Caravan Club website woes

[J9withdogs]

I love the CC - they always give me exactly what I need at a very good price.

 

Most times I can stay for less than £10 per night and the motorhome pitches are fine. (Flying solo does have its benefits!!)

 

I like the fact that they let me choose my pitch, whereas the CCC insist I park where they tell me to.

 

A bit of cheeky banter also usually results in help with levelling the van with chocks (difficult on your own) if necessary.

 

If the website says there are no pitches, a quick phone-call to the site often reveals a vacancy.

 

No problemo. :D

[LordThornber]

Well the plot thickens yet again, but this time it's good news. I've just clocked the website and there are vacancies at our favourite site on earth, York. Of course I cancelled our current booking and took the availability straight away.

 

Unbelievable, you can get into Rich's wallet easier, (so I've heard).

 

I've just texted Andrea, who is on her works "do", boy am I going to be popular, she loves the place, happy days indeed.

 

Martyn, (feeling less groused about the CC now, Gosh I'm cheap..) :D

[Klyne]

Tracker - 2008-12-18 4:13 PM

 

S#d the Caravan Club with their bad attitude on almost everything.

 

They won't get a penny out of me until they change their prejudiced and overtly anti motor caravan outlook and their self righteous 'we are never wrong' attitude and start behaving in the member's interests rather than their own management's secret agenda.

 

It's not as if they don't have any money - but just ask yourself where that money came from in the first place?

 

We put up with them for many years until we discovered the ease of motor home holidays in France and the rest of Europe.

 

The clue is in the name - The CARAVAN Club I suppose?

 

Tracker, please fill me in. In which way does the CC discriminate against motorhomers and how do, presumably, caravanners get a better deal?

 

David

[Guest Tracker]

If you just turned up unbooked at a site for just a one night stay we were often treated with some disdain as an obvious inconvenience by some wardens.

 

The enforced charge for electricity whether you want it or not - and we don't.

 

I don't know about now, but high site fees in comparison with CCC and no over 55 discount.

 

You can't attend rallies or holiday sites without prebooking which kinda spoils the whole concept of spontaneous camping that we enjoy.

 

There may be other reasons that might come to mind but that was enough to put us off.

 

I'm not knocking anyone who finds the CC to their taste as we are all different and - there is no right or wrong way - but it's not for us in it's present form.

[Klyne]

Tracker

 

Thank you for explaining. I some how doubt its going to change that much in the immediate future! Funnily enough we were at Chatsworth about 10 days ago and I have to say the split between motorhomes and caravans was pretty even and the site of some days was pretty full. Perhaps the difference is that motorhomers want a less formal more ad hoc style of camping where as caravans a more formal arrangement simply because of the nature of the beast. Clearly motorhomes are an ever expanding section of the market, more so than caravans, but in total numbers they still lag behind their towed cousins so perhaps, at this stage the CC do still see themselves as'The Caravan Club'. There is no harm in putting your views in writing to the Club-it could make a difference.

 

David

[Guest Tracker]

Thanks David.

When I was a member (and a member for over 20 years) I wrote to the CC several times over the years expressing my concerns at the prejudice shown against motor caravans and usually I did get a polite acknowledgement which was probably the best that I could expect.

After the electric hook up imposition I sent a letter explaining why I had decided to let my membership lapse and even though I sent a second copy of the letter no reply was ever received which I took to mean that as a non member my views were not worth replying to.

I accept and understand that as a Club they have to do what they feel is best for their core membership and as long as the core membership want ever increasing sophistication and extras and as long as members like the security of pre booking months ahead and are happy to pay ever higher site fees then fair enough as that is what the CC will feel obliged to continue to provide.

I just do not subscribe to the 'one size fits all' philosophy when all I, and many others, need and want is safe overnight stop with the chance to fill and empty various fluids every few days at a sensible price and without the pre booking ritual.

If the CC ever starts to provide this facility - doubtful? - I will happily rejoin.

Good luck to all CC members and may you enjoy your form of holiday just as we enjoy our form of holiday - abroad where we are more free and more welcome.

[Mel B]

Seeing as the Caravan Club has such a demand for its sites now, it would make good economic sense for them to have aires at the same places so that motorhomes can use them for overnight stops, paying a fee of course, but as most would only want to park up and do the waste water/toilet/fresh water routine (ie NOT partake of the toilet block etc) then it wouldn't put much strain on the staff already there. If, of course, use of the toilet block was required, then a separate fee could be levied. This would take some of the pressure off sites, whilst still keeping the usage rate high, and also bring in even more income for each site.

 

The other option would be to treat them as they do 'late night arrivals' where you park in the overnight area (basically a small car park) and only pay the 'person' charges, ie no pitch fee, this allows the occupants to use the full facilities, including the waste etc point, but without the extra expense of a pitch fee and electricity, although some do still allow you to use the electricity I believe.

 

If they did this I would happily join up again. Whilst I love going abroad and using the aires with the freedom it gives us, with having the dogs it does make the crossings very expensive. If I could do a similar thing here, even if I had to pay fees for British 'aires', I would happily do so. And before anyone says that's what CLs are ... no, they're not. They certainly have their place and I have stayed on many a lovely CL, but often they are out of the way and in bad weather you run the risk of getting bogged down in the fields etc as not that many have hard-standings.

[nightrider]

I have often read of members objecting to the compulsory payment of hookup charges, what exactly is the objection? If you have to pay for it then use it, thats what I say, not exactly sure what the charges are for, something to do with the resale of electric?

[Mel B]

Oh no ... not THAT can of worms again .... 8-)

 

Unlike most caravanners, motorhome owners don't always need electricity and some in fact don't actually have the facilities in their motorhomes (older vehicles). I see it a bit like going to a restaurant ... if I don't want a pudding I don't have to pay for one ... so if I don't want electric why should I pay for it?

 

This is a very subjective issue and this is my view, I'm not saying it is right or wrong, it is just mine ... all mine! :D

[Guest Tracker]

Mel B - 2008-12-20 3:38 PM

 

Seeing as the Caravan Club has such a demand for its sites now, it would make good economic sense for them to have aires at the same places so that motorhomes can use them for overnight stops, paying a fee of course, but as most would only want to park up and do the waste water/toilet/fresh water routine (ie NOT partake of the toilet block etc) then it wouldn't put much strain on the staff already there. If, of course, use of the toilet block was required, then a separate fee could be levied. This would take some of the pressure off sites, whilst still keeping the usage rate high, and also bring in even more income for each site.

 

The other option would be to treat them as they do 'late night arrivals' where you park in the overnight area (basically a small car park) and only pay the 'person' charges, ie no pitch fee, this allows the occupants to use the full facilities, including the waste etc point, but without the extra expense of a pitch fee and electricity, although some do still allow you to use the electricity I believe.

 

If they did this I would happily join up again. Whilst I love going abroad and using the aires with the freedom it gives us, with having the dogs it does make the crossings very expensive. If I could do a similar thing here, even if I had to pay fees for British 'aires', I would happily do so. And before anyone says that's what CLs are ... no, they're not. They certainly have their place and I have stayed on many a lovely CL, but often they are out of the way and in bad weather you run the risk of getting bogged down in the fields etc as not that many have hard-standings.

 

I have written to the CC several times over the years suggesting exactly that Mel, but I guess that they were not interested at that time because they didn't reply other than an acknowledgement.

 

In all practicality, unless all their toilet blocks had keycode or card entry it would be difficult to keep people who had not paid the extra out of them and I doubt that either would be acceptable or viable financially, and maybe even the planning people would object on (their own) perception of our hygiene needs?

 

I think their main stated objection was planning consent for the extra units but I would imagine that most local authorities would be delighted to see even more of us travellers (as they tend to see us) disappear into our sheep pens at night!