A poor reception at Kendal
I arrived today at my favourite site, Low Park Wood, (Kendal), which I have been using for more than 25 years. My internet booking sheet clearly stated arrival 12.00 - 14.00 in the booking summary.
Arriving at 12.15 I was told that the new rule for earliest check in time was 13.00. The reason given was that the narrow approach lane, which of course I had already negotiated at this point, was hazardous if incoming traffic encountered outgoing vans.
On rechecking my booking form, the new check in time is stated further down, contradicting the statement higher up. I hadn't noticed this.
OK, I can accept the reasoning, regarding the lane, and in future I will comply. What REALLY upset me was that the duty warden then refused to open the barrier to allow me onto the site. We were left standing in the arrivals park area, with several other
"earlies", like naughty children being taught a lesson! This served absolutely no purpose as there were no traffic movements either on or off site at the time. In the event, the barrier was actually opened at 12-45, I think because a tail back was building
up risking blocking the entrance.
This is not what the club is about. The sites are opearated for and on behalf of the members, not for the officials to ensure compliance with arbitrarily changed petty rules. This experience quite spoiled the start of my long weekend break.
Comments
-
I struggle to comprehend how your oversight of the site instructions is justification to berate the wardens on a public forum.
Reinforces that complacency breeds contempt.
Who would you berate publicly if your journey had been delayed? It's a holiday, take a chill pill.
0 -
The confusion on times is a fault of the booking software. It is the same at Chatsworth, where earliest is 1pm and Edinburgh where it is 9am. However the first ETA tick box for both is 12 - 14:00. However, it is not appropriate to publicly berate the wardens
on this forum0 -
Most wardens do a great job, it seems some on here feel that it is wrong to be critical of them if their work falls below what are normal customer service standards.
It is the wardens job to serve caravan club members, if a member feels standards are not been met then it's only fair to comment on the caravan club forum and create discussion , not to be described as ' inappropriate' for doing so .
0 -
I have copied and pasted my post from the Rowntree complaint thread, as I think it applies equally well to this case.
This is far from just a story. What you have done is charged, tried and convicted the warden and they have had no right of defence or appeal. IMO that is just wrong. Occasionally in a supermarket I have been concerned by the level of service I have received. However, I would never publicly take the individual to task, however much I might like to. Again in my opinion the correct approach is to mention it to their supervisor, in this case the CC, either informally or a formal complaint is up to you.
0 -
How about a sign on the gate saying, Hello, if you have a reservation please come in and choose a pitch and sign in after lunch? That's common practice at other sites.
0 -
This sounds like a fault with the booking system which should have clearly stated the new arrival time when the member was booking the site.Two different arrival times on the same booking form is no help at all.As regards this discussion the member has every right to raise this on the forum and air his views.I see no problem with that.
peter.
0 -
This sounds like a fault with the booking system which should have clearly stated the new arrival time when the member was booking the site.Two different arrival times on the same booking form is no help at all.As regards this discussion the member has every right to raise this on the forum and air his views.I see no problem with that.
peter.
I would agree with that Peter if the individual(s) Had not been all but identified. If the post had been more general, site name Deleted User for instance. Too publicly make a complaint when the person being complained about cannot respond is unfair.
0 -
Any change in arrival times really needs to be made crystal clear. If you are using the CC website on a phone the arrival time is not obvious. You need to click on the important information link to see it.
Confusing email, no obvious arrival time on mobile webpage, out of date time in handbook no doubt, no communication of the change to members via website news or magazine? Sounds about right to me
0 -
I have copied and pasted my post from the Rowntree complaint thread, as I think it applies equally well to this case.
This is far from just a story. What you have done is charged, tried and convicted the warden and they have had no right of defence or appeal. IMO that is just wrong. Occasionally in a supermarket I have been concerned by the level of service I have received. However, I would never publicly take the individual to task, however much I might like to. Again in my opinion the correct approach is to mention it to their supervisor, in this case the CC, either informally or a formal complaint is up to you.
Write your comments here...I have not charged,tried or convicted anyone, this is a forum for caravan club members to have their say And anyone from the club has the right of reply, however you are entitled to your opinion,
we are now having a nice relaxing time at beechwood grange,the wardens are great, ( hope I'm allowed to say that )
0 -
This sounds like a fault with the booking system which should have clearly stated the new arrival time when the member was booking the site.Two different arrival times on the same booking form is no help at all.As regards this discussion the member has every right to raise this on the forum and air his views.I see no problem with that.
peter.
I would agree with that Peter if the individual(s) Had not been all but identified. If the post had been more general, site name Deleted User for instance. Too publicly make a complaint when the person being complained about cannot respond is unfair.
It's a difficult call, that Steve. There have been loads of generalised complaints about various matter on here before and quite often the first question asked is "which site are we talking about"?
I think on balance it's fair enough to name the site but I would like the wardens concerned to be given the chance to put their side of the story.
And David has gone out of his way to praise the wardens at Beechwood - he's clearly not one of those "have a go at the club and wardens at every opprtunity" members.
0 -
I realise the thread(s) have not been against the Wardens per se but against the system they are obliged to adhere to. If there are enough Wardens(if not there should be) the system could be more relaxed, ie arrive when it suits the customer. Clockwork attitude
in a digital age It does jar & create problems
0 -
I agree with that Rocky. There are loads of club sites wth more than one pair of wardens where there are absolutely no access difficulties whatsoever. In those cases the rigid arrival/departure rules are very frustrating - but that's a topic for a whole other thread maybe!!
0 -
This sounds like a fault with the booking system which should have clearly stated the new arrival time when the member was booking the site.Two different arrival times on the same booking form is no help at all.As regards this discussion the member
has every right to raise this on the forum and air his views.I see no problem with that.peter.
I would agree with that Peter if the individual(s) Had not been all but identified. If the post had been more general,
site name Deleted User for instance. Too publicly make a complaint when the person being complained about cannot respond is unfair.It's a difficult call, that Steve. There have been loads of generalised complaints about various matter on here before and quite often the first question asked is "which site are we talking about"?
I think on balance it's fair enough to name the site but I would like the wardens concerned to be given the chance to put their side of the story.
And David has gone out of his way to praise the wardens at Beechwood - he's clearly not one of those "have a go at the club and wardens at every opprtunity" members.
M that Is my concern with this type of specific thread, the wardens are not able to give their side of the story. Even if they were members of CT, I don't think the CC would approve of them responding. I would agree it is nice David has given credit to the
wardens at Beechwood. However, in his post he says "hope I'm allowed to say that" I fear he is missing the point that there is a big difference between criticism and praise if the recipient is unable to respond.0 -
Point taken, Steve. Maybe someone from HO who monitors threads should be responsible for pursuing complaints like this and answering on behalf of the wardens.
(Obviously just for specific complaints of this nature and not for the dozens of supposed faults and complaints that some folk dream up!
)0 -
Blimey, when I read the OP, I thought he was talking about a C&CC site who have all gone to 1p.m. arrival. I didn't realise some CC sites were the same.
Perhaps the site warden had another function to carry out which meant he couldn't book the early arrivals in. It seems to me that site wardens have a thankless task, damned if they do and damned if they don't. As an aside, I think I prefer holiday site
manager (C&CC) sounds more friendly than warden. After all they are sites for leisure not prison camps, aren't they? Escape committee anyone, lol?0 -
Point taken, Steve. Maybe someone from HO who monitors threads should be responsible for pursuing complaints like this and answering on behalf of the wardens.
(Obviously just for specific complaints of this nature and not for the dozens of supposed faults and complaints that some folk dream up!
)Agreed, it would be nice to see some input on this thread.
0 -
This sounds like a fault with the booking system which should have clearly stated the new arrival time when the member was booking the site.Two different arrival times on the same booking form is no help at all.As regards this discussion the member
has every right to raise this on the forum and air his views.I see no problem with that.peter.
I would agree with that Peter if the individual(s) Had not been all but identified. If the post had been more general,
site name Deleted User for instance. Too publicly make a complaint when the person being complained about cannot respond is unfair.It's a difficult call, that Steve. There have been loads of generalised complaints about various matter on here before and quite often the first question asked is "which site are we talking about"?
I think on balance it's fair enough to name the site but I would like the wardens concerned to be given the chance to put their side of the story.
And David has gone out of his way to praise the wardens at Beechwood - he's clearly not one of those "have a go at the club and wardens at every opprtunity" members.
M that Is my concern with this type of specific thread, the wardens are not able to give their side of the story. Even if they were members of CT, I don't think the CC would approve of them responding. I would agree it is nice David has given credit to the
wardens at Beechwood. However, in his post he says "hope I'm allowed to say that" I fear he is missing the point that there is a big difference between criticism and praise if the recipient is unable to respond.Write your comments here...please don't fear I am missing THE point, , it is YOUR point of view Not THE point of view.
If you look at my previous posts you will see I don't have a go at wardens generally. I just felt that on this occasion the club fell below the standards we as members deserve.
If it's wrong to name a site or menation a warden then the Mods will delete The post.
That has not happened.
0 -
SL, D2 has not attacked wardens, I see no personal comments this forum can't really go down the route of sanitising or only allowing positive comments it would kill it dead. If a rule was in place re 'not able to comment' in the absence of the subject would
we have to stop posting negative comments on-dealers/LV's/Cars/Shops/Roads etc?. Personal attacks are totally unacceptable agreed, there are none here
0 -
Regarding CC staff Rocky, there is a duty of care owed to employees. Although it's good to be able to make comments there are boundaries about employees especially ones that are obviously traceable to the actual person. I'm not defending poor responses or attitudes but these need to be taken up with the CC itself.
0 -
We've been members for quite awhile now but if I was a new member or potential new member, I would be having second thought just now.
The amount of complaints about the Club running on CT at this time is very off putting. I know this only shows a fraction of the membership but its not a good reflection of the Club. I'm dissapointed that there is very little interaction between the club and CT when members are clearly wanting answers.
In answer to the OP it is unfortunate that the times have changed for this site and the documentation wasn't correct, the OP had previous knowledge of the site and wasn't aware of the change, it happens. The club leaves itself open to these complaints because they do not have a standard check in time across the network, also each site seem to bend/break the rules to suit, all of which is very confussing for the customer.
0 -
Agreed TG
My membership is teetering on a knife edge due to the Broadway fiasco but the sheer volume of petty (and not so petty) complaints at the moment is really off putting.
Renewal looks ever more unlikely
After my own problems with the Club this week, my membership is also in on the brink. The only reason that I would stay is for the CL network, we have 2 CL's that we use on a regular basis (to visit the children) that have become friends and I wouldn't want
to lose that. Everything else I can get elsewhere.0 -
I've not had the sort of problems you have TG.
I just don't have much respect for a business that doesn't answer complaints and explain the situation. It doesn't matter whether the club don't see this as a forum for grievances - this is what it's treated as and this is what people use it for.
I'm not tied into the CL network as much as others but I would miss the site search and booking system
0 -
I've not had the sort of problems you have TG.
I just don't have much respect for a business that doesn't answer complaints and explain the situation. It doesn't matter whether the club don't see this as a forum for grievances - this is what it's treated as and this is what people use it for.
I'm not tied into the CL network as much as others but I would miss the site search and booking system
... have to agree with you there.
0 -
Agreed TG
My membership is teetering on a knife edge due to the Broadway fiasco but the sheer volume of petty (and not so petty) complaints at the moment is really off putting.
Renewal looks ever more unlikely
After my own problems with the Club this week, my membership is also in on the brink. The only reason that I would stay is for the CL network, we have 2 CL's that we use on a regular basis (to visit the children) that have become friends and I wouldn't want
to lose that. Everything else I can get elsewhere.+1 TG, I now just want to use CL's with my Tailgate Awning. The CC won't allow me to do so on CL's, to test this I mailed 2CL's with a pic of my set up. both said no sorry. I asked both if they were full-1 had one rig the other had 2 rigs. I have the money
& the time, the CL's have the space-but it ain't happening. Looking at the C&CC app they are very accommodating. 'Money talks' I understand folks frustration0 -
I have copied and pasted my post from the Rowntree complaint thread, as I think it applies equally well to this case.
This is far from just a story. What you have done is charged, tried and convicted the warden and they have had no right of defence or appeal. IMO that is just wrong. Occasionally in a supermarket I have been concerned by the level of service I have
received. However, I would never publicly take the individual to task, however much I might like to. Again in my opinion the correct approach is to mention it to their supervisor, in this case the CC, either informally or a formal complaint is up to you.I agree with much of what you say, Steve......but unfortunately writing to the CC doesn't usually provide any results. If you are lucky enough to actually receive a reply (many don't) it is usually along the lines of "thank you for your comments, we will
look into this" - not much use!On the matter of the wardens having no right of defence, I suppose the wardens in question could take the trouble to reply on this post, maybe? If I were a warden, I'm sure I would look in here to see what sort of things were annoying my 'guests' as well
as looking at site reviews.0
