Inspectors' reports
i was reading a devastating review of a CL today - its first review for many years. Nobody reading that review will ever visit that CL again.
But a Club inspector visits regularly does visit - is it once a year? - and yet we have no idea what he or she thinks. Does he agree with that damning review, or does he think it is unfair? We never even know what criteria he is asked to report upon, and we don't know what sort of quality assessment he is asked to make , and of course we never see his or her report.
Would it be fairer to all concerned - site owners and visitors alike- if the inspector's report was published on here alongside the CL details and reviews?
Comments
-
I would hope that if the inspector agreed with the damning review, that either the shortcomings would be rectified or the club would withdraw the exemption certification from this site.
1 -
I believe that some of the inspectors wear rose tinted spectacles, eurort.
2 -
I'm in full agreement. It would be good to know what an inspector actually looks for on their annual rounds, and reports published.
Inspectors are all volunteers and only get paid expenses.
As a CL owner, we have no knowledge of when an inspection might happen (possibly a good thing, but irritating if you'd like to meet them for any advice) and we have only the vaguest idea what they are checking for.
Likewise, when there's a change of ownership or a new CL, the site gets a thorough re-inspection, and can be temporarily closed because the Adviser doesn't like the way something is set up (such as the CDP). But there are no published criteria for these elements, so the CL Owner has to re-build or whatever blindly, not knowing if what they have then had to spend money on will pass the next inspection, which may or may not be by the same person. It seems a lot of personal judgement is exercised by the Advisers and Inspectors and each one is likely to have a different view.
It would certainly be helpful to CL Owners if the Club could draw up a list of specifications or guidelines (in consultation with Members and Owners) so that prospective Owners knew what was required.
As the needs and expectations of Members are changing, and the club wishes CLs to improve in 'quality', they need to understand that asking for new and possibly expensive infrastructure such as septic tanks to support a re-sited CDP are expensive, and could mean that the CL becomes uneconomic to run.
It would, therefore, be helpful to have both a 'minimum' specification and an 'ideal' specification so that some forward-planning by committed CL owners can take place.
6 -
It would certainly be helpful to CL Owners if the Club could draw up a list of specifications or guidelines (in consultation with Members and Owners) so that prospective Owners knew what was required.
Surely there should also be an input from CL users, as they seem to be very short on the ground at HO!! Very many CL users are quite happy with relatively basic facilities, and are not particularly interested the all singing, all dancing type of sites.
2 -
I had no idea that CL owners don't know what specifications inspectors look for on a CL, I can't believe that there isn't a list for CL owners with criteria/guidelines. Surely that is something which is vital information to any CL owner? How can he/she be expected to improve something 'blind', without knowing wat standards are required?
I can't see why any of it should be unpublished, as it would not only be of use to CL owners of course, but also to members.
0 -
It does seem a bit of a mystery. We have been on CLs when two inspectors turned up, although they never asked our opinion as visitors. One resulted in CL owner deciding to increase spacing between units. An interesting move, as the CL has been established for last forty years with lots of space between units, and it was a voluntary decision, luckily something that cost little to do other than commit time to moving an existing fence. Size of vans and awnings has of course increased hugely, so owner decided to do this to make sure Site was "future proofed".
Second time we saw an inspector was very enlightening. He turned up, out of the blue, busy dairy farm, calving in full throttle. Site was full, all five pitches in use, no problems for anyone. Inspector wanted owner to go round with him then and there. Poor man had been up all night with others delivering one calf after another, and was in throws of sorting out another. No way could he just drop everything at that moment! We never saw anything out of place, or unsafe on CL so can only assume all went well.
0 -
Just in case some have never seen the Club guide to setting up a CL, this is information for prospective owners/ managers of a CL.
https://www.caravanclub.co.uk/globalassets/pdfs/content/about-us/setting-up-a-cl-guide.pdf
Having read this, and noting that the Club does seem to push EHU as a necessity, and showers and toilet blocks as desirable, to me it comes as no surprise that some folks might be totally put off setting up a CL, as the start up costs will be huge. With that kind of expenditure involved, it's no wonder some of the CLs take the plunge after a few years and decide to expand into a small private site. We use around half a dozen ex CLs that have now got planning permission to extend, and offer more pitches to cover the costs. They are still lovely sites, but the prices are very reasonable as income comes from more pitches, rather than high charges for just five pitches. Most have toilets and shower blocks.
1 -
Thanks, TDA, I’ve never bothered to read it before but it’s quite an eye opener.
The main points that jumped out at me were the definite push towards providing facilities & EHU, and the strong stance on the exceeding of 5 units.
CL owners must be club members - I do hope they’re not charged the annual membership fee.
0 -
That seems to be a fairly recent, probably in last ten years, requirement. I know a lot of older CLs don't show Member status in handbook. Might be something that causes issues with some CLs in terms of updating details if they have to pay before anything new goes into book or onto webpages. Farmers, tight margins. Just wondering....
0 -
It seems a bit odd for the club to demand £51 from CL owners so that it, the club, can extend its network to include thousands of CLs. Yes, the CL owners gain from the exemption but they could just as easily seek that exemption from another body such as C&CC.
0 -
Could be something to do with insurance I suppose, and I know quite a few CL owners tour themselves as well. But handbook has a lot of entries not marked up Member Owned.
0 -
Why bother to mark some 'member owned' if it’s a condition that owners must be members?🤔 It gets odder. 😏
0 -
As a CL owner it would be nice if we could leave a revue on our visitors, fortunately for us the most are very welcome, but there are a few who let the side down. A member booked in for 3 nights arrived and asked a visitor were the reception office was, and he needed to see the toilets and showers , as we have none of their requirements without contacting me turned round and left. None of their requirements are in the CMC book, and if they had asked at the time of booking I would have been able to inform them of our facilities.
2 -
I don't think a few folks have much common sense regarding CLs at times Wildemere. Most annoying for you. I fully understand why some CLs ask for a deposit at busy times. Trust the fools won't be leaving a review. All it would highlight is their naivety and lack of planning!
0 -
I believe that that "fool" did leave a review, however wildemere was able to have it removed after contacting HO.
TW, I think that only "new" CL owners, ie those that have set up within the last few years, have been required to become member. However owners of older sites do not need to be, (unless of course they are CC members because they tour themselves) so would not have the "members owned" sticker on their site data.
1 -
Asking owners to be members can't be for insurance otherwise it would be a pre-requisite for all. It's my belief that the club think CMC members may look more favourably on the CL simply because of this supposed "Club" thing, ie they're a member so they must be good. Silly if that is right. Doesn't make any difference to us.
I'd like to see an official certificate of when the CL was last inspected, maybe on the CLs page on this website. At least with ACSI inspected sites you can see who inspected it and when.
0 -
I think anything to promote CL's can only be beneficial to all concerned - even if it's a bad report.
Most of us rely on a few pictures, a few introductory lines and hopefully some recent reviews before setting off. Therefore, for me, the more information the better
1 -
I personally wouldn't trust reviews by all CAMC members. Some know how to write a review, others don't. One person's pit in hell is another person's heavenly spot of tranquillity.
If a CL has a review by certain members who use them on a regular basis, I would trust that review to be fairly even handed, and on the whole what is is to be expected.
1 -
As a CL Owner , who is also in touch with 400 other owners through the owners group, perhaps I can shed some light on the points raised.
Start-Up Costs. Yes, if you wish to cater for the 'majority' of members and offer EHU, Hardstanding and possibly Toilets / Showers then your costs are going to be between £20K at a minimum and £100K. A new site that has just opened and is offering 5 toilets & showers (one for each pitch) cost that much. I can't see the business case myself as the ROI will be 20years+, however, there may be another motive. With a 5 van restriction, and rising running costs, it is difficult to make an economic case for starting a CL that will attract enough members to be profitable within a reasonable time (4-5 years is what I call reasonable for a small business investment). Others may disagree with my timeframes.
CL has to be a Club Member. This requirement started about 6 years ago (I stand to be corrected). CL Owners pay the full fee. Many (like me) are not caravan owners, but we do get an 'enhanced' listing on the website (8 photos rather than 1 and a fuller description).
If only 25% of CL Owners are members, The club has derived around £27,000 per annum from them.
Third Party Liability Cover - All CL's have to have this. Some choose to buy through the Club, Others (like me) have it as part of our farm insurance and the Club accepts our cover. Documentation is rigorously administered by the club.
Reviews - Many CL Owners would like the ability to write a 'counter review' or, as suggested by wildemere, simply review our guests.
This is now commonplace on sites like AirBnB where (like guests on a CL) a visitor is effectively coming to your home as a guest and staying - sometimes for a week or more - right in your backyard with dogs and children etc.
I'm ready to be shot down here, but having heard about the behaviour of a tiny minority of members (who have possibly been stopped from booking Club Sites - which can happen if they persistently cancel or are no-shows), it might be useful for members to be reminded that this is a 'Club' and that they should adhere to the club ethos of behaviour and that CL's are not somewhere they can 'hide'.
I stress that poor behaviour is from a tiny minority; in 7 years of running our CL, I would only refuse bookings from three members if they tried to book again. But I'd certainly like to have had the ability to 'mark their card' in some way for the benefit of other CL owners who may have had the misfortune to have them book. Forearmed is forewarned!
I hope this clarifies a few points.
3 -
CL owners can respond to a review, CG, and put their side of the story on record. Many do.
0 -
Very enlightening. We have spoken to CL owners who have been asked to increase the facilities so that "value can be added" Hard roads, MH service points, Toilets, Showers.
The club has lost its club ethos. Fortunately some of the CL owners are unable or unwilling to take the clubs advice and simply run a nice quiet CL.
3 -
I wonder which was the CL with the devastating review!
0 -
Tinwheeler - To clarify the review question. You are correct, a reply to a review can be given, but the reply is 'behind' the review, and only accessible if you click the 'replies' link which I would say 90% of people don't.
In a few circumstances, if a CL owners wishes to reply to a review that they feel is particularly important, they can asl the CL team to put a reply at the same level as the review itself, so that it is seen. However, this is not an elegant or simple solution as it involves a back&forth with the CL team over what the reply says etc.
0 -
the simple solution is of course not to get a bad review in the first place but I fully appreciate that there are always one or two reviewers who cannot be pleased and cause trouble.
Which is why when looking at any reviews on anything I dismiss the really bad 'rant' ones but only if there are only one or two and the majority of reviews are good or satisfactory. If you have too many bad ones then the message is clear and no amount of owner replies can make it better?
1 -
is there a payment to the club? Apart from being a member? If so that is cheap at 50 pounds per year?
I really don't know! what does it cost to become a CL apart from your start up costs?
0 -
I agree with you about the reviews, Corners. If the bad one is an isolated case, I ignore it. You can generally get the idea of a reviewers outlook by viewing his/her other reviews as well.
I think Harry's cash cow comment probably refers to the CL owners being forced to be club members @ £51 p/a each as CG explained earlier.
0 -
Ok thanks
But that 51 pounds a year get them the listing on the website and handbook? Seems cheap for that?
0
