Would the club be that upset?? Really??
Now, I post this for interest sake only, I don't want a punch up about it but I thought it rather revealing. I know rules are rules and that the British are sticklers for rules but.....
On site at the moment. A non EHU with 3 vans- one belonging to the so called 'warden' so loads of space. A guy, who was most obviously a cyclist came in the site the other evening and asked, as he had got himself lost and had been cycling all day and was tired. Could he just pitch a tent so he could get his head down. I referred him to the 'guy who cuts the grass ' and he was refused permission!! The reason being that it's against the rules! Who would know? Where's the charity that we are supposed to have gone?? I found it hard to fathom. One night to help a bloke out and £5 in the owners pocket but apparently it's against the rules. No wonder we have a reputation of being a snobby club!! Had it been me, I wouldn't have even thought of saying No. What's the opinion of other members please
Comments
-
I'm with you on this, Merve - it couldn't possibly have done any harm.
But then given the readiness of some folk on here to complain about even the most trivial transgression of "the rules" I can see why the owner reacted the way he did!
3 -
I will take it that due to the numbers this was a Certificated Location.
With the Caravan Club the exemption certificate is for caravans only. The Camping & Caravan Club Exemption Certificates are for 5 caravans and a variable number of tents. So it would invalidate the exemption certificate to allow use by a tent.
We don't know what has gone on before at this site regarding tents, or other breaches of the rules. For all we know the site is being closely watched, if not by the local authority directly but by the neighbour who wants it closed down and calls them in when he can. The owner could be on a "final warning".
Same applies with a full scale site. Conditions are laid down, they get pushed beyond limit and Local Authority removes site licence.
Why the cyclist wasn't told to go pitch in the corner of the next field is another matter.
3 -
No wonder we have a reputation of being a snobby club!!
Firstly I think it grossly unfair to blame the Club or suggest the image of the Club is damaged because the person who refused, I imagine, was nothing to do with the Club other than being an employee of the CL owner if I have interrupted the information you have shared correctly. We would have to know whether this employee had, had his fingers burnt for using his discretion in the past? Perhaps the person concerned who feels decisions of that nature are above his pay grade and as such refusal is always the easiest option. Would you have been as sympathetic if a sixth caravan had turned up and pleaded to be allowed to stay? I appreciate that it all seems pretty petty to refuse and I am sure there are many amongst us when put in the same situation would have used our discretion in a positive way something I have often ended up in trouble for myself!!!
David
0 -
These people are not employed by the site owner. They spend 3 months in Dorset( on this site) and 9 months in Spain apparently. They cut the grass - when they feel like it and other than that, little else . They also pay full price to stay here- again, apparently. There are no neighbours and I have had a pup tent on this site before. I personally think that this couple who are self confessed child and dog haters took a decision which wasn't theirs to take. Shame how a couple who think that they own the place can alter the 'feel' of a site. We will be looking for pastures new in the future. Never in over 25 yrs have I had problems like this. I will be approaching the site owner with my views and concerns. A corner of an adjoining field is a very good point- it wouldn't have hurt anyone, the world wouldn't have stopped turning and a kindness would have been expressed. David, I don't blame the CMHC- but others will- and I agree entirely regarding your comments re discretion- they will see it as a unmitigated refusal to do the right thing- such a shame. I for one wouldn't have minded a sixth van- been on many a site where a sixth van has been there the odd night. This goes to the heart of a problem though. If these CLs don't make money we will lose them- I would rather have 6 or 7 vans if it keeps the site open. Yes OK £5 won't make any difference but you will understand my basic point.
0 -
"I will be approaching the site owner with my views and concerns."
I think I would have done that before posting here, Merve. Get all the facts first then tell the tale.
1 -
"I would rather have 6 or 7 vans if it keeps the site open."
More than five caravans is what gets sites closed. Nothing to do with owner being kind, Caravan Club, whatever. It is a law. Same as the numbers that define what speed is legal on certain roads.
0 -
I think I can guess where you are Merve and it's very much a protected area of Dorset so where do you draw a line? Maybe the site has been under previous pressure? One tent leads to another etc. and there's plenty of room for tents at nearby Freshwater Bay in Burton Bradstock.
0 -
This has to be a matter of degree. I have been around Local govt Circles for quite a long time now and I know of none who would even dream of closing a site because of a single infringement.
I would actually go further and suggest that before any LA withdrew the licence of any site, there would have to be quite a long history of complaints and a refusal to heed warnings! I know of no local LA that even employ's anyone today, to go around checking on such matters.
It would really be for the CC or the C&CC to take any action, and again I simply cannot see any action being taken on an isolated case.
Before anyone jumps to the wrong conclusion however, I am certainly not advocating for site owners to ignore the rules. But this case it may well be one where the wise man knows when it it is better for all concerned to take the Nelsonian eye.
1 -
If they spend 3 months on the site and are fee paying they are surely in contravention of the RULES? I would have let the tent stay in a discreet spot too I am sure - although IF they have been in trouble for allowing too many vans (some hope?) they may have been warned to stick to the rules?
2 -
Let's hope the Cyclist wasn't of an ethnic group, disabled or transgender or there could have been an almighty row when he consulted his Lawyer.
We met a Dutch women who asked me on an Aire, Chateau Larcher actually, earlier this year if it was alright to pitch a tent as she and her partner had been cycling all day and were struggling to find a stop for the night.
Okay by me, I said, just drop a few Euros at the Mairie in the morning and everyone will be happy.
She stopped, she paid and everyone benefited.
Too many rules in this country and too many Chiefs.
2 -
We used to stay at a site where the owner was kicked out of the club's CL scheme due to more than 5 vans, however, she was a persistent offender and when we used to stay had many more than 5. I believe it took a long time for her to be de-listed.
Perhaps the tent is a fire risk!
0 -
is this a club site? or a CL? I'm confused, Its seems to be a CL as we're talking about being more than five vans? If so what has the club got to do with it? It was completely up to the owner wasn't it? Club site rules do not apply to a CL. Did the owner (warden on a cl btw?) say it was the club's rule or the CL owner's rule?
0 -
I've lost count of the number of times we'get been on CL's with a slight excess of numbers. In every case there was always loads of space available & there would have been space for twice the number of units.
Personnaly I'd have said get in the corner & of the site & don't shout about it.
As for being the "Snobby" club I'm afraid I'd have to agree. We were on a club site the other weekend when 2 foreign vans of a certain age appeared & I couldn't help but notice the reactions of certain members pitched close to them. Their noses almost became gunsights the way they were looking down at them.
We are currently on site in Holland & even over here as soon as you say the Caravan Club it's "Oh, The Snobby One!"
1 -
"It was completely up to the owner wasn't it? Club site rules do not apply to a CL"
The five caravan limit is NOT A CARAVAN CLUB RULE.
The "certificate" part of Certificated Location is able to be granted as an exemption to planning regulations for members of a club staying at a site subject to a seperate set of planning regulations. Otherwise the site would need planning permission - which if granted would have its own limit on number of units and what type of unit could use the site.
0 -
thanks,
so what exactly is this thread about? It's a CL. The owners can do what they like The owner of the CL through the 'warden' choose not to let someone camp, is that right? So why is the gist of this thread against the club for being snobby? It has nothing to do with the club!
Am i missing something here?
0 -
"Let's hope the Cyclist wasn't of an ethnic group, disabled or transgender or there could have been an almighty row when he consulted his Lawyer."
I hope you're not suggesting the site owner would have been right to break the terms of his exemption certificate for those reasons, K&M! See Nav's post to save me repeating it all.
0 -
Ok thanks.
0 -
I agree Nav, but perhaps it's time to look at the 'rules ' again. I don't know how long the law has been enacted but if, like most laws like this one, it's been in force since 19 hundred and frozen stiff then I think the introduction of a 6th van would not go amiss. It might even be the difference between losing sites (which we seem to be doing) and not. It would also give much more choice to folk in the fact that with a stroke of a pen, many more pitches would be available.
0
