How to book a CL on the revised website
Comments
-
Quite frankly even with inaccurate prices advertised, CL pricing is more transparent than Club sites. When they introduced so many bands I gave up trying to work out myself how much a stay would cost. With a CL if a site is advertised at £8 or £16 or £20 you at least know a ball park figure. I ALWAYS check the price when booking, through email when possible.
1 -
Ted
I don't know how hard the Club try to make sure CL prices are up to date or how easy they make it for prices to be updated. However from your quote I sense a degree of frustration from the Club that it is proving difficult to provide accurate information. If that is not possible, perhaps best to not include it. As for Club sites I would personally not use any pricing information. However the only trouble with that is that pricing of main Club sites is not as transparent as under the old system as far as I can tell, you seem now to have to virtually make a booking to get pricing?
As to pricing being available on the old system I wonder how long for? In her most recent post Rowena quoted this "A number of members have been asking why we replaced the old booking system. First and foremost the old booking system could no longer be easily maintained and wasn’t capable of meeting the needs of the members for the future."
Does that suggest all aspects of the old system will eventually be taken down?
David
0 -
David, I find this really difficult to understand. The club offers "prices from" for their own sites with little indication of what the real price might be. For CLs the club now offers nothing in the way of pricing but were quite happy previously to include CL pricing even if it was out of date. Why not the status quo for all?
2 -
I am pleased to see some further progress this week and a new video launched..
However..
- There are no prices shown for CLs - see this thread for an explanation
- Sites only show in A-Z order and only show 20 sites - this negatively impacts any sites at the lower end of the alphabet
- The compare function shows the same photo for all sites selected
- The photo shown is not the 'lead' photo that CL owners would like to see
- The filter option still lacks vital elements such as 'Hardstanding' or proximity to Public Transport or a Pub or Off-Grid sites..
- There are also hundreds of CLs that have closed that are showing..
The team are aware of all these issues (and more), and I'm sure they will be resolved soon..
0 -
What a dogs dinner the club have made of CL Bookings and information and what hypocrisy to want transparency of costs for CL when the clubs own "from" price is probably representative of less than 0.1% of the bookings made for that particular site. That is to say 1 adult (maybe without EHU) on the last day in Winter.
As for only 20 sites in A-Z form I can't think of many more things insulting to the intelligence of owners and CL users than this, and it has plenty of competition.
Digusted with this club.
6 -
Reported your post WN, just to make a point, but without much hope that someone might take a bit of notice.
0 -
The team are aware of all these issues (and more), and I'm sure they will be resolved soon..
Ted, do you honestly believe that or is it just a case of wishful thinking on your part?
0 -
Unfortunately, after nearly 5 weeks now since the launch of the new website, I don't share Ted's optimism either; I wonder whether it was rather tongue-in-cheek.
The "club"'s comments about costs is arrogant IMHO. Their own "from" prices are hardly realistic, are they? Based on 1 person on usually the last day before the site closes for winter
At least CL prices aren't based on only 1 person, but are based on pitch. In addition, CL prices don't fluctuate throughout the year, unlike the main club sites, which have about 6 or 7 different price bands last time I looked. Mind you, that was on the good old system, now that HS are £1 more than grass, there are no doubt even more price combinations than before
I really feel sorry for CL owners, who have been left out in the cold so to speak. And I'm very frustrated, angry and, yes, upset, at the way the "club" has foisted this new system on us. I have also read the reviews on Trustpilot, and the replies; they are an insult to our intelligence: stock answers, repeated ad nauseum, without addressing each individual review in detail.
I sincerely hope the website will improve as far as CLs are concerned, but won't hold my breath.
4 -
I have criticised the CL part of new site on this forum, reported issues via the booking experience feedback facility and have also commented on trust pilot. Guess where I get a response? Within hours of posting on trust pilot there is a reply. Says they are listening to members and acting on comments, inc abt CLs. Says there is as one of the fixes an ability to search via facilities. ( I knew that, and my comment referred to it) Needless to say don’t answer species abt poor facility search or abt limited numbers of sites appearing on list.
I do hope those going to the NEC not only make feelings known but also take an opportunity to actually demonstrate the issues. Hopefully some of those attending will let us know about the response.
1 -
I think the Club values it’s Trustpilot commitment. It’s had an excellent reply response rate right from joining, and up to the introduction of this new Booking Scheme, enjoyed very high ratings (admittedly based mainly on lots of Site based reviews, rather than the company as a whole). You can trace the date back to when things started to go downhill, and the fall has been a swift one, relatively speaking. Credit to the Club for at least responding on here, but most replies from the TP team are a bit formulaic.
Sadly, it’s the best place to let the Club know how it’s changes are being received, because of the attention it receives, and it’s wide profile. At least it will generate a response, unlike on here, or get lost in the Twitface muddle.
Sort of on the plus side, the Club does value TP. The Caravan and Camping Club has never valued it at all, and their ratings are frankly embarrassing on such a broad stage. They would be better off ditching it altogether…….
0 -
The C&CC seems to survive well without Trust Pilot, all ratings are subjective and can be used for many purposes, good or bad. Generally the in house membership reviews for both clubs are the ones which are helpful. C&CC checks and monitors it's reviews, CAMC doesn't seem to do this and possibly relies on reporting?
I don't know which system is best but I prefer in house reviews which are monitored rather than energy expended on outside review sources.
At least CL reviews tend to be in house.
I can't understand why CAMC are using an outside source to field answers to complaints!? They could run a feedback section on their own website.
4 -
I agree to a certain extent brue. If I want to know what Sites are like, I use the in house review section of both Clubs. A good resource if you are cute enough to discard the “I didn’t get my way” rants that occasionally pop up.
But I think TP is a reflection of the Company as a whole, beyond individual Sites. That’s why I find it strange that the CCC almost totally disregards it…why bother if there’s no commitment. If it wasn’t for folks posting positive reviews about individual Sites on TP, the CAMC ratings would possibly be lower than they are?
In a nutshell, for me, it’s possible to like most of the CAMC’s Sites, but not some of the rules and regulations, the governance, the decision making, the communications, the pricing, the closures, dealing direct with HQ, etc….
Not sure if it includes CAMC Experience Freedom arm? We seem to be getting a lot of offers lately from this?
0
