Pillings is to blame

THE situation at Pillings Lock Marina, threatened with losing its access to the canal, is complex, writes Mike Todd.

Three inter-connected companies were set up to oversee the development and operation but have accounts so entangled that it is difficult to see just what is going on, but this is how I understand it:

No right for connection

From the outset, one company, QMP, owns the freehold but engages another company, PLM to operate it. As part of the long standing failure by QMP to pays its dues to BW/CaRT, the access agreement has now lapsed and there is no right of the marina to connect to the canal.

A third company, QMH, is the protective layer that holds the mortgage that enabled QMP to develop the marina in the first place and is principally a mechanism to ensure that, whoever else loses out, the original investors—just as with a home mortgage—can get their money back. (I told you it was complicated!)

Long and protracted attempt

CaRT have already taken to Court and had judgment awarded in its favour after a long and protracted attempt to resolve the matter informally. I seem to recall that some £20,000 costs were also awarded against Pillings Lock (QMP). In response, QMP has been put by its sole director into voluntary liquidation which put the long term agreements, for which people paid tens of thousands of pounds, into jeopardy.

The current situation seems to be that CaRT have cancelled the agreement which QMP had signed that allowed it to have a direct access between its water and CaRT's canal on the basis that, after several years of non-payment, QMP clearly had no intention of keeping to its side of the bargain. After all, it had taken the relevant monies from its moorers and, since now insolvent, must have used that for other purposes.

How much has ended up in the pockets of the directors and investors is a matter of wide speculation.

Free of charge

It is important to recognise that QMP/PLM were given the first year free of charge and the second year at 50% discount—not something they afforded their moorers, I guess!

As a result of the cancellation of the agreement, the marina now has a duty to close the link between the marina and the canal. If they fail to comply, having been given very good notice by CaRT, the latter will then do so for it. However, CaRT have indicated that it will not prevent any boat leaving the marina—but they will not be allowed back in.

The marina was slipping into financial difficulty, or so it claims as its reason for not paying its dues to BW, now CaRT, at a time when others have managed to work through the economic downturn by offering a quality service or through having an exceptional location. Since people on the ground evidence that the marina and its associated activities continue to be well-used, one is left wondering about the motivation for the liquidation.

Outcome is fair

Under what conditions CaRT will be willing to sign a new access agreement is yet to be seen but there are numerous interests keeping a close eye on the situation to ensure that the outcome is fair to all who use the canal system for pleasure or for business.

It is sad that many third parties will lose out consequent on the failure by Pillings Lock to honour the signed agreement from the outset (not to mention having questions raised regarding whether it has equally ignored the details of its planning permission). However, that is always the consequence of company collapses, and so often it is the 'little person' who loses more than the highly protected investor. But that is not something to lay at CaRT's door—rather it is the marina operator who should be answerable especially as facilities paid for with considerable up-front fees now seem to be missing.

Not down to CaRT

Many things go wrong on the canals and rivers and it is right and proper that the media have a go at CaRT and the EA when it is their fault—but this is definitely not down to them at all.