I got frustrated with BW a few weeks ago after they phoned and asked me  to move my boat again so another boat could squeeze into the Hunts  moorings.
I was doubly frustrated when I said I wanted to think  about the request and then my boat was moved. It transpired that the  reason why the other  boat was put onto my mooring was due to a mess up  with the BW mooring system.
I raised a 
FOI  request for information on mooring reduction policy by BW as at  Hunts despite the largest marina in the country being less than 15 miles  away we were still getting boats squeezed in.
The reply is below   - make of it what you will. I have blanked out the ladies name of the  boat who came to be my neighbour. I have no problem with this lady - she  is very nice and after all is a boater who has not been treated very  well by BW.
My thinking is that BW do not care too much for  boaters. In fact I'm sure they would rather the canals all be like the  Cromford canal - can fish, can walk, can cycle - all minimum costs to  maintain but those dam boaters that mean BW have to maintain the  workings of the canal  - we are the problem.
I do however respect  BW for their procedures and the fact they followed up the complaint  -  top marks to them for that.
I do not agree I said I would move my  boat. I phoned Sandie and left her a message on her voice mail to the  effect I wanted more time to consider the request.
The reply....
Dear  Mr Wells
Further to our telephone conversation last week, I have  now received the information I needed from Sandie to formally respond  to your complaint.  I appreciate and thank you for your understanding on  the phone.
I think you have two concerns:  (1) that your boat  was moved without your consent within the site at Fradley and (2) that  you have questions about the implementation of our online mooring  reduction policy.
(1) The boat move:  here is Sandie’s account  of what happened:
“Back in November, before the reorganisational  changes were in full effect, our previous local officer advertised a  vacancy for auction at the Fradley linear site.  The details uploaded on  the website were a straight copy from a previous one at the site.  This  was an error because the berth available was at a completely different  part of the site and none of the wording in the advertisement applied.   Unaware of this, the successful bidder completed the paperwork, paid for  the berth and when I met her at the site for the Meet and Greet was  extremely unhappy.
I therefore spent much time and effort trying  to sort a suitable alternative.  We agreed that the craft would moor  temporarily on the visitor moorings at the site.  The first option  offered sadly was too shallow and the craft could not get on to the  mooring.  The second option was acceptable but three craft at the  alternative site would have to close up slightly (approximately 6 feet)  for ******** boat to get in.
Becky contacted all the moorers to  explain.  Mr Wells was not happy at having to move the 6 feet required  so I phoned him myself to explain to situation.  He was still not happy  but agreed to move his craft that very weekend.
I explained to  ***** what was happening and then I went on annual leave.
When  ****** returned to the site after a week being in Dry Dock, only one  craft had moved.  Mr Wells craft and another had remained in their  original positions.
******* by this time (3 months on) moved the 2  craft herself.  I have since spoken to ****** and told her she  shouldn’t have moved them but understood she was extremely frustrated at  the time.  Mr Wells then made the complaint that his craft had been  moved.”
The relevant clause in your mooring agreement is as  follows:
This Agreement allows you to moor the Boat at the  Mooring
Site. It does not give you the right to a particular Mooring  or
berth. Where a berth or particular Mooring is specified, you
nevertheless  agree we may ask you to move the Boat or give
us authority to move  it a reasonable distance to ensure best
use of the water space  available at the Mooring Site.
Technically, it appears we were at  fault in not closing the final details of the move of you boat by the  small distance to make space for ******** boat so that **********  took  matters into her own hands.  I apologise for this oversight on our part.
2.    Implementation of our online mooring policy:  I hope this response  will also answer your FOI request.
     Details of the online  policy are published at www.britishwaterways.co.uk/onlinemooringpol and  our latest half yearly report is listed for download at  http://www.britishwaterways.co.uk/marinadevelopment/downloads/index.php   I believe however that you might already be aware of this material. 
      I think you are raising more practical questions of how we  actually make the decisions on which berths to close, so I’m pasting  below the decision criteria that we ask our local manager to use to  reach their conclusions.   Applying the scoring is obviously a balance  of judgment, and whilst I believe in general that we’re getting it  about right, that doesn’t mean there’s not room for improvement.  I’ve  recently developed a computer based model to help our local managers  which is just about to go into testing phase.
I hope that this  response is helpful and satisfactory, but if you would like the matter  to be investigated further under our formal complaints procedure (see  http://www.britishwaterways.co.uk/listening-to-you/if-you-have-a-complaint)  please register this request with Sarina (her address below).
With  kind regards
Sally Ash
Head of Boating
01923 201229 /  07710 175448
www.britishwaterways.co.uk
www.waterscape.com 
64  Clarendon Road, Watford, WD17 1DA
Boaters: stay in touch by  registering for our monthly updates at www.waterscape.com/boatersupdate
