Be warned - Chestnut Farm Meadow
Having been a club member for 10 years you never know what to expect.went to Chestnut Farm Meadow about 4 years ago in the summer not a bad cl,booked for the 21st/28th dec told by the owner it was quite wet so he would put us on a hardstanding pitch.we got there no about to check in with only bit of hardstanding we could see had what looked like a new age traveller 7.5 ton lorry parked across it and in front of that was a car taking up the rest of the so called hardstanding,toilet looked like a run down stable.We ended up leaving as there was no room to park.place was really poor compared to 4 years ago.For a club cl it was a damn disgrace.TRY IT AT YOUR PERIL.
Moderator Comment - This is not a story as specified by the T&C's. I will move it to the CL section in discussions but you really need to create a review.
Comments
-
Thanks for the heads up, chrisc.
0 -
Hi Chriscortes339
I am sorry to learn about your experience at Chestnut Farm Meadows.
Please could you contact Head Office at clresponse@camc.com with more information about your experience so we can look into this further.
Thanks
Maddie
0 -
Maddie
I am not sure the OP will see this as they originally posted this in the Story Section (I wonder if they intended it to be a review?) and I moved it to here. They have no history of posting on the forum. Could membership forward your message to them?
David
0 -
David, this is a problem that happens on a not infrequent basis...the moving of posts in the Story Section to specific sections of CT where occasional posters do not come back to view any responses. Isn't there any way of indicating where their post have been moved to, so that they can then follow them, without involving RO or others at HO?
0 -
Does the "normal" tracking system follow these moved threads?
Logged on > Discussions > "Useful info" column > "My Profile".
That shows our "Latest activity" with a "view this discussion" option; the question is does this track these moves?
0 -
In my view no. People very rarely come back to answer any notes left and that is the main reason I have given up on it. Given the shortcoming of the forum software I think asking Admin to contact the member in question once in a while is probably the best approach. In an ideal world it would be useful to be able to move things to the review section when they have been posted in the wrong place but that is not possible. At least moving it to the discussion area also got it noticed which perhaps it wouldn't have been had it been left in the Story Section?
David
0 -
Dont often use CL's and not familiar with the management of CL's by the club, but my guess would be that somebody is responsible for inspecting CL's probably at start up and infrequently thereafter, so would it not cut out a lot of effort if the person responsible for this checking jumped in a car and paid said CL a visit?.
0 -
Well at least to add it to a list of sites needing a more frequent inspection by the Club. If I recall correctly there as a similar sort of review of this CL in 2017, has it not been inspected since then? I would be interested to know what the inspection regime for CL's is, perhaps one of our contributing CL owners would like to enlighten us?
David
0 -
Looking at the state of a odd few CLs it would appear that if they are inspected at all then those doing the inspection are wearing rose coloured spectacles, if any at all!!
0 -
Nellie
With your experience they should make you a CL Inspector
David
0 -
I do wonder at times if some of the inspectors actually stay on a CL for a night or two, and not just have cursory visit now and again, when they know that the sites will be nearly empty.
0 -
Perhaps the CL inspectors just use the aerial view in Google Maps . . . .?
Seriously though, I have avoided a few CLs (and sites) because of what I can see there.
1 -
The local school, care home and GP have all been inspected and tne results published. I suggested a long time ago that the Club might also publish inspection reports of its own CLs. This would protect CL owners from vindictive reviewers, and would protect Club members from finding sites which were not as they expected. Might it be time to look at this again?
2 -
It’s a good thought, Euro, but the institutions you list are inspected by trained professionals with set national criteria to work to.
CLs are inspected by volunteer members who, with the best will in the world, are going to differ in their opinions of what’s good or not so good. The CL inspectors are often local to the area and known to the site owners and, while I’m not suggesting there’s anything underhand going on, I think an inspection by a ‘mystery camper’ would be preferable.
1 -
I think an inspection by a ‘mystery camper’ would be preferable.
I'd be up for that, expenses paid of course.
1 -
"mysery camper" indeed!
0 -
You'd be ideal for the job, Nellie👍🏻
1 -
Pah, should have gone to Specsavers, Nav.😂
0 -
You'd definitely get my vote: we've stayed on a few cls that you've reviewed and you've always been spot on.
As a CL lover all I want is an accurate description and if any facilities are advertised (which isn't a prerequisite for us) that they are fit for purpose. We've stayed on 2 where the shower and toilet facilities definitely were not!
We booked one particular cl because it had a shower. We knew in advance that we couldn't use the one in our van (as it had started leaking through van floor and was booked in at a future date to be repaired under warranty). However, the cl shower head was so covered in limescale that the water barely trickled out so using it was an unpleasant, cold and lengthy process! I pointed this out in my review of the site and yet others (who admitted they hadn't used it) said it "looked" fine to them!
You really do have to be able to read between the lines with people's reviews of cls and this is an art I'm slowly getting better at! I do love cls and don't let the one or two bad ones we've encountered put us off:sadly though I think it does put some people off which is a great shame as there are some fantastic cls out there.
4 -
Couldn't agree more with you thebells. We tend to know which reviewers to trust, and not just those who are on CT, and yes you do need to read between the lines. Some peoples concerns wouldn't matter to us, for example poor TV reception as we don't take one so you tend to do quite a bit of sifting through.
In general I do agree that there club could/should do more to engage better reviewers. They should also demand that all CLs provide photos giving an overall impression of the CL. No photos at all does lead one to wonder what they're hiding yet we've stayed on a few that have turned out fine but only after reading good reviews from members.
5 -
Rufs
No Cl's are not a revenue stream for the Club, in fact they costs the club money, The Inspectors get expenses and the Bi annual book has to be printed, together with staff at headquarters to be paid. The whole system is run as a service to the members. As a CL owner I have to operate to certain standards. and supply documents to prove this. All of which add hidden costs. As a club member and a caravaner that uses CL's I am happy with that.
2 -
In return the club collects a membership fee from every site owner and uses the CLs to boost the site network. It’s anybody's guess how many members pay their subscriptions to the club purely because they want to use CLs so it’s debatable whether CLs are a financial gain or drain to the club. Whichever, long may they continue👍🏻
4 -
In general I do agree that there club could/should do more to engage better reviewers. They should also demand that all CLs provide photos giving an overall impression of the CL. No photos at all does lead one to wonder what they're hiding yet we've stayed on a few that have turned out fine but only after reading good reviews from members.
Although they do say that a photo is worth a thousand words they can also give a false impression, as we've found out recently. However I would much more readily look to book a CL with a set of photos showing the site from various angles than some which give only one shot of the site and a whole load of other photos that show the what's in the area to visit, or those without any photos at all. Again we try and read between the lines of the site reviews and the details supplied by the site owners before we choose which ones we'll visit.
3 -
Totally agree NTH. Only pictures of the site and the pitches needed. Gereric photos of the area are obtainable elsewhere.
Never noticed a CL site inspector visiting a site in many years of CL camping. Wonder how you become one? Must be a hundred CL's within easy visiting distance of where I live in the Yorkshire Dales.
Would do it free of any charge to help the club and members
0 -
We have actually been on a CL when an inspector called! Unannounced of course (nothing wrong with that) but the very busy farmer was expected to drop everything instantly. On this occasion he couldn’t (needed for a going wrong calving). Inspector got a little huffy, did a cursory walk round, didn’t speak to any of us happily sat outside and that’s the last we saw of him. It was an excellent CL, so he wouldn’t have found much wrong anyway. Might have been in touch later of course.
Some of the tales we have heard about inspection visits have had us puzzling as well. One or two times, CLs that have been inspected for years, happily still part of network, are suddenly told you need this, this and this....not H&S stuff, but more what the inspector things users want. All adds up to a lot of expense for CL owners, and of course makes them question whether it’s still worth it.
0 -
We use CLs, and my usual criteria is always -
location most important (where we want to be, and not down a single track approach road), does it have EHU, then size of CL (ample space, 1/2 acre min), then if more than one CL is still on the list, check reviews, Google earth for layout etc, and availability.
Bungalow with 1/2 acre of manicured lawn is always preferable to CLs containing the word Farm in their name, with accompanying 2 feet high meadow grass, and a tap 300m from pitches!
0
