Electric Hook up
I don't know if this has been raised before apologies if it has but I've heard a rumour that the club are planning to introduce additional charges on club sites for electricity, I must stress that its only a rumour but I wondered if anyone else had heard similar and if so could the club please either confirm or deny.
Comments
-
There has been a trial of metering electricity at one site, with reduced pitch fees. I think there was a report on this in the last magazine. The club have also been allowing people on other sites to opt out of hook up with a reduced fee. Unfortunately I think the latter is only over the winter.
I am sure someone will be on here soon to give further chapter and verse. It has been discussed at length on this forum but the chances of finding that threat are slim, due to the poor search facility on CT.
1 -
It is not lawful to charge for the resale of electricity other than by meter and within certain rules. I suspect it is the trial of metering you have heard about.
See - https://www.caravanclub.co.uk/uk-holidays/useful-information/smart-metering-trial/
It has also been discussed several times on this forum.
0 -
I've not noticed any reference to further charges and would struggle to see how and where they would come from?
0 -
John
As others have explained the Club are experimenting with the use of metering for electricity usage. That is not an extra charge as there would be a corresponding reduction in site fees to compensate. I think the Club have said that they will review and comment around mid year as to whether the system is expanded to all sites so we will have to wait and see. The Club have made quite a few changes in the last two years and it is sometimes difficult to keep up. Although this forum generally has good discussions on these topics.
David
0 -
"That is not an extra charge as there would be a corresponding reduction in site fees to compensate."
I doubt the club would be lowering pitch prices by 'a corresponding amount' for campers on site in the current cold snap.
...and this is the issue....
the summer 'reduction' (based on an average low usage) is so small (£2) it doesn't make club sites attractive compared to other 'non electric' (THS) sites but at least the £2 allows for 5kwh a day so perfectly manageable (no heating etc) for those using electric 'normally'.
OTOH, anyone on site this week and possibly using between 20 and 40 kWh (I seriously doubt folk will be turning the van heating off in this weather even when out for the day) is going to think hard about incurring upto £18 a day (@45p per kWh) electric fees when the max reduction is set at £8....
this means a winter pitch in really cold weather could effectively be £10 more expensive for meter users than it would have been with inclusive leccy.
Just checking the prices of the club site we would be likely to visit in winter, the winter prices are already at around £30 for non new year prices, the thought of these 'off season' prices becoming upto £40 hurts.
with New Year prices now set at 'peak levels' and approaching £40, adding another £10 a night net cost for cold weather metered leccy means daily prices of £50....that's a mighty price for a New Year pitch.so, where might this leave the club and winter tourers...?
well, I'm definitely in favour of the chance to use metered pitches but (obviously) only on my own terms...and that means I'll use THS sites (as we have plenty of solar and cheap gas) at £10-£15 in summer but, despite being a keen 'off gridder', I can't see us (or anyone else) accepting a £70 a week rise in winter pitch prices for the 'benefit' of metered usage, putting winter touring at CAMC at serious risk as sites move into ever heftier pricing.
im sure some of these issues will come out in the trial but the club has to be realistic about how much electricity members are currently paying for as part of their 'pitch price' and if it wants members believe in the metering approach it needs to be confident that customers understand they really are going to get 'a corresponding reduction in site fees to compensate'....
3 -
I imagine the site fee reductions applied by the Club, where metering is in place, were a best guess probably based on the average energy usage across the network. The winter reductions seem, to me, quite realistic if I compare with my home usage. Although comparing with home usage is not as straightforward as it may seem as I don't use a washing machine or a dishwasher whilst away and I only have a modestly sized fridge in the motorhome! What we don't know is whether the Club can distinguish between bollard electricity usage and overall site usage? I think it is a shame that it is such a small experiment, especially if it dictates what happens to the whole network. The Club may decide, based on the evidence gathered that the winter reductions are too generous and the summer reductions not generous enough. We will have to wait and see.
David
1 -
The Club is obviously not entirely satisfied with the trial because they have not expanded it to Ashridge Farm as originally stated and they also mention in the January magazine that they intend to enhance the trial at Wyatts Covert from the summer of 2024 before any further decission is taken. Nothing is going to be decided even after a years trial, in spite of them realising there is a 30 percent saving in consumption to be made. Across the network that would equate to a £1.8 million saving. Difficult to understand their thinking.
peedee
3 -
Having spent many Spanish winters using metered electric I can say with decent accuracy that anyone running a largish fridge freezer will require around 4 kWh per day, add in some battery charging and tv etc and 5-6 kWh is a fair estimate for a uk summer day. With the club charging 45p per kWh then £2-3 per day is about right....
however, the winter usage can be far more variable...the f/f usage might be a tad less than summer, but lights will be used far more, along with tv...but all this is at the low end...the big variable is whether the weather is mild or severe.
having the heating on for a couple of hours in the evening to take the chill off on a mild winters day is a long way from leaving it on 24x7.
...and this is the difficult part to estimate the 'reduction'.
So, rather than take a top down approach (how much shall we take off for electric, hard to get right) perhaps the club should be looking at a bottom up approach to actually rework all the costs to give an accurate 'non electric' base pitch price. Then there will be a truly accurate equation for customers based on what they use.
3 -
PD, maybe I’m missing something but can you explain where the 30% saving in consumption figure comes from, please?
1 -
Yes there may be a reduction in consumption of 30% (though I can't see how this is arrived at?) but the club is not saving £1.8 million (or what it really is of course) at all as this 'savingl' is paid by those using the pitches and paying for that electricity?
Personally i think it's quite easy to understand their thinking, apart from what I and others have written before that the club will overestimate the usage and probably make some profit by doing it the way it is now, but more importantly the trial may show that people don't want metering, you might like it yet plenty of others may not. Additionally if only the club goes to metering and other non club sites don't where will people go? It could lead to a loss of income as people choose inclusive prices especially in winter. Is the CCC doing similar trials? As I've said before It's not done in hotels or holiday lets? If those who actually use club sites don't prefer it then surely the club should follow that?
At the moment there is a choice, for those like you that prefer metering go to those sites and non club sites that have metering but there's not that many as I see it from posts on CT, but many of the comparable large non club sites don't have it do they? As alway I go back to there are cheaper and better quality sites out there some with metering so why use club sites?
1 -
+1 and how have they (the club) realised this?
0 -
Actually I think a better option to metering is to allow ehu or no ehu, as the club is doing in some places. From something I read, maybe on this forum, if you don’t want the hook up they block the bollard. Obviously it depends on pitch price reduction but I think that would be a very popular option for late spring to early autumn. It’s what we do on CCC sites. I can’t remember the price differential, however.
As (YT? ) said up thread, the Club ought to re calculate pitch prices from the bottom up, without ehu, and then see what the electric element really is.
2 -
It could lead to a loss of income as people choose inclusive prices especially in winter.
Possibly, but note some people didn't even bother hooking up when staying at WC. It may be as oft complained about on here they will go elsewhere when there is no choice and the price is too high. There will be risks either way. but for the savings the Club will make it may be one the Club is willing to take especially as sustainability is the watch word of the day.
peedee
0 -
Really? It can only be surmised at this stage, surely, so perhaps you can elaborate for the benefit of those of us who don’t see the mag. Also, as Corners said, if pitches are metered, there will be no monetary saving for camc.
1 -
Actually I think a better option to metering is to allow ehu or no ehu,
I suspect that will not result in as much saving as meters and if that turns out to be allowed, did the Club really need to introduce inclusive pricing in the first place?
peedee
1 -
I disagree! However, I won’t press you when you’re clearly unwilling to back up your comments with a quote or explanation 😕. It means, of course, that I cannot accept your comment as fact.
1 -
If they didn't bother hooking up then where does your £1.8 million saving come? or indeed the savings you talk about in this reply?
The electricity bill for any site will be what it will be. The club has to pay it either from an inclusive price or from metering so it will not save any money, especially the £1.8 million you quoted?
The club has to be follow what those actually staying on site want, isn't that the idea in any successful business? if this trial shows what people really want the club must or should follow it. Not much point talking about sustainability (is the word of the day btw?) if income is down and less popular sites perhaps closing in the worst possible case.
And some does not mean the majority, otherwise I assume it would have said so, and it does not say the exact figure and more importantly of course this was in the first six months of the trial in the summer and you appear to be extrapolating this over a full year in your saving of £1.8m? So we will have to wait what the winter figures are and some equally found it complicated all for a saving of £1.49 (YTD average) a night. For me that hardly seems worth it.
1 -
Why the grumpiness, PD? I’m puzzled by your reaction. I asked a simple question in an attempt to learn the facts and you have refused to answer. So be it 🤷🏻♂️
1 -
Agreed, as long as there is this option on every pitch. far simpler and cheaper to implement, easily understood and (should be) straightforward to price.
1 -
Does anyone know why the 'average daily price reduction' when using no electric on a metered pitch isnt the same (for the corresponding month) as the 'pitch discount per night' when you take a non electric option?
0 -
Just stayed on a cl site over the new year metered electric 15 units a day allowance usually 12 on metered sites,ran fridge freezer alde heating, hot water and oven on gas .
Still ended up paying £20 extra ,electric charged at 36 p business tariff .site owner in a no win situation, installed meters to stop idiots leaving heaters on in awnings and van while out for the day but not getting as much business due to meters.
.
0 -
I don’t have the article the Club ran in the last magazine but they maintained, if i remember correctly, that the trial had made everyone more aware of consumption. And they quoted figures, which I don’t remember. I am sorry to hear of the CL above getting less business because of metering. I don’t think that is the universal result, unless it is a winter response. Certainly some CL have just reported much smaller electric bills and no loss of business.
0 -
I was wondering that too YT, seems strange!
Also thinking that whoever negotiated the electricity contract did not get a very good deal. Would larger users not get a better price than small users? Although they would of course pay a higher rate of VAT. But then would the VAT paid out not be deductible from the VAT paid by customers? Not sure how it all works.
Our Guide Hall is about to start a new contract in a few weeks, OH has gone with Business Octopus. They will pay 22.143 p per kWh, plus VAT, and a daily charge of 66.189 p, plus VAT, a 12 month contract. Seems a lot less than the rate at Wyatts Covert.
Adding VAT at 20%, that would be 26.57 p per kWh, plus 79.43 p per day, though they will only pay 5% VAT. Business daily standing charges are rather steep these days.
0 -
Does anyone know why the 'average daily price reduction' when using no electric on a metered pitch isnt the same (for the corresponding month) as the 'pitch discount per night' when you take a non electric option?
Infrastructure costs could account for the differences?
peedee
0 -
...and this is a real issue.
when electricity was cheap(er) it formed a much smaller part, cost wise, of the pitch price, with the 'basic' pitch element being set quite high yet not leading to a monstrous total price...
fast forward to todays leccy prices and, with those same base elements not changed much, the total price has now rocketed.
hence my suggestion that all sites (not just the two clubs) will need to look hard at their base costs to ensure that 'with electric' pitches aren't pushed totally beyond the very customers they are trying to attract/retain.....and also that 'non electric' prices are also sufficiently low to make giving up the orange cable worthwhile.
agreed, costs across the board are still increasing but if the club is looking to sell two types of product (with/without electric) then it has to make both of these sufficiently attractive to those customers who are likely to choose each.
3 -
But the numbers are the wrong way around for that....
the 'infrastructure cost' would be more for the metered bollard system (physical changes, app development and management etc, etc) yet the discount is more here than for the non-electric option which just requires just a locking hook up.🤷🏻♂️
0
