Early arrivals - action at last?
Comments
-
Fair enough Steve, and I agree.
0 -
If draconian penalties are desired then a head on a spike at the site entrance "pour l'encourager le autres" would certainly get the message across. I can imagine such a feature being an attraction to boys of a certain age -'can we go that site with the dead, dad?'
What has happened to the LNA area? Has it been "rewilded". A "cunning plan" could have been to pull in there immediately and waited the requisite time out of sight of the office.
Having examined the "banjo" on GoogleEarth, whilst a bit of a faff, it doesn't seem an impossible solution to the eviction until opening time.
As has been observed, there may be more to this episode than just 10-15 minutes. Personally these days I find, like Maria von Trapp, I'm always late for everything.
0 -
That’s way off base they are totally separate issues. The blatant refusals engendered the possible sanction not the early arrival.
2 -
I would say not linked at all if you read what the Op on the other forum posted:
...approached by two wardens who directed us to leave the site immediately , and return after 1pm. When asked where we could go were told to turn left out of the site, toward Kingswear and the ferry terminal. Having attended the site previously, and knowing the geography of the very narrow and steep lane, I declined to do soon the grounds of safety to my wife myself, my car and caravan.
Five minutes later 12.50pm(still 10 minutes early we were approached by a gentleman stating that he was the site manager. He instructed me to leave immediately and return after 1pm(Less than 10 minutes).
I again sited the relative safety issues and refused to leave for the sake of 10 minutes. I was very polite with the man. The site manager then told me that my booking was cancelled with immediate effect, and my CMC membership suspended.
Note well the then in the last paragraph
So if one follows the parts in bold in the timeline given, they were asked to leave the site, they refused, another site manager instructed them to leave, they refused again, and then they were told their booking was cancelled and membership suspended.
If they had left the first time it would have been no cancellation and suspension, if they had left the second time same again bit it was only after they refused to leave the second that the action was taken. They sanction was taken because they refused to follow the site manager's instruction not the early arrival. Failure to follow a warden's instruction is perfectly fair grounds to have a booking cancelled and membership suspended.
1 -
what he said
0 -
I expect there are quite a few others in the situation.as stated to the site staff by the member , in that situation me included would be in the same situation it would have been well past 1300 even if he had done as said by the first two staff members,
0 -
When firm rules are in place there’s no need for something like that elusive much abused ethereal ‘common sense’. A lot of folk bang on about it, all claim to have it but none actually know what it is🤷🏻♂️
1 -
Did you honestly expect there to be any word, apart from locking the thread, that is?🤔
0 -
That ticked a box Rocky
JK
0 -
That's another box ticked
JK
0 -
As a way forward, perhaps CAMC HO could consider a better way of keeping all its members informed of any future actions it is putting into practice that could affect its members.
Whilst I don’t think arriving prior to the official time should be allowed to continue (and it obviously isn’t at this moment in time) I can’t personally recall being made aware officially that site staff were going to turn members away if they arrived early.
Turning members away for arriving prior to the official time is such an ‘new’ action which it appears has caused some issues for some members and some staff which could possibly have been avoided if members had been made aware of it.
0 -
As a way forward, perhaps CAMC HO could consider a better way of keeping all its members informed of any future actions it is putting into practice that could affect its members.
Many of us on CT have been saying this for years. Unfortunately nobody is listening. Or if they are totally ignoring us. They don’t even seem capable of sorting out who gets emails when they are requested. Or if requested, sending them consistently at the right time with relevant information.
0 -
It all gets more complicated. There’s a review for Treamble Valley site from someone who arrived two hours early, parked on a grass verge, was not turned away but was charged £23 for arriving early.
0 -
You can get fined for parking on the verges where we live, are you sure this isn’t the case. Strange these folk don’t leave a review on the site page, where those thinking of staying there are more likely to see it. Personally I don’t take a lot of notice of reviews, we are only stopping a few days in any case, so are prepared to find out for ourselves. However if I did, I would look to the ones on the site page rather than other sources.
edit Just found it, you went back a fair way euro 27/7
1 -
Another revenue stream for the club, an Early Arrivals Surcharge. Say a set fee of £25 for an arrival prior to 13:00. I expect that would lead to better planning and attention paid to the Sat Nav. Or maybe some would see that as a premium for picking the best pitch available.
0 -
Or better still, come after 13.00
JK
1 -
But that would only work if there were pitches available, impossible to do that now maybe possible under ANPR but again no one, or any system knows when someone is going to leave, what happens if 20 pay the early arrival fee and there's only 10 pitches because enough haven't left?
0 -
More to the point, it could all have been avoided if the member had not arrived early.
5 -
If only folk stopped driving cars there’d be no climate change, or fuel poverty issues. Yup we can all state alternate facts but none of us can change logic. Yet some will always try to push an agenda in a vain attempt🤷🏻♂️🙁
2 -
In a vain attempt at humour some folk like to get threads locked TW.
JK
1 -
There's been many an attempt, JK.
1
