not just say no mooring? Is it some sort of council requirement to provide a public mooring but they can't really be bothered with it? If it had been dark or raining I can imagine people getting caught out.

20170721_190619.jpg

20170721_193425.jpg

Edited by Dave123
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Blame the dossers that took over that streach a few years ago, its the same furthur downstream the other side of the residential moorings again dossers took it over.

It never was EA moorings just towpath owned by the LA 

  • Greenie 2
Link to comment
Share on other sites

This nearly caught us out too.

 

I guess it really means "no mooring" but uses contract law rather than the law of trespass in the same way as the new arrangements where you have to register and pay after 24 hours.

 

MP.

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

They do not want you to moor there, but if just no mooring it is difficult to impose a £100 fine as it is clearly disproportionate to their losses etc, but they can say you may moor here for £100 per day which is your choice to accept or not, and like parking charges probably enforceable.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I would think this is a private mooring (a bit like a private car park) and AFAIK cannot be enforced in law. If the car park notice is enforced by the council or the police then it can be enforced. The so called fine is an invitation to pay, not a summons to pay or go to court. It can only be recovered by a civil action which would be more expensive than the parking fee.

Cheers

David

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I notice that this is District Enforcement, the same gang that CRT are using to impose £150 per day penalties for unauthorised mooring at long stay moorings on the cut. I read one of their notices here at Gailey today and noted that they claim that the towpath is "privately owned" by CRT. Can't be right, can it? The waterways are held in trust by CRT but still technically owned by BWB on behalf of the state, I thought?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Looking at that sign it seems to be held on by cable ties, I wonder how long it will last before being bent out of shape/ripped off/cable ties cut etc. (Not that I would ever encourage such law breaking actions)

Cheers

David

Link to comment
Share on other sites

42 minutes ago, Chewbacka said:

They do not want you to moor there, but if just no mooring it is difficult to impose a £100 fine as it is clearly disproportionate to their losses etc, but they can say you may moor here for £100 per day which is your choice to accept or not, and like parking charges probably enforceable.

Tell that to the nurses 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Yes this all makes sense. They should just make the sign legible from the water. And if it's council owned why don't they want to get more money by letting it as a £8 per night temp mooring with a £100 overstay fee/fine etc like they do in some of the other towns. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Two points strike me about this notice, the first being, since it is clearly intended to discourage mooring, why is it called Ryepeck Moorings?

The second point is that the line about 'remaining stationary at this site ' must be pretty well unenforceable since I can only commit trespass by attaching myself to the relevant land (anchor or mooring line), I cannot be trespassing by floating above the relevant piece of land even if they are the riparian owners, otherwise I will be spending my whole day whilst travelling on rivers trespassing above somebody's land:unsure:

  • Greenie 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

3 hours ago, Chewbacka said:

They do not want you to moor there, but if just no mooring it is difficult to impose a £100 fine as it is clearly disproportionate to their losses etc, but they can say you may moor here for £100 per day which is your choice to accept or not, and like parking charges probably enforceable.

It takes ages and is a right pain to evict someone for trespass. Put up a sign like that, and anyone stopping is accepting a contract. If they break the contract by not paying £100 per day, it's easy to get the Feds to throw them off.

 

The aim if not to collect £100 per day, it's to create the contract to make enforcement easy.

 

Similarly,  the new arrangements for EA moorings make it much easier to evict overstayers, because a contract exists between them and the EA or their representatives.  There are other places on the Thames doing the same thing, and in Ely the contract ruse has been used without needing a payment for the allowed period, only for overstaying. Cambridge are intending to go the same way.

 

MP.

 

 

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

District Enforcement is a company which makes and collects parking fines on behalf of anyone who cars to invite them to do so.

They appear to  based in Leicestershire.

Presumably if you stayed overnight you would have to pay for two days .  The fee is reduced to £60 per day if paid promptly. 

Looks like it would be a very peaceful spot .

Link to comment
Share on other sites

8 minutes ago, Matt&Jo said:

Does anyone get the feeling that cc'ers are going yo be forced off the waterways before long here.....not the dossers but genuine abiding by the rules cc'ers........ bloody country is going to pot.

All the CC'er's need to do is join the NBTA,it means that they will never have the pleasure of cruising on their Boat again but they will still be on the Waterways.

  • Greenie 2
Link to comment
Share on other sites

36 minutes ago, Matt&Jo said:

Does anyone get the feeling that cc'ers are going yo be forced off the waterways before long here.....not the dossers but genuine abiding by the rules cc'ers........ bloody country is going to pot.

Well these CCers just transited the Thames, and found moorings easier to find than the last time we did it, probably because of the new enforcement.

 

MP.

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I'm also c'cing and have found the Thames quite easy for mooring so far...but it is a shame there aren't more places for mooring longer than 24h.

My main complaint about this sign though is how much it looks like the EA 24H ones from the river

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Dont get me wrong ive not got my boat yet (awaiting build slot march 2018) but the preception i get from alot of people i talk to and tye consultation papers online is that the C&RT do not do things correctly, are concreting more towpath (great) but not putting in mooring rings so removing those mooring spots....putting large fees in areas they want to maintain as idealic and natural beauty spots by keeping those on the waterways away. And not to mention the latest licence review shambles.....its a shame as they are a charity first and foremost..............

I may be wrong with regards to the above as i do not currently live on or even own a boat and i may of fallen fowl to negative perception of them from those on the towpath who may not be acting within the legal frame work......

I hope you guys prove me wrong to lift my spirits

Link to comment
Share on other sites

11 hours ago, Wanderer Vagabond said:

Two points strike me about this notice, the first being, since it is clearly intended to discourage mooring, why is it called Ryepeck Moorings?

The second point is that the line about 'remaining stationary at this site ' must be pretty well unenforceable since I can only commit trespass by attaching myself to the relevant land (anchor or mooring line), I cannot be trespassing by floating above the relevant piece of land even if they are the riparian owners, otherwise I will be spending my whole day whilst travelling on rivers trespassing above somebody's land:unsure:

deleted

Edited by LadyG
Link to comment
Share on other sites

57 minutes ago, Matt&Jo said:

Does anyone get the feeling that cc'ers are going yo be forced off the waterways before long here.....not the dossers but genuine abiding by the rules cc'ers........ bloody country is going to pot.

Why?

Surely this mooring fee affects all boaters not just those who CC?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Yes but as a cc'er you by nature travel alot more than pleasure boaters with moorings........ (or your supposed to) so will effect cc more due to exposure to these mooring restrictions/fee's? My logic anyhow.

Edited by Matt&Jo
Link to comment
Share on other sites

8 minutes ago, Matt&Jo said:

Yes but as a cc'er you by nature travel alot more than pleasure boaters with moorings........ (or your supposed to) so will effect cc more due to exposure to these mooring restrictions/fee's? My logic anyhow.

The Thames is run by the EA which does not have a ''continuous cruiser'' option for boaters only CRT have that by way of the declaration of no home mooring.

All ''continuous cruisers'' on the Thames are visitors from CRT waterways, either with a visitor licence or a Gold licence.

Keith

Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 hour ago, Steilsteven said:

The Thames is run by the EA which does not have a ''continuous cruiser'' option for boaters only CRT have that by way of the declaration of no home mooring.

All ''continuous cruisers'' on the Thames are visitors from CRT waterways, either with a visitor licence or a Gold licence.

Keith

Can you have a gold licence with no home mooring?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

3 minutes ago, OldGoat said:

Possibly - last time we bought a Gold, I just said "Themes" and BW (yes it was) accepted that.

Answering my own question. I just checked in he application form for a gold licence, and in the home mooring section there st a check box for continuous cruising, so presumably you can.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!

Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.

Sign In Now
  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    • No registered users viewing this page.
×
×
  • Create New...

Important Information

We have placed cookies on your device to help make this website better. You can adjust your cookie settings, otherwise we'll assume you're okay to continue.