Charging for awnings
Comments
-
We don't set our awning in the winter so no heater required. This is another of those pathetic discussions on CT. I don't do this or have this so you shouldn't, as I say pathetic. In 2014 the CC made over £1.5million profit on the UK sites part of their
accounts So obviously not too much of a problem. If you sit in the awning with a heater and switch your heating off in the van then the environmental cost is balanced outI am not sure how heating, shall we say, Derbyshire as opposed to a very well insulated modern van can be classed as balanced out.
0 -
theres nothing controlling about anyone wanting the damage done by awnings to be contributed towards by those who cause it, is there...?
what is controlling is the incessant drip drip of attacks on anyone who doesn't do what a few self appointed 'role models of perfection' do, anyone who has the audacity to think freely & use their own choice to live their lives are told the 'better' way.
It's a sad state when folk need to resort to these methods rather than accepting we all have freedom of choice.0 -
I'm saddened, though not surprised really, to see the re-emergence of the "I'll pay for what I use and not a penny more" type of comments that I thought were a thing of the past. Too many folk too concerned with how others enjoy their hobby instead of getting on with life.
I apologise to anyone whose holiday has been blighted by our two dogs and our small (unheated and uncarpeted) porch awning!
Not too bothered myself over paying for less than I use. I often feel off peak site fees are kept higher to subsidise peak periods, I have also been surprised to see all a caravans roof lights open when the occupants are sat in the evening with outside temperatures well below 10C. Presumably heating working well.
I don't tend to get worked up though. With regard to awnings on grass I can see some logic in making a charge, particularly on smaller CL sites where it may be less easy to rest slightly damaged areas
0 -
theres nothing controlling about anyone wanting the damage done by awnings to be contributed towards by those who cause it, is there...?
what is controlling is the incessant drip drip of attacks on anyone who doesn't do what a few self appointed 'role models of perfection' do, anyone who has the audacity to think freely & use their own choice to live their lives are told the 'better' way. It's a sad state when folk need to resort to these methods rather than accepting we all have freedom of choice.
Of course the freedom of choice should not really extend to deliberately damaging a pitch. A couple of the grass pitches on the site we are on have badly damaged areas where the awnings go, others do not. Clearly some folk do not lift their ground sheets as instructed.
0 -
as has been said many times, the charges for dogs and awnings are deterrents...
re: dogs.....to keep the numbers down....hence maximums are usually set...
if charging for dogs was a money spinner, why set a limit at one or two?
most customers without dogs dont want dogs all over the site, making a racket, and most site owners recognise this, yet also are aware that some guests wish to bring them...
the charge is a compromise to allow one/two per van but to show guests without dogs that their concerns are being addressed as well...
re: awnings, there is a cost associated with either setting up the HS infrastructure in the first place, or on the maintenance of the pitch 'post awning use'....
everyone can see what damage a week long stay with an awning does to a grass pitch....it spoils it for the next guest, perhaps thay should get a rebate, too?
...and, of course, its difficult to use an awning heater without an awning....
Write your comments here...and the Deterrents work ! I for one dont go to any sites that charge for Dogs, especially if they provide no facilities, like Dog walk etc., do not go where we are not wanted, and that means ALL of us, including the Dog, Why would any site want to deter Awnings ? especially if they are getting extra cash for them ? Also why would anyone want to heat an awning in the Summer ?? Or when you are not actually sitting in it ? NO, the CC has got it right, no charging for Dogs or Awnings just as i like it.
Why should Club sites conform to some commercial NORM, that wants to DETER some customers. And does, this one anyway. Disagree with you BB.
0 -
theres nothing controlling about anyone wanting the damage done by awnings to be contributed towards by those who cause it, is there...?
I thought the argument was to penalise (charge) all those terrible awning users, even those who do everything right (either don't use groundsheets on grass or lift them regularly)?
One wonders how camping sites survive at all - all those tents causing irreperable damage to the grass.
I think, as so often happens on CT, there's a need for some perspective here, rather than the sledgehammer approach some would like to see.
0 -
as has been said many times, the charges for dogs and awnings are deterrents...
re: dogs.....to keep the numbers down....hence maximums are usually set...
if charging for dogs was a money spinner, why set a limit at one or two?
most customers without dogs dont want dogs all over the site, making a racket, and most site owners recognise this, yet also are aware that some guests wish to bring them...
the charge is a compromise to allow one/two per van but to show guests without dogs that their concerns are being addressed as well...
re: awnings, there is a cost associated with either setting up the HS infrastructure in the first place, or on the maintenance of the pitch 'post awning use'....
everyone can see what damage a week long stay with an awning does to a grass pitch....it spoils it for the next guest, perhaps thay should get a rebate, too?
...and, of course, its difficult to use an awning heater without an awning....
Write your comments here...and the Deterrents work ! I for one dont go to any sites that charge for Dogs, especially if they provide no facilities, like Dog walk etc., do not go where we are not wanted, and that means ALL of us, including the Dog, Why would
any site want to deter Awnings ? especially if they are getting extra cash for them ? Also why would anyone want to heat an awning in the Summer ?? Or when you are not actually sitting in it ? NO, the CC has got it right, no charging for Dogs or Awnings
just as i like it.Why should Club sites conform to some commercial NORM, that wants to DETER some customers. And does, this one anyway. Disagree with you BB.
Write your comments here...do you agree that those not taking dogs or awning should have a discount, they are not using or expecting dog walks sometimes showers , and not spoiling the grass that needs extra attention due to those that have
0 -
theres nothing controlling about anyone wanting the damage done by awnings to be contributed towards by those who cause it, is there...?
I thought the argument was to penalise (charge) all those terrible awning users, even those who do everything right (either don't use groundsheets on grass or lift them regularly)?
One wonders how camping sites survive at all - all those tents causing irreperable damage to the grass.
I think, as so often happens on CT, there's a need for some perspective here, rather than the sledgehammer approach some would like to see.
Write your comments here...Lord save us from well meaning people with Sledghammers.
Perhaps if Wardens checked over grass pitches after an awning user has left, and sent out a standard letter/e-mail to the member who left a damaged pitch, telling them that they damaged the pitch for the following member. And that it had been noted....and note it, like late cancellers are ! Might work, at least it doesnt penalize everyone for the behavior of a few. Enforce the rules we have, dont make new ones.
0 -
as has been said many times, the charges for dogs and awnings are deterrents...
re: dogs.....to keep the numbers down....hence maximums are usually set...
if charging for dogs was a money spinner, why set a limit at one or two?
most customers without dogs dont want dogs all over the site, making a racket, and most site owners recognise this, yet also are aware that some guests wish to bring them...
the charge is a compromise to allow one/two per van but to show guests without dogs that their concerns are being addressed as well...
re: awnings, there is a cost associated with either setting up the HS infrastructure in the first place, or on the maintenance of the pitch 'post awning use'....
everyone can see what damage a week long stay with an awning does to a grass pitch....it spoils it for the next guest, perhaps thay should get a rebate, too?
...and, of course, its difficult to use an awning heater without an awning....
Write your comments here...and the Deterrents work ! I for one dont go to any sites that charge for Dogs, especially if they provide no facilities, like Dog walk etc., do not go where we are not wanted, and that means ALL of us, including the Dog, Why would any site want to deter Awnings ? especially if they are getting extra cash for them ? Also why would anyone want to heat an awning in the Summer ?? Or when you are not actually sitting in it ? NO, the CC has got it right, no charging for Dogs or Awnings just as i like it.
Why should Club sites conform to some commercial NORM, that wants to DETER some customers. And does, this one anyway. Disagree with you BB.
Write your comments here...do you agree that those not taking dogs or awning should have a discount, they are not using or expecting dog walks sometimes showers , and not spoiling the grass that needs extra attention due to those that have
Write your comments here...No. we are a Club, some users subsidise others, i dont use the site showers, but i dont expect others to have to pay extra for them. Swings and roundabouts.We all have an ultimate choice...sites ot CLs, some say no dogs/children, some say extra for awnings...the owners choice...but leave the Sites alone, with the rules they already have.
0 -
The OP was about CLs. With only 5 pitches on a popular site it may not be easy to rest areas suffering a little awning damage. Depends on site layout. On larger club sites far less of a problem
Write your comments here...Oh i dont know EasyT, we went to Looe site a couple of years ago, this time of the year, most of the grass pitches were having to be re-seeded because of the groundsheet damage, the Warden was working almost full time for a week on them.
ps never been to a club site with showers for dogs ?
0 -
The OP was about CLs. With only 5 pitches on a popular site it may not be easy to rest areas suffering a little awning damage. Depends on site layout. On larger club sites far less of a problem
Write your comments here...Oh i dont know EasyT, we went to Looe site a couple of years ago, this time of the year,
most of the grass pitches were having to be re-seeded because of the groundsheet damage, the Warden was working almost full time for a week on them.ps never been to a club site with showers for dogs ?
so, is an extra charge (for the reparation) not justified?
0 -
Blackshaw Moor site has a dog shower.
im sure a couple of our long term Conti sites had them.....but they will have charged for dogs (upto a limit)...
0 -
I'm all for people having freedom of choice (and shame on those who try to say that I think otherwise - how dare you!).
But if you want an awning that will damage grass and require extra time spent on repairs and remove pitches from use (as at Centenary Park, apparantly) and you want to have a pointless heater in it.......then you should pay for it.
All this talk about 'let us be free to chose' is a bit like the old hippies......wanting to opt out and be free, but happy to take handouts from and live off the backs of society.
0 -
I'm all for people having freedom of choice (and shame on those who try to say that I think otherwise - how dare you!).
But if you want an awning that will damage grass and require extra time spent on repairs and remove pitches from use (as at Centenary Park, apparantly) and you want to have a pointless heater in it.......then you should pay for it.
All this talk about 'let us be free to chose' is a bit like the old hippies......wanting to opt out and be free, but happy to take handouts from and live off the backs of society.
.+1 ..Oh my god i have done it again
0 -
Let's charge for windows on a per window basis, and awnings have lots of extra Windows, it's been done before I know. But sunlight makes people happy, so it needs taxing
Good thinking JC. I know. . . .Lets call it something radical like-'window tax'
0 -
its taxing reading some of JVB's posts....
one doent need a menu of chargable items, its just that awnings do have a physical detrimental effect on the site, not only that, non awning pitches dont need to be as large, so grading pitches sizewise to suit a customer's requirements makes sense.
with more smaller (non-awning) pitches, there might be more space for those larger awning pitches...
simple process to then reflect this difference in 'status' with a price adjustment...
larger pitch with awning means more reparation work, so a higher price...
smaller, no frills pitch, slightly lower price...
this would help 'guide' those who only need a small pitch onto these, rather than the default choice of an awning pitch, in the 'mistaken' belief that they are getting something more for their money....
0 -
Could anyone who is in favour of charging for awnings please explain what repair work needs to be done on an HS pitch? And could you explain why charging everyone who is, apparently, "selfish" enough to use an awning is justified when the vast majority do little or no harm to the ground at all?
Fair enough if a pitch has been obviously left in an unfit condition by a previous user they should be resonsible for any extra costs involved, and wardens will know who has used which pitch - as with other matters they should expect backing from HO if they report offenders.
BTW, I don't regard reseeding pitches at the end of the summer season as an "extra cost". Surely it's simply a necessity on any site with grass pitches?
0 -
Could anyone who is in favour of charging for awnings please explain what repair work needs to be done on an HS pitch? And could you explain why charging everyone who is, apparently, "selfish" enough to use an awning is justified when the vast majority do
little or no harm to the ground at all?Fair enough if a pitch has been obviously left in an unfit condition by a previous user they should be resonsible for any extra costs involved, and wardens will know who has used which pitch - as with other matters they should expect backing from HO if they
report offenders.BTW, I don't regard reseeding pitches at the end of the summer season as an "extra cost". Surely it's simply a necessity on any site with grass pitches?
good points, as always
0 -
" ...this would help 'guide' those who only need a small pitch onto these, rather than the default choice of an awning pitch, in the 'mistaken' belief that they are getting something more for their money...."
You don't have a very high opinion of the intelligence of your fellow members do you, BB?
0 -
" ...this would help 'guide' those who only need a small pitch onto these, rather than the default choice of an awning pitch, in the 'mistaken' belief that they are getting something more for their money...."
You don't have a very high opinion of the intelligence of your fellow members do you, BB?
Wrong, wrong and just plain wrong....dear M....
ask the majority of campers, given a free choice at booking time for the same price, which type of pitch they would plump for....what do think the answer would be....?
youve really got a large bee buzzing in your bonnet on this thread, for some reason....
as Pippa says, lets make it simple....large/small, awning/non..
call it what you like.....simple system, simple differentiation on cost.....larger (awning, more reparation work required) pitch, larger fee.....
0 -
Oh dear! Rather patronising don't you think "dear BB"?
B(B) in my bonnet? Well have I made more comments than your good self? Am I not allowed to express an opinion?
So you want HS/grass, awning/non awning and then large/awning/small awning - and that's a simple system?
We obviously disagree on this, but, please, stop being so patronising!
0 -
We adopt a stress free attitude to choosing our sites:
pick somewhere to visit, check out sites that look nice, check out facilities we need, check price, book it if it suits. If it don't, look somewhere else!
We don't worry ourselves what others need or use, or what they are paying.
0
