Results 1 to 52 of 52

Thread: Water Bailiff's

  1. #1
    Join Date
    Jun 2014
    Location
    Staffs
    Posts
    115

    Default Water Bailiff's

    What power do they actually have?

    My understanding is they get there powers from the freshwater fishing act(or similar)

    * I understand they have certain powers to search and seize things if they suspect foul play, but most of this seems to relate to fishermen and not canoeists/kayakers.

    * It is also my understanding that they can not ask you to leave a water course, is that correct?

    Can someone clarify or improve on my knowledge

    I heard of a person being "kicked off" the wye i believe it was yesterday and having to resort to driving to matlock to paddle instead.

    Thanks

  2. #2

    Default

    Only have power over fishing, full stop.

  3. #3

    Default

    Oops - I just posted in access!

    Out!

  4. #4
    Join Date
    Jul 2006
    Posts
    1,969

    Default

    Doug Dew
    "The best is yet to come" My Father


  5. #5
    Join Date
    Jul 2006
    Posts
    1,969

    Default

    Last edited by dougdew99; 7th-October-2014 at 06:34 PM.
    Doug Dew
    "The best is yet to come" My Father


  6. #6
    Join Date
    Jun 2014
    Location
    Staffs
    Posts
    115

    Default

    cheers.

    I had asked Dr wiki, but not exactly being top of my game on official garble i thought someone might be able to enlighten me. Which they did. thanks mr Wavecloud

    I was more concerned about the stop and search powers that it mentioned. The act says they can stop and search anyone they suspect of illegal fishing/poaching. I wondered if bailiffs had tried this approach?

    I haven't enquired too much but just when this person on Facebook mentioned they had been asked to leave the water i wondered if i was missing something is all.

    thanks all.

  7. #7
    Join Date
    Jun 2010
    Location
    Teynham Kent
    Posts
    219

    Default

    i know a River Bailiff he says while at work they are a Constable. (careful what you say) he is also an ex-copper.
    Not a Police Constable but has the same powers of arrest. He carries some of the same equipment and stab vest.
    He has nearly been arrested several times for impersonating Police. Which he wants for the £5000 false arrest compensation.
    He quotes the act which gives him the power but most Police don't know this.

  8. #8
    Join Date
    Jul 2007
    Location
    Robin Hood's Bay,Yorkshire
    Posts
    2,848

    Default

    Don't forgrt there is a world of difference between a bailiff appointed by the government, or government body and one appointed by a land or riparian owner. The later has no more powers than you or I
    http://www.davidwperry.blogspot.co.uk/

  9. #9
    Join Date
    Jul 2006
    Posts
    1,969

    Default

    What does a 'real water bailiff's' ID card look like?
    Doug Dew
    "The best is yet to come" My Father


  10. #10
    Join Date
    Jul 2006
    Posts
    1,969

    Default

    Doug Dew
    "The best is yet to come" My Father


  11. #11
    Join Date
    Jul 2007
    Location
    Robin Hood's Bay,Yorkshire
    Posts
    2,848

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by dougdew99 View Post
    What does a 'real water bailiff's' ID card look like?
    a) I assume an Environment Agency Bailiff has an ID issued by the Environment Agency. I doubt for a single minute an EA employee could care less whether you have any 'right' to be on the water, only whether you are impacting on something which is written down in his job description. And other than damaging something he is responsible for I can't see how he can get involved in canoeing matters. His role is set out in the link given by Doug.

    If you don't comply with his/her requests you may be breaking the law further if you are doing something illegal.

    b) Any one else may or may not have some kind of ID issued by the riparian owner or club. It doesn't really mean anything much whether he's called a bailiff, river warden, game keeper or anything else, is to my thinking irrelevant.He's just another member of the public like you or I.

    If his employer has said "look Alf, I'm going to give you the job of looking after the river, make sure no one's on the water without membership, check for poachers and make sure non of them bloody canoeists go paddling either", What can he do if he catches you paddling or illegally fishing?

    In the case of illegal fishing all he can do is ASK for ID from you,in which case a poacher would probably thump him and tell him to go f@@k himself or some other command. I think he can also apprehend you - if you let him!! Or if he's willing to take the risk of perhaps later being sued for wrongful arrest if there';s not enough evidence to convict you of a criminal offence. This isn't different from what any tom dick or alice can or cannot do walking down the street. All he or she can really do is collect evidence or ask the police or an EA bailiff to help him.

    He/she can do anything else which is legal and within their job description but really isn't much more than you or I can do. If you don't comply with his/her requests you no one really can do much about it.

    We have a local (ex) water bailiff employed by a local angling consortium and he was regularly beaten up and sometimes his house or car windows were smashed until he wisely retired.

    So if someone approaches you and says they are a 'bailiff' ask them to prove it by examining their ID card. Then you know which son sheet they are speaking from.
    http://www.davidwperry.blogspot.co.uk/

  12. #12
    Join Date
    Jun 2014
    Location
    Staffs
    Posts
    115

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by dougdew99 View Post
    Indeed.

    Very informative posts there, and some waffle, but mainly very informative

  13. #13
    Join Date
    Mar 2013
    Location
    Leek
    Posts
    134

    Default

    Water bailiffs often act as either apparent, implied or express agents to the owners of land, river bed and any other rights owned by the Principal.

  14. #14
    Join Date
    Aug 2006
    Location
    Keynsham near Bristol
    Posts
    3,751

    Default

    All the more reason for them to make it crystal clear in what capacity they are acting - as a warrant card holding official of the EA, as a official of an angling club, as an authorised agent of the landowner (which also implies that the landowner is liable for the actions of his/her agent) or as a self appointed busybody. Some documentary evidence of the role in which they are acting is not unreasonable, is it?
    Keith

  15. #15
    Join Date
    Mar 2013
    Location
    Leek
    Posts
    134

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by KeithD View Post
    All the more reason for them to make it crystal clear in what capacity they are acting - as a warrant card holding official of the EA, as a official of an angling club, as an authorised agent of the landowner (which also implies that the landowner is liable for the actions of his/her agent) or as a self appointed busybody. Some documentary evidence of the role in which they are acting is not unreasonable, is it?
    An EA official will have a ID card. No need for any further documentary evidence as the law of Agency is clear.

  16. #16
    Join Date
    Aug 2006
    Location
    Keynsham near Bristol
    Posts
    3,751

    Default

    How does that work then Robbo? How do you distinguish between a self appointed busybody claiming to be a landowners agent, someone with a genuine agency concerning fishing rights but not extending to navigation issues and someone with a full and complete authority to represent the landowner on all issues. What does the "clear" law of agency say?
    Keith

  17. #17
    Join Date
    Mar 2013
    Location
    Leek
    Posts
    134

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by KeithD View Post
    How does that work then Robbo? How do you distinguish between a self appointed busybody claiming to be a landowners agent, someone with a genuine agency concerning fishing rights but not extending to navigation issues and someone with a full and complete authority to represent the landowner on all issues. What does the "clear" law of agency say?
    One way is if you reasonably believe, from how the Principal has acted, that the Agent has had powers given to him by the Principal, the Principal may be bound by the conduct of the Agent.
    FreemanandLockyer v Buckhurst Park Properties(Mangal) Ltd[1964] 2 QB 480. This is the settled law of agency via estoppel or whatever they are calling it now.

  18. #18
    Join Date
    Aug 2006
    Location
    Keynsham near Bristol
    Posts
    3,751

    Default

    And if you have never seen the Principal, don't even know who he/she is and have no reasonable grounds for believing the claimed "agency" even exists? Why do you seem to think it's unreasonable to ask the "agent" to identify himself/herself and the source and extent of their agency powers?
    Keith

  19. #19
    Join Date
    Mar 2013
    Location
    Leek
    Posts
    134

    Default

    Agency is a very complex area of law, especially estoppel. An agent has the same powers as the Principal unless his powers are expressly curtailed. Who is and who is not an Agent depends not what they say but how the Principal has held them out. There's some case law I remember about a guy who walked into a shop and gave the debt he owned the shop keeper to a person walking around the shop. That person was just a customer who ran off with it. The courts said the debt had been discharged. Its drafted very widely!

  20. #20
    Join Date
    Aug 2006
    Location
    Keynsham near Bristol
    Posts
    3,751

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Robbo11 View Post
    Who is and who is not an Agent depends not what they say but how the Principal has held them out.
    So in a case where you've never met the Principal and there is no documentation to establish how the Principal has "held them out" it's safest not to accept that the alleged agent is what he claims to be. It's safer to require them to prove they are who and what they claim to be - especially if they are claiming rights that you believe even the principal doesn't have, like the right to control navigation on an unregulated river where reasonable evidence suggests there are public navigation rights.
    Keith

  21. #21
    Join Date
    Mar 2013
    Location
    Leek
    Posts
    134

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by KeithD View Post
    So in a case where you've never met the Principal and there is no documentation to establish how the Principal has "held them out" it's safest not to accept that the alleged agent is what he claims to be. It's safer to require them to prove they are who and what they claim to be - especially if they are claiming rights that you believe even the principal doesn't have, like the right to control navigation on an unregulated river where reasonable evidence suggests there are public navigation rights.
    It's probably safer to accept the Agent as one, especially if he says he is acting on behalf of a Principal or leads you to believe he is. The courts have drafted the law of agency very widely to include agencies as much as possible.

  22. #22
    Join Date
    Aug 2006
    Location
    Keynsham near Bristol
    Posts
    3,751

    Default

    Sounds like this where the man on the Clapham omnibus comes in. If someone emailed you claiming to be the agent of the widow of Dr Njuda Gamba, the late Finance Minister of a central African republic, would you accept his assurances that "the courts have drafted the law of agency very widely to include agencies as much as possible"?
    Last edited by KeithD; 8th-October-2014 at 10:22 PM.
    Keith

  23. #23
    Join Date
    Jul 2007
    Location
    Robin Hood's Bay,Yorkshire
    Posts
    2,848

    Default

    This is all getting rather silly isn';t it?

    A) Surely if I'm sat on the bank for example having a brew and a guy in an EA logo fleecy or whatever with a EA jacket on comes up and introduces him/herself as an employee of the said EA and/or a Bailiff, mentions the work they are doing in the area to control poaching, asks me if I'm fishing (he's noticed my fishing rod), asks me if I've a rod licence then I don't have a problem with producing it. If I don't have a licence and I'm getting defensive, I can always ask him/her if he's any ID. He/she is going to produce it as I assume they are told to carry it for ID purposes. Pretty clear to me where we stand. He may well call the police if I start causing him/her problems.

    On the other other hand:-

    B) If some guy turns up with no uniform, (or indeed he does have a uniform!) tells me he's the river bailiff but is clearly wearing nothing which looks like its been issued by the EA, starts telling me this is a private river with no canoeing and asks me for my name, car registration and tells me I've got to get off the river etc., so I tell him to go back to his boss and say I'm paddling this river anyway. He then produces an ID issued by Twee River fishing Club or Buckglen Estates or whatever, which indeed does identify him as their employee, then he's no more rights to take action than you or me. I really don't care whether as Keith states, he's the agent of the late finance minister of some obscure african country or the principle or his/her agent. He can't arrest me. I'm not breaking any criminal law. He can ask what he/she wants I don't have to answer or respond. I get back in my canoe and wish them good-by.

    On the other hand, if in A, or B, the guy starts getting rude (this has happened to me) starts getting stroppy because I'm refusing to co-operate then unless he produces an EA ID he's on dodgy ground. If he/she lays a hand on me because I've gone and provoked the private landowner's bailiff I'll tell him I'm going to report him for this to his employer for common assault and tell him he's likely to loose his job. This normally works a treat especially if I produce a camera and take his picture.

    It is extremely unlikely that the EA official will act in anything other than an extremely polite and assertive manner. If he steps out of line he's got far more to loose than the non EA guy as the EA does not want or allow its employees to be seen in a bad light by condoning any thing other than professional behaviour.

    Or am I missing some point here?
    http://www.davidwperry.blogspot.co.uk/

  24. #24
    Join Date
    Jan 2006
    Location
    Bucks
    Posts
    6,948

    Default

    The doctrine of equitable estoppel will not be enforced on a principal unless, by his actions, he accepts, or does not reject, what a self appointed agent does in his name. That someone is an agent for another is, in most circumstances, a matter of fact, not a matter of assumption.

  25. #25
    Join Date
    Dec 2011
    Location
    Western Lake District
    Posts
    1,109

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Adrian Cooper View Post
    The doctrine of equitable estoppel will not be enforced on a principal unless, by his actions, he accepts, or does not reject, what a self appointed agent does in his name. That someone is an agent for another is, in most circumstances, a matter of fact, not a matter of assumption.
    Being someone without a law degree (or common senses most of the time), what does that actually mean ?
    Death is natures way of telling you to slow down.

  26. #26
    Join Date
    Jan 2006
    Location
    Bucks
    Posts
    6,948

    Default

    Equitable estoppel is a legal doctrine used in evidence by the higher courts. It basically means that someone cannot escape something without evidence if he has, by his actions, acknowledged it. So, if someone, not your agent, enters into a lease on your behalf without your permission, you take possession and pay the first month’s rent, you cannot then argue that he was not your agent and that there is no contract in place. You would be ‘estopped’ from arguing that.

    If someone is your agent, then he is. If someone is not your agent but says he is, he is still not your agent. If someone is not your agent but says they are and then you act as if he was indeed your agent, the courts would treat your and his actions as if he was.

    Simple!






    (I don't have a law degree but I have learnt quite a bit through my job)

  27. #27
    Join Date
    Mar 2013
    Location
    Leek
    Posts
    134

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Adrian Cooper View Post
    Equitable estoppel is a legal doctrine used in evidence by the higher courts. It basically means that someone cannot escape something without evidence if he has, by his actions, acknowledged it. So, if someone, not your agent, enters into a lease on your behalf without your permission, you take possession and pay the first month’s rent, you cannot then argue that he was not your agent and that there is no contract in place. You would be ‘estopped’ from arguing that.

    If someone is your agent, then he is. If someone is not your agent but says he is, he is still not your agent. If someone is not your agent but says they are and then you act as if he was indeed your agent, the courts would treat your and his actions as if he was.

    Simple!

    (I don't have a law degree but I have learnt quite a bit through my job)
    Estoppel is a doctrine of law, not a legal doctrine and equitable remedies are not legal but are lawful. If you ever do a law degree you will have this rammed down your throat. High Trees, DC Builders, Foakes v Beer. I'd have thought you Free Men on the Land would know that. Up the common law!

  28. #28
    Join Date
    Nov 2007
    Location
    very soon to be norfolk
    Posts
    1,608

    Default

    Totally lost me now!

  29. #29
    Join Date
    Jul 2007
    Location
    Robin Hood's Bay,Yorkshire
    Posts
    2,848

    Default

    In other words ignore any one who isn't an EA employee.
    http://www.davidwperry.blogspot.co.uk/

  30. #30
    Join Date
    Oct 2010
    Location
    UK
    Posts
    717

    Default

    I'll dig out the EA guidance as well...

    http://www.google.co.uk/url?sa=t&rct...77161500,d.ZGU

    The Angling Club Bailiff
    In this context, a ‘bailiff’ is a person either employed by or who volunteers to assist an
    angling club to ensure compliance of fishery rules and local byelaws. In law, however,
    the angling club bailiff is known as a ‘Water Keeper’ and should not be confused with
    a ‘Water Bailiff’. The latter can only be appointed by the Environment Agency (EA) and
    have statutory powers provided by the Salmon & Freshwater Fisheries Act 1975.
    Angling club bailiffs, therefore, have no powers in law beyond those of any citizen and
    this must be understood from the outset.
    EA Bailiff do not have any remit to try to control rivers they EA are not the authority for.
    Last edited by Quicky; 9th-October-2014 at 10:04 PM.

  31. #31
    Join Date
    Jul 2007
    Location
    Robin Hood's Bay,Yorkshire
    Posts
    2,848

    Default

    Just a point on the google quote from Quicky:-

    An employee can have any job title their employer likes. So If my boss wants to call me a 'water bailiff' he is entitled to.
    http://www.davidwperry.blogspot.co.uk/

  32. #32
    Join Date
    Jan 2007
    Location
    'In The Vale'
    Posts
    2,264

    Default

    I do love how stuff on here get's all distorted, blown out of proportion, and then people start getting confused, upset, wound up, peed off and so on! If I didn't paddle, I'd still be a member...

    Pull up a seat friend!
    Last edited by dirtydog; 10th-October-2014 at 11:16 AM.

  33. #33
    Join Date
    May 2006
    Location
    Chesham in Bucks.
    Posts
    1,320

    Default

    So in summary it seems:

    We can ignore anyone who isn't a proper EA bailiff.
    We can ignore an EA bailiff if it isn't in relationship to an EA controlled navigation.
    We can ignore an EA bailiff anywhere if it isn't a matter to do with fishing.

    Sounds OK to me :-)
    Happy paddling ,
    Rob.


  34. #34
    Join Date
    Jan 2007
    Location
    'In The Vale'
    Posts
    2,264

    Default

    I thought it was only EA enforcement officers who had similar powers to the coppers?

  35. #35
    Join Date
    May 2006
    Location
    Chesham in Bucks.
    Posts
    1,320

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by dirtydog View Post
    I thought it was only EA enforcement officers who had similar powers to the coppers?
    Nothing like a copper really as their role ( fishing activities on EA controlled rivers) is so limited. They have no remit or authority to 'uphold the law' on other matters.
    Happy paddling ,
    Rob.


  36. #36
    Join Date
    Oct 2010
    Location
    UK
    Posts
    717

    Default

    Just a point on the google quote from Quicky:-

    An employee can have any job title their employer likes. So If my boss wants to call me a 'water bailiff' he is entitled to.
    The link was from the Angling Trusts own advice. Thought it was interesting the time fishing helpers called themselves Baliffs till asked for there official ID...

  37. #37
    Join Date
    Mar 2013
    Location
    Leek
    Posts
    134

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by David Perry View Post
    In other words ignore any one who isn't an EA employee.
    Absolutely NOT!

    Ignore the EA the most.

  38. #38
    Join Date
    Mar 2013
    Location
    Leek
    Posts
    134

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Quicky View Post
    I'll dig out the EA guidance as well...



    EA Bailiff do not have any remit to try to control rivers they EA are not the authority for.
    Rubbish. The EA have authority for all controlled watercourses, its just that you shouldn't listen to them because they are almost entirely irrelevant.

  39. #39
    Join Date
    Oct 2010
    Location
    UK
    Posts
    717

    Default

    Feel free to correct me if i am wrong.....

    Angling Enforcement Officers monitor illegal fishing and check for licenses on all watercourses and fisheries in England. This includes still waters, rivers, private commercial and public fisheries.

    Navigation Waterways Officers are responsible for waterways where the Environment Agency is the navigation authority.

    These are:

    • River Medway
    • River Thames
    • Anglian waterways
    • Rye Harbour
    • Royal Military Canal
    • River Wye
    • Dee estuary



    Among other things, the Waterways Officers check that crafts on EA waterways are correctly registered and operate locks and moorings.

  40. #40

    Default

    On the Thames near me we have an EA Fisheries Officer. All water that has fish is covered by him. I am in contact with him regularly. His name is Matt Drew and I inform him whenever I see illegal fishing activity going on. He is only concerned with fish, nothing else.

  41. #41

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by dirtydog View Post
    I thought it was only EA enforcement officers who had similar powers to the coppers?
    Matt Drew does have such powers with regards to fishing.

  42. #42
    Join Date
    Jun 2010
    Location
    Cheshire UK
    Posts
    1,630

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by wavecloud View Post
    Matt Drew does have such powers with regards to fishing.
    Matt Drew's work is detailed in this report. http://www.anglingtrust.net/page.asp...liff%20Service
    "Rules are for the obedience of fools and the guidance of wise men"
    Grp Cpt Sir Douglas Bader CBE,DSO,DFC,FRAeS.

  43. #43
    Join Date
    Oct 2010
    Location
    UK
    Posts
    717

    Default

    Feel free to correct me if i am wrong.....

    Angling Enforcement Officers monitor illegal fishing and check for licenses on all watercourses and fisheries in England. This includes still waters, rivers, private commercial and public fisheries.

    Navigation Waterways Officers are responsible for waterways where the Environment Agency is the navigation authority.

    These are:


    • River Medway
    • River Thames
    • Anglian waterways
    • Rye Harbour
    • Royal Military Canal
    • River Wye
    • Dee estuary


    Among other things, the Waterways Officers check that crafts on EA waterways are correctly registered and operate locks and moorings.
    No comments,

    Cool, must have got it right....
    Last edited by Quicky; 11th-October-2014 at 10:11 PM.

  44. #44
    Join Date
    Mar 2013
    Location
    Leek
    Posts
    134

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Quicky View Post
    No comments,

    Cool, must have got it right....
    The school of Burton on Trent...

  45. #45
    Join Date
    Oct 2010
    Location
    UK
    Posts
    717

    Default

    Originally Posted by Robbo
    The school of Burton on Trent...
    Care to explain Robbo?

  46. #46
    Join Date
    Mar 2013
    Location
    Leek
    Posts
    134

    Default

    qui tacet consentire videtur?

    'No response has been made so the PRN is asserted by default on all flowing water in the whole of Wales. If anyone does not like it they may use the complaints procedure on the National Record of Asserted PRN's.'

    96 Napier Street Burton on Trent

  47. #47
    Join Date
    Oct 2010
    Location
    UK
    Posts
    717

    Default

    Nope, still lost me.... Last did Latin 30 years ago....

    What does you comment have to do with
    Angling Enforcement Officers monitor illegal fishing and check for licenses on all watercourses and fisheries in England. This includes still waters, rivers, private commercial and public fisheries.

    Navigation Waterways Officers are responsible for waterways where the Environment Agency is the navigation authority.

    These are:


    • River Medway
    • River Thames
    • Anglian waterways
    • Rye Harbour
    • Royal Military Canal
    • River Wye
    • Dee estuary


    Among other things, the Waterways Officers check that crafts on EA waterways are correctly registered and operate locks and moorings.
    Last edited by Quicky; 12th-October-2014 at 09:04 PM.

  48. #48
    Join Date
    Mar 2013
    Location
    Leek
    Posts
    134

    Default

    My reply was in response to your comments in post 43; 'No comments, cool I must have got it right'. It reminded me of another proponent of the maxim, 'silence is assent' from BoT. My law teacher used to say that to his students all the time and it didn't apply then either.

  49. #49
    Join Date
    Oct 2010
    Location
    UK
    Posts
    717

    Default

    so are you saying I got the facts right or wrong. (a simple answer with suffice for us non technical people)

  50. #50
    Join Date
    Jan 2006
    Location
    Bucks
    Posts
    6,948

    Default

    On the contrary Andy, he is saying his lack of a response in the negative cannot be taken as affirmation or consent. He is also suggesting that Angut's common law notices do not stack up since, the absence of a statement rejecting his assertion cannot be taken as assent. I have never understood the common law notice thing so am unable to comment.

  51. #51
    Join Date
    Aug 2006
    Location
    Keynsham near Bristol
    Posts
    3,751

    Default

    Silence means consent (in any language)? Robbo is clearly right that this is not always so. According to this "on-line lawyer (personally I'd hesitate to believe any of them) there are some quite clear exceptions.


    1. Where the silent person is not bound in good faith
    2. Where the silent person is not aware of his rights or what he is doing
    3. His/her silence is not voluntary
    4. The person concerned is disqualified to act as non compos or an infant or the like.


    Do any of these exceptions apply to you Robbo? Surely not?
    Keith

  52. #52
    Join Date
    Mar 2013
    Location
    Leek
    Posts
    134

    Default

    On the subject of agency, independant contractors whether they be painters, builders or fishery workers on the River Dove can not bind their Principal and any arrangements made with third parties are void. Just so ya know.

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •