21 day rule
Comments
-
I am interested as we have friends/acquaintences who shuffle from CL to Club site all through the Summer months, so they will do 21 days on a Club Site, then move a mile away to stay 28 days on a CL, then back and forth again between March and October. Hence
they will probably have around 5 months in total, on a Club Site, but only in stretches of 21 days or less. Other friends who did similar solved their moving dilemma by becoming volunteer Wardens on a Club Site, working one day a week and never having to move
off pitch!
0 -
The general CC rule is as quoted above, max 21 days on a site, then you can move to another, or return after a 2 day absence.
Never heard of not being allowed to return to a site until more days than that have elapsed.
Only possibility is that Alderstead has/had a different rule as it is very popular with those working in the London area.
If it does then it should be stated on the site information.
Having just checked the site details, it quotes the 21/2 day rule only, no mention of anything else.
0 -
With regard to application of 'rules' some of us advocate site discretion (sometimes this is part of the rules), others the need for standardisation and unwavering application with no discretion to be utilised across all sites. Some folk even switch their
standpoint between the two depending on what the 'topic/rule' is and what suits them at the time.Now I'm all for discretion and common sense management but some folk I acknowledge won't like idea at all. But let's be honest, who is it that can't win whatever approach is adopted?
0 -
I have no problem with most of Club's rules and regs, as a member I signed up to them. I would like to know in this instance if the max of 21 days on a Club Site is a Club determined rule, or if it is legislatory. Either way, not something I have an issue
with, just interested to know which it is.0 -
Common sense has been reported as deceased, and in it's place is rare sense
Where does commercial reality come into the discussion? This discussion commenced in respect of the low season. Surely if there are members wanting to pitch up for longer than 21 days when pitches are readily available why not enable that?
In my case I may be away from home for a few months over the low season and would much prefer to use the caravan than stay in hotels. Why not the CC take the income than put me off using my membership just because of roolz for roolz sake?
The Act mentioned previously is over 50 years old. The current economic climate means going to where the work is. The proposed changes to self employed and small business owners will make people seek the best cost benefit, so why not the CC capitalise on
this. The CC is a commercial organisation, not a club, after all.0 -
That is the basis of my question. If it is merely a Club "rule", then perhaps with enough representation to the Club council, such a "rule" could be modified for the benefit of members, and Club turnover. If however, it is a piece of legislation that the
Club has to adhere to, then changing this will not be so easy. Sort of like Brexit really!0 -
The Caravan Sites and Control of Development Act 1960; is an extensive and complex piece of Legislation (Law) It contains a great number of Regulations but also a great number of Exemptions. To be able to determine exactly which part of the Act that will apply to a Site, you must first determine under which part of the Act that Particular Site has been granted its Licence. (not a task for the faint hearted). and probably only achievable by seeing that Particular Site’s Licence, In addition to this the Licensee may place additional Rules upon its use by their clientele, so long as these Rules do not conflict with the terms and conditions of the Act itself
0 -
I agree with your 'beef'. The reason is because some numpty who would not know a caravan from a moon rocket decided that it will happen. Don't forget that we are in the uk and are ruled by a lot of numpties.
Why live here then? You're at liberty to go to any country of your choosing where there's no "numpties"!!
0 -
Without trawling through the Act but going from memory (but please allow for the fact that my memory
is going)
.I believe that the 21/2days regulation is part of the Act that applies to Seasonal Pitches only.
Not sure if this is infact the case. With the C&CC the rule is thus :- For touring pitches "On all of our sites, the maximum stay allowed is 28 days after which time your pitch must be vacated for 24hrs before you can return to the pitch".
For seasonal pitches "The unit may be occupied for recreational puposes only, subject to a maximum of 21 nights for any one visit. An interval of at least 3 nights must elapse before a return visit to the unit situated on the pitch"
0 -
It would seem from NTH's post that the 21 day "rule" is not law as the C&CC seem to operate a different time limit and one would assume that they would have to abide by the same law as the CC. If it is just a rule laid down by the CC then sufficient representation
to the sites department might get the subject discussed at least. They could then have a trial period at a limited number of sites and then abandon the idea0 -
The rule is not law although it might possibly be a planning restriction on some sites, but certainly not all. As the C&CC has 28 days the CC policy must have been someones brainwave some time ago, but it certainly could be looked at if there is demand for
more. Not sure though how many people need more than 21 days unless they are people working in the area rather than holidaymakers.0 -
I do not think it can be clearly established just whether it is Law or whether it is Rule unless; as I posted earlier, you have access to a Particular Site/Sites Licence/Certificate.
Although the Act does not stipulate a particular time frame Re: continuous occupancy, the Minister or Local Authority may have done so by statute, in which case it is Law.
On the other hand if it is a condition imposed by either a body issuing an Exemption Certificate or by the Site Licence/Certificate Holder then it is a Rule.
0 -
be it a rule imposed by the club or not, its what you sign up for when you join? You don't have to join or use the club's network of sites
But seriouly apart from the OP (not saying it isn't a problem for them) has this been a problem to most club members? Didn't the club say that on booking day the average stay is 5 nights?
0 -
be it a rule imposed by the club or not, its what you sign up for when you join? You don't have to join or use the club's network of sites
But seriouly apart from the OP (not saying it isn't a problem for them) has this been a problem to most club members? Didn't the club say that on booking day the average stay is 5 nights?
it's probably only a problem to full time caravanners, who would like to live all year round in one place, as that is nesr where they work.
0 -
Digressing slightly, even when we both worked full time, because of the way our leave was allocated, and the work patterns we followed, we regularly had more than 21 days away. At the time, we tended to stay in one place with caravan, using car for days
out. So in the early days, we used a CC site, but could never book more than 21 nights. We solved it by using a CL close by and having 28 days. So some people do want/ need more than a week or so on a site. It's not an issue on some Club Sites, as the weekends
are booked, preventing a long stay anyway! But that's for another thread!
0 -
I do not think it can be clearly established just whether it is Law or whether it is Rule unless; as I posted earlier, you have access to a Particular Site/Sites Licence/Certificate.
Although the Act does not stipulate a particular time frame Re: continuous occupancy, the Minister or Local Authority may have done so by statute, in which case it is Law.
On the other hand if it is a condition imposed by either a body issuing an Exemption Certificate or by the Site Licence/Certificate Holder then it is a Rule.
Local authorities work with powers vested in them by various acts of parliament. One of those powers enables them to issue licences for the establishment and operation of campsites. In issuing such licences they normally follow a nationally accepted standard
modified to suit the particular application and area. The licence that they issue is not law it is simply a set of conditions, a contract if you prefer, that the licensee is required to follow. Should he not do so the local authority has various remedies
which include withdrawing the licence, terminating the contract, so that the site can no longer operate. I imagine all of the licences issued to CC Ltd are very similar but not all the same it is then up to them to manage how the sites are used within the
terms of those licences and ensure the terms are not breached.DD very well put, but also further demonstrates CC Ltd has a 1 rule fits all approach that may not benefit members, sorry paying guests. Flexibility would benefit some members and probably increase income for the club in the less filled times.
0 -
"Local authorities work with powers vested in them by various acts of parliament..."
Surely if a power is vested by an act of parliament, then it is Law.
If it make you happy then you may be interested in the broadest definition of Law:
"The system of rules which a particular country or community recognizes as regulating the actions of its members and which it may enforce by the imposition of penalties."
However, it makes no difference to how campite licences are issued managed and enforced.
With regard to discussing whether Laws are Rules or for that matter Rules are Laws, the argument in this case seems comes down to one of semantics and therefore could carry on ad infinitum. I do agree with your statement:
"However, it makes no difference to how campite licences are issued managed and enforced".0 -
Well I would wait at a red traffic light at 2am. Sense and the law require it. However, to return to topic. I think it may be a planning requirement. Otherwise it would be a residential rather than a touring site.
Write your comments here...I too would wait at the red traffic light, even if the place looks deserted there is always someone about, and to them it is a James Corden moment....green lights all the way, apart from the bod who might jump the red lights !
21 day rule diffentiates between a touring and a residential site.
0 -
I understand the need for rules but rules are there to serve all the people as and when needed. My beef is with the 21 day max stay rule in low season when the current site has pleanty of spare pitches. I recently had to move off for 2 days just to return
to the exact same pitch I left. What a waste of time and loss of income for the site. Why not let the CC site have the dicresstion to manage their own pitches after all they know of their advanced bookings and in my case whereby 3/4 of the site was empty
it just seems rules for rules sake, no common sense taken into consideration. So come guys give a bit of credit to your site managers and allow them to make local dicisions.Its akin to waiting a red traffic light at say 2am when one is the only car there..... traffic lights were put there to manage the traffic for all the road users but if there are none then by nature they become redundant in their function. Common sense should
prevail.... perhaps thats why it is a dying art ( common sense) I mean because it is being taken away from us.Just my thoughts out loud...... beef over !
Write your comments here...tough
0 -
Without there being some very specific and very pressing reason I cannnot contemplate staying on a single CC Ltd site for 21 nights my feet are just too itchy
.The two times we have stayed 21 days, there were pressing reasons. The longest we have stopped without was 14 days at Morvich, and could easily have stopped longer, it was such an amazing area.
0
