So what did the Club ever do for Motorcaravanners?
Comments
-
+1
2 -
Forgive me in that I found I could not plough all through this thread, but from the start the following seems obvious.
There will be huge animosity if the club singles out one camping mode group for special exclusive camping, funded at the expense of all, even the name change was all about inclusiveness, not exclusiveness.
Yes, we fund play equipment that at 76 I don't make a lot of use of, but I suspect children in the care of caravanners, trailer tenters and motorhomers all do. I can't except that because we fund those, it follows we should fund sites exclusively for either motorhomers, or indeed either caravanner or trailer tenters
Is it not time this special interest group form its own independent club, to provide just what they want?
Charge a membership fee or get bank loans to fund buying inner conurbation, and bus route land for a network of these sites and provide the specific facilities needed. I suspect they would first have to win the legislators over to forgo presently excepted UK standard fire prevention policies and find insurers to underwrite the associated risks these providers might consider they carry.
Then charge night stay fees as they see fit to run, maintain and expand the network.
This would certainly be equitable, everything specifically funded by those wanting this. I suspect in competition with the house and commercial land development pressures, we would not be doing this at anything like the CMC's membership fee levels, together with just the few £s nightly fee as is mooted. The consciences though would be clear, it is all done without requiring those excluded being required to help pay for it.Hurry, we could soon be coming motorhomers!
2 -
No I haven't. Your analogy is flawed. A supermarket car park will be used by those shopping and overnight it may be closed and so those spaces could be used.
So a MH turns up on a club and take the last few spaces at say 9pm and it could take quite a few spaces if it has to park itself across bays as it won't fit in length ways.
Then those outfits with extra cars and/or visitors turn up after a night out and cannot park. Yes that seems fair???
All I understand is that you want a cheap club site visit at the expense of other users. Not fair at all.
As you rarely visit club sites (if at all) and not a member I think your facts are just second hand, or you're doing your (as freely stated by you) winding people up routine?
4 -
Is it not time this special interest group form its own independent club, to provide just what they want?
No they want the rest of us to provide that for them with our money.
Good post, what I and a few others have posted.
8 -
good post, and not forgetting the European visitors here who are already very familiar with this type of facility.
0 -
This thread is degenerating into an "us" and "them" slanging match. Provision for MH's should be regarded as no different to the provision of play areas/ dog walks. I haven't seen any complaint that the provision of these is regarded as discriminatory notwithstanding they are only for a subset of the membership.
3 -
Just a personal observation of this discussion and I admit I have not read every post - It appears that some posting here suggesting the club provide non facility pitches for them at a reduced rate (OP describes them as Nightstops) are able to enjoy their time away by touring at reduced rates attending rallies in Europe and the UK and using THS sites (possibly provided by CMC and/or CCC). As said there are providers out there in the UK who already offer “Nightstop” type facilities. I personally would not advocate the club providing a specific facility that could only be used by one type of leisure outfit.
1 -
See my second post on page1, CY.
The provision of play areas, dog walks and so on is for use by all, not just motorhomers. The financial outlay of these is a far cry from the club setting up a chain of nighthalts intended only for motorhomes.
Us and them? Hardly. You and I both have MHs.
0 -
I had children who used the play area, there are campers who may not need the area now but could do in the future, I don't have a dog but may have one in the future and then could use it. Some have showers in their outfits and don't use the shower block but could. I have never ever used the veg prep area but could do. The laundry room is there if you want to use it.
Get the idea they are open to all and people see that others on site might want to use them and are not so selfish as to complain about them
BUT, these MH only pitches could only be used by MH.
Post edit - snap again TW
0 -
I suppose you could say the same about disabled toilets?
It's about the need and thinking of others David
1 -
Their use is not restricted to members with one particular type of camper unit as you know full well. The financial outlay is minimal.
0 -
A spot in the ocean compared to a network of aires solely for MHs.
0 -
I cannot see either club who insist that a 6m clearance between caravans/motorhomes is essential for safety promoting any pitches giving less clearance and certainly not significantly less. Given that fact and desirable locations for such facilities plus the need for waste and water I cannot see them being cheap within most of the UK
3 -
Seriously, are any struggling with the concept of "aires"?
I sense "the issue" is the concept that the Club should now be breaking with "inclusiveness" and using our funds for sites solely for one specific type of camping unit?
My view if exclusiveness is needed, as it seems it is, then those should look elsewhere than an inclusive club for that.
3
