Guest pelmetman Posted August 16, 2012 Share Posted August 16, 2012 Robinhood - 2012-08-15 10:47 PM However, you seem to be quite happy that people break "the rules" regarding CL/CS use. We can all be quite selective, can't we. ;-) Frankly, I don't like people doing either. :-S Naturally I see it different Robin, my beef about the CC is well known, I have said on many occasions they are no longer a club, but a business only interested in increasing revenue rather than providing a service to its members *-)......................In theory its still owned by its members although you 'd think it was a PLC the way its run >:-( So I see resigning and using the CL system as a legitimate protest :D...........the CL owner gets a customer and the CC gets p****d off ....................a win win B-) A man who does not think for himself does not think at all. ;-) Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Robinhood Posted August 16, 2012 Share Posted August 16, 2012 pelmetman - 2012-08-16 8:20 AM Robinhood - 2012-08-15 10:47 PM However, you seem to be quite happy that people break "the rules" regarding CL/CS use. We can all be quite selective, can't we. ;-) Frankly, I don't like people doing either. :-S Naturally I see it different Robin, my beef about the CC is well known, I have said on many occasions they are no longer a club, but a business only interested in increasing revenue rather than providing a service to its members *-)......................In theory its still owned by its members although you 'd think it was a PLC the way its run >:-( So I see resigning and using the CL system as a legitimate protest :D...........the CL owner gets a customer and the CC gets p****d off ....................a win win B-) A man who does not think for himself does not think at all. ;-) Naturally :-S (though it is, of course, an illegitimate protest). Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
kelly58 Posted August 16, 2012 Share Posted August 16, 2012 For what its worth my take on the CC and CCC is that without these organisations a lot of caravanners / motorhomers would be at a loss as to where they could use their expensive purcase and the CC and CCC know this . As it shows they have a captive ordiance which then allows them to basically charge what they like a sort of like it or lump it attitude . Not everyone likes to venture abroad for different reasons and are not aware of the excellent sites available out there at a fraction of the CC and CCC fee's and the free and easy attitude to their customers . I belong the CCC , but I often ask myself why as we have only in the past 6 years used one site at Barnard Castle and because of the attitude of the warden at that time we only stopped the one night . Last year we went touring the lake district using CL's the 1st three we eventually found were diabolicle with long grass bad access and very wet soggy ground , then we found a real jem not too far from Grange over Sands on a farm a beautifull site on a working dairy farm at £4.40 pn with the nicest owners you could wish to meet which certainly revived which I thought would be a total wasted holiday. Being retired we do spent the majority of our time between April and October in Europoe mainly using aires and the ASCI site , but thats our choice . Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest pelmetman Posted August 16, 2012 Share Posted August 16, 2012 Robinhood - 2012-08-16 8:35 AM (though it is, of course, an illegitimate protest). I guess it depends on which side of the fence you sit whether its legitimate or illegitimate ;-) Even so I think it's an excellent way of registering a protest without causing CL owners lose of earnings :D An idea that is not dangerous is unworthy of being called an idea at all......... He's good is old Oscar B-) Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest 1footinthegrave Posted August 16, 2012 Share Posted August 16, 2012 Robinhood - 2012-08-15 10:47 PM 1footinthegrave - 2012-08-15 9:05 PM Robinhood - 2012-08-15 7:47 PM 1footinthegrave - 2012-08-15 7:14 PM I have only ever been asked for it on one occasion over the years, I think most CL / CS sites are just happy to have a little extra revenue, and let's face it, cash is king....................and why not ? ......and I wouldn't be suprised if the people that break that rule (actually, it's a legal constraint, not just a rule) are the same ones that let their dogs roam free, and don't clean up after them. ;-) Funny old world isn't it. B-) ???????, you've completely lost me !!!! but I am in the CCC club, but DON'T own a dog. ( as some will know ) ....yes, I know, and I'm aware that you don't like people breaking "the rules" with their dogs. However, you seem to be quite happy that people break "the rules" regarding CL/CS use. We can all be quite selective, can't we. ;-) Frankly, I don't like people doing either. :-S One of the advantages of the clubs is access to the 5 van sites. Their existence arises from concessions in planning law fought for by the clubs, and the setting up of legal and review processes that they, amongst others, run for their members benefit. As such, you should be a member to use the relevant certified/certificated sites, and very much count it as a benefit of your membership. If you don't want to pay, don't expect to get the benefits Much of my response is not aimed personally at you, but the flavour of the thread is pretty depressing. My expectations of the respondents on this forum are (with some exceptions) generally quite low, but even then they quite often fail to be met. :-S B-) You obviously missed what I said earlier, I AM IN THE CCC CLUB, and merely said I have rarely been asked for my membership card, so I repeat, some CL / CS owners no doubt turn a blind eye that only my observation in not having had to produce my card over the years, as the old saying goes,a bird in the hand............ Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Robinhood Posted August 16, 2012 Share Posted August 16, 2012 1footinthegrave - 2012-08-16 10:06 AM You obviously missed what I said earlier, I AM IN THE CCC CLUB, and merely said I have rarely been asked for my membership card, so I repeat, some CL / CS owners no doubt turn a blind eye that only my observation in not having had to produce my card over the years, as the old saying goes,a bird in the hand............ .....not at all. I took your original statement "I have only ever been asked for it on one occasion over the years, I think most CL / CS sites are just happy to have a little extra revenue, and let's face it, cash is king....................and why not ?" as condoning the use of CLs/CSs by non-members. Your latest post appears to compound this. If I've misinterpreted, then I apologise. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest 1footinthegrave Posted August 16, 2012 Share Posted August 16, 2012 Its a chicken and egg situation as I see it, the CS /CL owner obviously would like some revenue for his efforts, so in many ways they could see it as counter productive to turn away someone by asking for their card, especially as very many 5 van sites are underused as you will know. It's not for me to Police the world, and again I say, most folk are more than happy to take your cash,member or no member, so your beef should be with them, not me ! think about how many times your asked for your card, unless you volunteer it first. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Robinhood Posted August 16, 2012 Share Posted August 16, 2012 1footinthegrave - 2012-08-16 10:41 AM Its a chicken and egg situation as I see it, the CS /CL owner obviously would like some revenue for his efforts, so in many ways they could see it as counter productive to turn away someone by asking for their card, especially as very many 5 van sites are underused as you will know. It's not for me to Police the world, and again I say, most folk are more than happy to take your cash,member or no member, so your beef should be with them, not me ! think about how many times your asked for your card, unless you volunteer it first. It's a chicken and egg situation only in the aspect that CLs/CSs would not exist unless members-only organisations were there to arrange, certify and monitor them. Using them outside their legal terms of existence risks replacing the system under which they exist ith something far worse, or even nothing at all. This would be (IMO) a sad loss. I therefore do not condone their illegal use (on practical grounds, but I also find it ethically questionable). Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Tony Jones Posted August 16, 2012 Share Posted August 16, 2012 For me, the ONLY reason for being in the CCC is the CS network (oh, and the access it gives to the excellent-value "Forest Holidays" sites helps too). Between these two, my annual fee is a good investment, providing for pretty well ALL the times I want to use my van in the UK. It saves me budgetting for what would otherwise be significant site fees (loads of CSs can be paid for out of loose change in the pocket - well under a tenner). I certainly wouldn't be interested in using Club Sites, on price alone (never mind all the hassle of bookings and minimum stays). I know some CSs (probably more than CC CLs) break the 5-van and members-only rules, but that's their problem not mine. I wouldn't encourage it, or lend my book to a non-member, but as long as the practice doesn't become so widespread as to endanger the whole system (or CCC's part of it) I can't get steamed up about it. BtW, the "other" mag has a "nightstop" scheme, linked with the Motorcaravanners' Club, which apparently allows pubs etc to become MCC CLs, WITHOUT any membership requirement. So I wonder if the "members-only" thing is actually part of the exemption law referred to above, or imposed by the clubs to protect their investment in running the system? If the latter, no criticism from me - it makes perfect sense. But we ought to know which bits of these regulations are Law and which are Club Rules. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Tracker Posted August 16, 2012 Share Posted August 16, 2012 Robinhood - 2012-08-16 11:23 AM Using them outside their legal terms of existence risks replacing the system under which they exist ith something far worse, or even nothing at all. Just because a law exists it does not make it just, sensible, reasonable, enforceable or in keeping with the needs of the 21st century camper whose needs are vastly different to the original concept of a bit of a farm field idea that began the CL/CS idea in the first place. In view of that I firmly believe that in this high cost modern world the site owner should be helped by both the clubs and by parliament to maximise site occupancy and not hindered by an antiquated and out of date law. How about both major clubs allowing member access to each other's site networks for a starter? If something is not done to increase CL/CS occupancy the networks will dwindle as the site owners chase ever increasing costs with ever increasing fees when what is needed is more nights use to help drive back down the costs. It's the poor site owners that are stuck in the middle and it would probably be more interesting and relevant to hear their point of view than ours? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
bolero boy Posted August 16, 2012 Share Posted August 16, 2012 Tony Jones - 2012-08-16 11:42 AM For me, the ONLY reason for being in the CCC is the CS network (oh, and the access it gives to the excellent-value "Forest Holidays" sites helps too). Tony, we love the CL/CS network and the membership is worth it for these BUT I would never describe the Camping in the Forest' sites as cheap - well, not HollandsWood anyway. We were looking at going over the Bank Holiday weekend (yes, it's peak) but £25 a night for 3 nights is not a cheap weekend for a site with no facilities other than a toilet block. It's like CL camping for 3 times the price. Not good value in my book, I'm afraid. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Robinhood Posted August 16, 2012 Share Posted August 16, 2012 Tony Jones - 2012-08-16 11:42 AM BtW, the "other" mag has a "nightstop" scheme, linked with the Motorcaravanners' Club, which apparently allows pubs etc to become MCC CLs, WITHOUT any membership requirement. So I wonder if the "members-only" thing is actually part of the exemption law referred to above, or imposed by the clubs to protect their investment in running the system? If the latter, no criticism from me - it makes perfect sense. But we ought to know which bits of these regulations are Law and which are Club Rules. The "members-only" requirement is the law. Exempted organisations can only provide a certificate "for use by its members". (reference to the legislation I've quoted above will clarify). The MCC (not the cricket one!) is an exempted organisation, and therefore can issue certificates. I note that it claims to do this for "public" use, though on what legal basis, given the wording of the act, is unclear. It may be that they are choosing to interpret the above wording not as being "exclusively used by members" (or don't enforce it), but it is clear that most planning authorities are explicit on this. Nightstops, I suspect, are provided outside the above legislation, since they are simply (AIUI) arrangements that allow for parking of a motorhome overnight, not the setting up of a more formal "campsite", also allowing caravans. The value-for-money argument is also interesting in the context of the MCC, whose annual fee is £28.50 - giving access to a small number of "CLs", and no club sites. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Robinhood Posted August 16, 2012 Share Posted August 16, 2012 Tracker - 2012-08-16 12:07 PM Just because a law exists it does not make it just, sensible, reasonable, enforceable or in keeping with the needs of the 21st century camper whose needs are vastly different to the original concept of a bit of a farm field idea that began the CL/CS idea in the first place. In view of that I firmly believe that in this high cost modern world the site owner should be helped by both the clubs and by parliament to maximise site occupancy and not hindered by an antiquated and out of date law. I think the current arrangements are quite sensible, reasonable, and enforceable (and should be). They're also quite aligned to the needs of planning legislation (from which they sprung). After all, your average caravanner/motorcaravanner shouldn't expect to be preferentially treated. My needs are amply satisfied by the type of location and meet that is covered by an exemption certificate - any greater provision would be less attractive to me, and should, where/if there is demand, generally (IMO) be covered by the more formal planning process. It simply appears that some people are too tight to pay a small annual membership fee for the benefit of legally using facilities that they obviously covet. Whatever changed arrangements might be put in place, such people are still likely to find ways of avoiding any on-cost. :-S Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
bolero boy Posted August 16, 2012 Share Posted August 16, 2012 Robin, have to agree wholeheartedly. Sites with 5 vans are lovely, usually very relaxed, no collective 'gangs' of noisy teenagers etc. For those who are happy with large busy sites that are very good value and incorporate plenty of facilities, try Haven. We have used these when necessary as they are ridiculously cheap mid-week out of season. HOWEVER, these are not our preferred type of site and to consider 'de-regulating' CL/CS sites to make them larger will inevitably lead to demand for more facilities, followed by more noise and price increases. There are loads of commercial sites around for those who dont 'subscribe' to the CL lifestyle of the the Clubs themselves, so go use them. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest pelmetman Posted August 16, 2012 Share Posted August 16, 2012 Robinhood - 2012-08-16 1:13 PM It simply appears that some people are too tight to pay a small annual membership fee for the benefit of legally using facilities that they obviously covet. Whatever changed arrangements might be put in place, such people are still likely to find ways of avoiding any on-cost. :-S £42 squid might be a small fee to some people, but its dam near a weeks site fee's abroad ;-)................In my view the membership fee should be a nominal fee, not another way to fleece the clubs owners........the members *-) Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
bolero boy Posted August 16, 2012 Share Posted August 16, 2012 pelmetman - 2012-08-16 3:23 PM Robinhood - 2012-08-16 1:13 PM It simply appears that some people are too tight to pay a small annual membership fee for the benefit of legally using facilities that they obviously covet. Whatever changed arrangements might be put in place, such people are still likely to find ways of avoiding any on-cost. :-S £42 squid might be a small fee to some people, but its dam near a weeks site fee's abroad ;-)................In my view the membership fee should be a nominal fee, not another way to fleece the clubs owners........the members *-) So don't join - or the CCC if you're in that one. There, that's two extra weeks abroad you've just got yourself - can't be bad, can it? Seriously Dave, surely it is both you and Sue (and Troy) who are members for £42. Discounting Troy, that's £21 each for the year or 40p a week. Not a lot really. Still, it's everyone's choice whether to join or remain in the Clubs. If you were a member of a 'drinking club' where the beer was cheaper for members, you would not think very much of those who felt that the club should be open to all at those rates without the bother of becoming a member. It's the same at many Glof Clubs where drinks are cheaper to members (or even social members) than to visitors - a perk of being a member as is the access to the Clubs' CL/CS sites. Sorry, but that's how it is. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
duetto owner Posted August 16, 2012 Share Posted August 16, 2012 got the return to cc membership email today cost £42. ok if you stay on their sites on a regular basis as the sites are good, but unless you book months in advance you have no chance. i think if it was only open to members this would give members more chance of getting a pitch. we tend these days to park up in a quiet street or layby and move location each night, never had a problem with it so far. [ but would book a cc site if available] Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
maggyd Posted August 16, 2012 Share Posted August 16, 2012 Yes but like Dave I think the increase is far too much :-S we are members of both clubs and dont use them !! as we like to go abroad for our hols at t he moment anyway and maybe use one site from either club a year. They should either reduce the membership fee or the site fees lets face it three nights on a site can cost £70 !! we can stay a week for that on Stals or Aires. And this Pitch Fee is ridiculous they used to charge for electric!! but even if you dont want it you have to pay this fee even if they put you on the car park with no elect facilities as happened to us last year when it was too wet to go on a grass pitch!! the CCC club doesnt really like catering for motorhomes I know I overheard an assistant warden!! Can anyone recommend the Motorhome club ? what are their sites like and are they many? and how much? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
bolero boy Posted August 16, 2012 Share Posted August 16, 2012 Tracker - 2012-08-15 11:04 PM When we left the CC years ago we threw away the sites book and have not felt the need to go near a CL ever since! Rich, so how do you go about finding a small peaceful site within the £6-£10 per night bracket. Certainly, most of the 'commercial' sites are far more expensive than this and many offer loads of 'facilities' that do not particularly appeal. Just curious, are we now back into the 'wild camping' thing............i.e. free? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
bolero boy Posted August 16, 2012 Share Posted August 16, 2012 maggyd - 2012-08-16 4:24 PM Yes but like Dave I think the increase is far too much :-S we are members of both clubs and dont use them !! as we like to go abroad for our hols at t he moment anyway and maybe use one site from either club a year. I have just checked my statements and the CC fee was £38 in 2010, £40 in 2011 and £42 this year. Similarly, C&CC was £37 in 2010, £39 in 2011 and £40 this year. So both clubs together went up by £3 per year - is this a massive increase?...............personally, I didn't think so. maggyd - 2012-08-16 4:24 PM They should either reduce the membership fee or the site fees lets face it three nights on a site can cost £70 !! we can stay a week for that on Stals or Aires. And this Pitch Fee is ridiculous...... Agreed, the pitch fee is ridiculous but regarding the price of sites, why not use the CL/CS sites as the price is much more in line with that of Stelleplatze or Aires. As was pointed out earlier in this thread, it's not fair to compare an aire at 5Euro with a full blown peak season CC club site at £25 or so. There are certainly Continental sites charging £25+ in peak season but no-one says on here how expensive they are. If the membership cost has become an issue and you are happy to forgoe the access to the CL/CS network then the right thing to do is to leave the Clubs. I, also, think the full Club sites are way too expensive but we rarely use them as we like to use the far better value (and better enjoyed) CLs. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Robinhood Posted August 16, 2012 Share Posted August 16, 2012 maggyd - 2012-08-16 4:24 PM Yes but like Dave I think the increase is far too much :-S we are members of both clubs and dont use them !! as we like to go abroad for our hols at t he moment anyway and maybe use one site from either club a year. In which case, maybe better to use them as a non-member and pay the premium at the time. maggyd - 2012-08-16 4:24 PM They should either reduce the membership fee or the site fees lets face it three nights on a site can cost £70 !! we can stay a week for that on Stals or Aires. ....but this is hardly comparing like-with-like; as a member you can stay for a week on IPS's CS for not much more than that - including the annual membership! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest 1footinthegrave Posted August 16, 2012 Share Posted August 16, 2012 bolero boy - 2012-08-16 4:52 PM Tracker - 2012-08-15 11:04 PM When we left the CC years ago we threw away the sites book and have not felt the need to go near a CL ever since! Rich, so how do you go about finding a small peaceful site within the £6-£10 per night bracket. Certainly, most of the 'commercial' sites are far more expensive than this and many offer loads of 'facilities' that do not particularly appeal. Just curious, are we now back into the 'wild camping' thing............i.e. free? I think Tracker likes to get over the water, like us, but................ I'm guessing your in the CC club, because we are in the CCC "club" and CS sites are now far more expensive, but many CS / CLs are to be found on the internet, just this afternoon I contacted a CC cl, and telephoned just out of curiosity to enquire about their membership policy as we are in the CCC club, but this CL had onsite fishing, they said they are both the same as far as they were concerned, and they had space, space at the height of the season tells you everything, is it any wonder they turn a blind eye to non members using their pitches, especially given the investment put in to provide hook ups, as more and more have done. But as someone else said, what a great idea it would be if both organizations merged, wouldn't that make membership much more worthwhile for everyone...........giving as it would much greater flexibility in finding somewhere convenient to wherever you were at the time, rather than having to make for a specific place all the time which is such a pain, especially if it turns out to be less that one had hoped for, like the CS described as peaceful, that turned out to be within yards of a busy railway line ;-) >:-( >:-( Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
kelly58 Posted August 16, 2012 Share Posted August 16, 2012 Last year for having an article published in MMM I was given some campsite guides and 2 " Free " site vouchers from the CC which as a non member was going to cost me £8 pn to use them . At the Peterborough Show I enquired from the CC stand how much membership was £40 which included 2 " Free " site vouchers , so by joining if you take off the £16 to use the 1st 2 free vouchers my membership only cost me £24 we then booked and had 4 nights at Crystal Palace site in July which would have been just under £100 for £40 and a years membership thrown in . When the annuall renewal came through this April I did not bother to renew as I felt I did not need to continue as a member. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Tracker Posted August 16, 2012 Share Posted August 16, 2012 For camping in the UK we either use one of our list of known quiet places gathered over many years or if we need to be somewhere specific we use a commercial site. For weekend breaks we use CCC weekend meets and/or THS where the cost is reasonable and no booking required in case the weather is bad and we don't go. Only rarely do we ever now use a CS unless we stumble across one that looks nice and is located such that it is easier to pay for that than to drive extra miles to a cheaper one. Main holidays are always over the water and in a three week tour of France last year our TOTAL expenditure on aires was much less than £42. OK so we had the ferry cost, but diesel is cheaper and most important of all - the weather is better. Job done! I do have to wonder how those who so vehemently advocate the law on CL/CS not being changed see the whole 5 van network structure in say five years time? My feeling is that they are a diminishing resource and unless a way can be found for owners to enhance occupancy I don't see how that decline can change? But as long as the status quo suits the style of those who oppose change is that OK then - or selfish - with respect to those who offer the case for no change, I call it 'ostrich' syndrome! Look the other way, and hope the problem will solve itself? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest 1footinthegrave Posted August 16, 2012 Share Posted August 16, 2012 Your right on the money Tracker, I personally know of two CS owners, who have put in ELHU, and as a result increased their charges, one from £5 to £12, with the nett result they tell me of fewer nights booked, and it will take them donkeys years to recoup their investment, cost of many CS / CLs are now approaching main and commercial site fee's, trouble is we can do perfectly well without EHU, and toilets and the like, but they all seem to be going in that direction, we just need a tap, and an elsen point, and for that I'd be happy to pay a max of £10, sadly those are proving harder and harder to find, well for certain in the CCC Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Archived
This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.