CLOSED - Your bookings are not safe
Comments
-
" also apply to large twin axle caravans and large European vans. IF you have completed yor profile information fully giving the size of your van and ETA then there should not be a problem."
...provided that somebody reads it......
its like these automated help lines...
"..please enter your account number to help us get you to the right person to help you....."
"hello, thanks for calling the helpline, whats your account number.....?"
DOH!
Everything was completed on the form. On the registration section I also wrote RV then the reg. Most of the sites had plenty of pitches that would easily accomodate and most didnt cone off a pitch for us. Some did.
However lets not get sidetracked onto the RV issue - its the fact that the CC dont see fit to honour all the bookings that are correctly made that is the problem here.
true, and i have been the victim of the 'process'....
however....two,things....
firstly, getting bumped (for anyone) is only likely to happen if the club has very good reason (unforeseen incident beyond its control)
secondly, i am not exactly clear on what the detailed process actually is....im sure someone tried (and failed, it seems) to explain it to Viv, but it would be good for it to be clearly and unambiguously documented here so that we all understand why this
might happen, and in what sequence bookings are cancelled.this is certainly a case where a scripted process is better than wardens discretion as this might lead to different (but similar) occasions resulting in different outcomes.
time for the CC 'person' to spell it out nice and clearly.
0 -
So for all Viven's hard work with the solos which brought revenue to the club then being dumped from a site because she wouldn't make the club as much money as another booking (despite being against the CC own t&c) she finally gets a suspension for speaking
her mind.I hope she takes the solos club to the C&CC who I'm sure would be happy to oblige.
In the last few years the CC has really lost touch with reality.
0 -
So for all Viven's hard work with the solos which brought revenue to the club then being dumped from a site because she wouldn't make the club as much money as another booking (despite being against the CC own t&c) she finally gets a suspension for speaking
her mind.I hope she takes the solos club to the C&CC who I'm sure would be happy to oblige.
In the last few years the CC has really lost touch with reality.
There is no evidence that she was cancelled because she was going solo. It does look to be one of a number of possibilities but the exact reason has never been revealed.
Having said that to me the criteria should simply be last to book are the ones cancelled as anything else just leads to problems. I am afraid any site can be faced with having to cancel if there are problems so no booking can be 100% certain.
0 -
It's against the T&C's
What is?
I was answering wildwoods post
Sorry HD, I somehow missed reding that post.
0 -
Why hasn't a bookings champion appeared on here and advised us what the score/circumstrances are when a site decides to cancel someone's booking. Rowena put a list of internal club champions in the introduction sections and most, not all, are never heard
of again. Most of the hassles that arise on CT could be resolved by the timely intervention of our CC championsOne wonders at the exact nature of their role. Doesn't one, One?
Do they actually have a role, or is it just to act as a mouth for the party line?
0 -
" also apply to large twin axle caravans and large European vans. IF you have completed yor profile information fully giving the size of your van and ETA then there should not be a problem."
...provided that somebody reads it......
its like these automated help lines...
"..please enter your account number to help us get you to the right person to help you....."
"hello, thanks for calling the helpline, whats your account number.....?"
DOH!
Everything was completed on the form. On the registration section I also wrote RV then the reg. Most of the sites had plenty of pitches that would easily accomodate and most didnt cone off a pitch for us. Some did.
However lets not get sidetracked onto the RV issue - its the fact that the CC dont see fit to honour all the bookings that are correctly made that is the problem here.
true, and i have been the victim of the 'process'....
however....two,things....
firstly, getting bumped (for anyone) is only likely to happen if the club has very good reason (unforeseen incident beyond its control)
secondly, i am not exactly clear on what the detailed process actually is....im sure someone tried (and failed, it seems) to explain it to Viv, but it would be good for it to be clearly and unambiguously documented here so that we all understand why this
might happen, and in what sequence bookings are cancelled.this is certainly a case where a scripted process is better than wardens discretion as this might lead to different (but similar) occasions resulting in different outcomes.
time for the CC 'person' to spell it out nice and clearly.
Not the case at all. Viv was bumped because another member (or non-member) with a family wanted a longer stay than she did. That is certainly not, IMO, very good reason (unforeseen incident beyond its control). It was all about maximising
profit!!0 -
Nellie,
.....the first issue surely, is that if there hadnt been 'a very good reason (unforseen incident beyond its control)' then NO-ONE (Viv, nor anyone else) would have been bumped, would they?
the second point is, 'should' there be the need to bump anyone, the sequence of who gets bumped first needs a total and unambiguous clarification.
if this 'clear' process was not the one used to cancel Viv's holiday (and some other process was used) this is wrong.
if the 'clear' process involves maximising income over date of booking, this is the club's prerogative, but morally wrong.
i am most definitely not defending the club, its just that we havent had a definitive (unabmbiguous) cancellation process mapped out.
this is an emotive thread, i feel very bad for Viv, i do know what its like to be 'bumped'.....in our case on New Years Eve for our New Year break....not a good time to be scratching round for an alternative.
however, the club has already taken action over 'emotive' and we need some clear facts...they need to plead their case.....but i dont see it happening on CT.
0 -
Nellie,
.....the first issue surely, is that if there hadnt been 'a very good reason (unforseen incident beyond its control)' then NO-ONE (Viv, nor anyone else) would have been bumped, would they?
the second point is, 'should' there be the need to bump anyone, the sequence of who gets bumped first needs a total and unambiguous clarification.
if this 'clear' process was not the one used to cancel Viv's holiday (and some other process was used) this is wrong.
if the 'clear' process involves maximising income over date of booking, this is the club's prerogative, but morally wrong.
i am most definitely not defending the club, its just that we havent had a definitive (unabmbiguous) cancellation process mapped out.
this is an emotive thread, i feel very bad for Viv, i do know what its like to be 'bumped'.....in our case on New Years Eve for our New Year break....not a good time to be scratching round for an alternative.
however, the club has already taken action over 'emotive' and we need some clear facts...they need to plead their case.....but i dont see it happening on CT.
No BB. There was no "good reason" to bump Viv, only increase in profit. It was vindictive. There were other solos who had booked after her who's booking were honoured. So there was certainly unforseen incident.
0 -
POST REMOVED: Posting on behalf of a suspended user is not permitted under the Community Guidelines.
0 -
Am I reading this correctly?
Beacuse the club had decided that grass pitches could be booked togther with HS, people did, inlcuding Vivien. However these grass pitches were then deemed to be un useable and so the number of pitches was reduced and hence some people including Vivien were
told their booking had been cancelled.Then it get complicated as to who get cancelled and who doesn't?
Is that correct?
0 -
Am I reading this correctly?
Beacuse the club had decided that grass pitches could be booked togther with HS, people did, inlcuding Vivien. However these grass pitches were then deemed to be un useable and so the number of pitches was reduced and hence some people including Vivien were
told their booking had been cancelled.Then it get complicated as to who get cancelled and who doesn't?
Is that correct?
If I understand what Vivien is saying she and the other family booked on the same day but she was the first to book. In deciding who should be cancelled the Club took into account the value of the booking rather than using the exact first come first served
basis. Whilst obviously the family booking would have been more valueable I wonder if any consideration was also given to the fact that the family had booked for a longer period and a greater number of people would have been disenfranchised had their booking
been cancelled?David
0 -
I'm sure the club does its best to try to please everyone but there may be circumstances in which this can't be done. Some of the comments on this thread do seem rather antagonistic towards the club. This is, after all, supposed to be a friendly and pleasant
forum and we're all members of the club and need to give the club our support especially as we have not yet heard the club's story about what has happened.0 -
Agree fully with David and Malcolm.
0 -
Am I reading this correctly?
Beacuse the club had decided that grass pitches could be booked togther with HS, people did, inlcuding Vivien. However these grass pitches were then deemed to be un useable and so the number of pitches was reduced and hence some people including Vivien were
told their booking had been cancelled.Then it get complicated as to who get cancelled and who doesn't?
Is that correct?
If I understand what Vivien is saying she and the other family booked on the same day but she was the first to book. In deciding who should be cancelled the Club took into account the value of the booking rather than using the exact first come first served
basis. Whilst obviously the family booking would have been more valueable I wonder if any consideration was also given to the fact that the family had booked for a longer period and a greater number of people would have been disenfranchised had their booking
been cancelled?David
Write your comments here...So if you are single or a couple and the site is overbooked your holiday could be cancelled so a larger party could have it as there are more of them, and it would be less disruptive to cancel the single or couple.
0 -
heard the club's story about what has happened.
So where are the much lauded full time champions who could explain what the rules for cancellation are and if they are applied evenly. I am not asking for explanation of Viv's situation, thats confidential and should remain so.
0 -
I'm sure the club does its best to try to please everyone but there may be circumstances in which this can't be done. Some of the comments on this thread do seem rather antagonistic towards the club. This is, after all, supposed to be a friendly and pleasant
forum and we're all members of the club and need to give the club our support especially as we have not yet heard the club's story about what has happened.Nor are we likely to!
0 -
I'm sure the club does its best to try to please everyone but there may be circumstances in which this can't be done. Some of the comments on this thread do seem rather antagonistic towards the club. This is, after all, supposed to be a friendly and pleasant
forum and we're all members of the club and need to give the club our support especially as we have not yet heard the club's story about what has happened.Nor are we likely to!
As is far too often the case their silence is deafening
v9
0 -
I guess tricky decisions have to made on occasions! No matter what criteria is used to make these, it won't please all of those folk disappointed by such unavoidable and possibly unforeseen circumstances.
agreed, M...there will have to be a process in place for these times.....
.hence my call for a definitive, clear, unambiguous statement from the club on 'exactly' what this process is...
Not some airy fairy 'weasle words' which give them carte blanche to bump who they 'feel' they should.
so, come on CC. nice and clear so that we can all understand.
thank you.
0 -
Like so many decisions the devil may just be in the detail, it could be site specific, pitch spectic, event specific, detail specific, booking specific. not easy to encompass in a straightforward, unambiguous coverall statement possibly!
0 -
Like so many decisions the devil may just be in the detail, it could be site specific, pitch spectic, event specific, detail specific, booking specific. not easy to encompass in a straightforward, unambiguous coverall statement possibly!
so, some general 'principals' with a dollop of 'wardens discretion' (or EG discretion?) on top?
if its a flexible system like this, there will always be room for a bum decision and the club being left open to criticism, as (it seems) in this case.
if the site becomes overbooked by (say) three bookings due to removal of three pitches for 'unforseen circumstances' the it would seem the fairest process is to bump the last three bookings, irrespective of 'the profitability/viability' of the site....or
whatever it was they came up with....if its really 'last booked' etc then there can be no ambiguity.
a 'last booked, but i think it would be better if we......' system is asking for trouble, as we now know.....
0 -
It may be that the club have a duty of confidentiality over vivien's situation and so cannot post any details on this forum about her particular case.
It must have also caused them some concern that a thread has been created that has become a witch hunt against the club and the staff who work there and designed to put other members off using the club when the aim of the club is to give all its members the best quality service that is possible.
This forum is perhaps not intended to be used as a means of naming and railing against particular members of staff who are just trying to do a difficult job in the best possible way.
0 -
im certainly not railing against the club Malcolm, merely requesting a clear, easily understood, fair system for those circumstances that are deemed unavoidable.
0 -
im certainly not railing against the club Malcolm, merely requesting a clear, easily understood, fair system for those circumstances that are deemed unavoidable.
Write your comments here...It looks as though, in this case, BB, it was a question of warden's discretion. It could have happened to any of us and if it did, most of us would have accepted the decision without complaint. So it seems a little unfair that wild accusations of discrimination are being made against the club when all the club was trying to do was act in the best interest of all its members. How can you expect the club to give favouritism to one particular member simply because she organises solo events when there are others in the club who are couples or families that also need consideration?
0 -
It should still be "last in, first out" as that is the only equitable way. Anything else is discriminatory.
0 -
It should still be "last in, first out" as that is the only equitable way. Anything else is discriminatory.
exactly, embellishing the process to include any sort of 'discretion' is asking for trouble.
0 -
It should still be "last in, first out" as that is the only equitable way. Anything else is discriminatory.
Write your comments here...I doubt that the club intended to discriminate against any one particular individual, CY. If anything, they have acted in favour of vivien by giving her three free site night vouchers. So why can't she appreciate their kind gesture instead of trying to create disharmony and fear amongst other members by saying their bookings are not safe and continuing to maintain such a theme when the club have probably gone overboard in trying to appease her.
0
