CC does it Again!!

[Mel E]

As a member of the CC, I phoned their Technical Section to obtain their views on the proposed EU changes to driver licencing.

 

(Under new EU rules that are likely to apply from about 2012, all new drivers will be restricted to a tow vehicle/trailer combination of 3500 MAM. The current option of a combination of 4250 MAM with a tow vehicle up to 3500 MAM and a trailer up to 750 MAM will be replaced by any combination up to 4250 MAM, but requiring extra training or a test (which is yet to be decided by the UK government).

 

The 4250 combination is, of course advantageous to caravanners who use SUVs to tow a large 'van and it was introduced to placate the caravan lobby. But the 3500 limit means motorhomers who want to tow a small trailer will have to take the extra training or test, since there are no motorhomes under about 3000 MAM except for a few very tiny ones.

 

When I pointed out that the new rules were disadvantageous to most motorhomers who can currently pull a trailer up to 750 MAM without the extra training or test, the attitude was:

 

" it will not affect the vast majority of our motorhome members as they have very small motorhomes."

 

The CC clearly doesn't know what motorhomes its members have - it's not even information they collect. So how can an official make such a sweeping statement? In other words, this proposed change is good for the caravan members, so sod the rest!

 

 

[michele]

You & Starspirit , Rest your case Yes.

It does not supprise me in the least . Thankyou Mel E for the information

again duely noted and taken in.

 

Regards

[Guest Frank Wilkinson]

This legislation is five years off. Do you honestly think that it's fair to ring the CC, without any notice of a very complex subject and to get a measured response. You may well have talked to a junior official who isn't totally au fait with the situation?

It would be much fairer to write to them, or phone them and tell them that you'll be happy to call back in a few days when they've had time to consider their position.

What will matter is the CC's attitude in a few months when they have been able to really digest the legislation.

In the meantime reading this thread gives another perfect opportunity for the handful of anti CC members to jump with joy.

I can just imagine Michele punching her hand in the air when she typed that triumphal 'Yes' with its capital letter. Michelle by the way who isn't even a member of the CC and does she even tow a vehicle?

"Brilliant guys, a really good post bashing the Caravan Club - Yes!"

Please, let's all try to be reasonable and to deal with people and organisations as we would like to be dealt with ourselves.

[mom]

I don't want to contribute to another endless debate on CC, CCC and any other club with C in it, but I must admit, I think there is a case to answer with this one. 

I agree with Frank that a proper, measured response can only come after the club has spent considerable time looking at the issue, examining the effects etc.  My interest doesn't lie there.  My interest is with the proffered argument that the "vast majority" have "very small" motorhomes.  That is not a passive statement, it is an active statement.  It implies a sound knowledge and understanding of the member base. 

It's not like the CC write software for a living, or construct toaster ovens.  Their field is the caravan and motorhome activities of people they accept money from.  I expect much higher standards of myself in my line of business.  Do I not have a right to expect the same of the club I pay dues to?

[michele]

michele - 2007-01-16 1:00 PM

 

You & Starspirit , Rest your case Yes.

 

Frank you have to forgive my grammar & the way I write .However you have assummed wrongly that I was punching the air?

What I was trying to infer is a question Yes. see what I mean. I should of put a ? there but thats typical me. I also should not of used a capital but tum te tum.

No I don't tow don't need to but I can tell you what I do do.

I do not choose to give my money to a bunch of Grummpy old sod's who don't like kid's, just to have a mag posted through my door about which I am not interested in . People speak as they find & I see you do .

That Frank is your perogative please don't assume that I am that nasty by nature I am not . I wish no ill to the various clubs I just don't need to be in their gang. I find's my ownway around I bothers no one.

So Frank you have me wrong you might try to see things from a different angle sometimes instead of being dogmatic & attacking at the first stage.

 

You like the various whatever they are called club's, Me I got my own club In which I try not to make enemies don't always happen but I try.

 

People know your views on the CC or whatever they are called

They are your views does not matter how hard you fight their corner each to their own you will not change people s own thoughts and views

 

if it bothers you others others views and you can't debate the good & the bad without attacking then your in a bad way .

You should try not to look for the sinister in what people are trying to say

you will find it alot easier going .

 

Take care.

 

[Guest Frank Wilkinson]

Mom, but aren't you falling into the same trap? This was an off the cuff remark by an official (how junior or senior we have no idea) who was caught on the hop by a question on a very complex issue.

This department is probably used to taking phone calls from people asking about buying gas abroad and that kind of thing. A question as broad and as important as this one, as you very fairly say, needs a measured response from someone much higher up the CC's food chain.

[Guest Frank Wilkinson]

michele - 2007-01-16 2:23 PM

michele - 2007-01-16 1:00 PM You & Starspirit , Rest your case Yes. Frank you have to forgive my grammar & the way I write .However you have assummed wrongly that I was punching the air? What I was trying to infer is a question Yes. see what I mean. I should of put a ? there but thats typical me. I also should not of used a capital but tum te tum. No I don't tow don't need to but I can tell you what I do do. I do not choose to give my money to a bunch of Grummpy old sod's who don't like kid's, just to have a mag posted through my door about which I am not interested in . People speak as they find & I see you do . That Frank is your perogative please don't assume that I am that nasty by nature I am not . I wish no ill to the various clubs I just don't need to be in their gang. I find's my ownway around I bothers no one. So Frank you have me wrong you might try to see things from a different angle sometimes instead of being dogmatic & attacking at the first stage. You like the various whatever they are called club's, Me I got my own club In which I try not to make enemies don't always happen but I try. People know your views on the CC or whatever they are called They are your views does not matter how hard you fight their corner each to their own you will not change people s own thoughts and views if it bothers you others others views and you can't debate the good & the bad without attacking then your in a bad way . You should try not to look for the sinister in what people are trying to say you will find it alot easier going . Take care.

I'm sorry Michele, but you are the one who's doing all the attacking 'Grumpy old sods' etc.

Your phrase - 'Rest your case' implied to me that this one bit of evidence proved all the negative things that certain people attribute to the CC.

I actually want people to be nicer. From what I've read about you, you seem an incredibly nice and generous but like a few others on this site your otherwise placid nature seems to go into reverse when the subject of the CC comes up.

There seems to be something about the CC that turns just a few otherwise nice people into something a little different!

[Dave Newell]

I am neither pro nor anti Caravan Club, its just simply not for me. We were members of the CC but dropped it when they hid the electric charge in the pitch fee. I still use CC sites occasionally but not often enough to save the membership fee and I never found much of interest in the mag.

 

I do agree with MOM though that an "off the cuff" statement that the majority of members motorhomes are small is laughable in its inaccuracy. We spent two nights this past weekend at the Losehill CC site in Castleton, North Derbyshire. There were plenty of families there with young children. Of the 79 pitches on site 43 of them were occupied by motorhomes (yes I am that sad that I walked around and counted them). Of these 43 motorhomes less than 10 were sub 6 Metre 'vans and only 1 was a micro camper. 1 Was an A class 28 foot tag axle job and 7 were panel van conversions.

 

Yes this is a rough and ready straw poll but I think it shows that "most CC members with motorhomes are over 6 metres and therefore not in the lightweight category at all. Even an underling in the organisation should be aware of this or else not give comments like they did.

 

Oh yes, the site was fully occupied on the Saturday night and probably 3/4 full on the Friday.

 

D

[michele]

Frank just because I have an opinion does not mean that my placid nature goes into reverse . I have once voiced my opinion on the CC not so long ago I did not go into a major run them down campain I just said that we had prob's with a few things.

You seem to attack people do you not think that you could handle it a better way? why do you seem to jump down peoples throats just because they disagree with something you say? (Maybe that's the way I see it.)

Mom Has just come on and said the above straight away you jump .

 

Why can't you chill and try to see that we all cannot be the same as the world would not go round.

Each & everyone is different with their own point's of view I except yours I don't jump or attack you . As for me doing the attacking about the grumpy old sod's yes you are right there but that's what I feel, is that ok to feel like that . They lost us as a family because of the way they treated us

we did not like it . I was not punching the air like you say Mearly asking a question . Have you taken that on board.

[Guest Frank Wilkinson]

Michele, I really do not understand your point. This is a forum where people discuss things and air their views. You were very quick to air your views about the CC shortly after this thread started. Am I not allowed to air my views and to defend an organisation that I think does an excellent job?

I happen to be working in my study all day printing and collating 500 pages of a document so I'm enjoying jumping in and out of the forum.

Finally, why do you keep using the word 'attacking'. If anyone's attacking it's you attacking me. I'm simply debating and putting my point of view against views with which I disagree. Isn't that my right on this forum?

As for punching the air, the way that you wrote: Rest your case Yes.' looked like a metaphorical punching in the air. Why else put 'Yes' at the end of a sentence. I'm quite happy to accept that you didn't actually punch the air physically.

[michele]

Frank give it a rest . Did I say you were not entitled to yor view's ? No

If you choose to read what I put the wrong way either because of my Grammar or spelling or english one can only apologise for that .

However I have given you the explanation that you were asking for and told you why I put a capital Y and yet you still come back .

 

This is a forum seemingly no one can get there views on that you don't like Yes ? Or would that be NO ?

Don't look for the worst in everone as you quite rightly put it it is a Forum .

open to discussion view's and debates not throw teddies out the pram fall out get wound up angry bloody annoyed which all leaves a bad taste.

 

If you feel that I attacked the CC then you must be right .

whatever . In previous postings that you have picked up spat the bones out of Frank you keep picking up quotes you won't listen to what people are trying to tell you I can see you are also not listening to me.

So if you feel that I have done the CC an injustice by answering Mel E's original post . What can Iwrite What can I say ......... What ever it will be wrong Yes ? No? Whatever.

[Brian Kirby]

Mel E - 2007-01-16 12:53 PM As a member of the CC, I phoned their Technical Section to obtain their views on the proposed EU changes to driver licencing. (Under new EU rules that are likely to apply from about 2012, all new drivers will be restricted to a tow vehicle/trailer combination of 3500 MAM. The current option of a combination of 4250 MAM with a tow vehicle up to 3500 MAM and a trailer up to 750 MAM will be replaced by any combination up to 4250 MAM, but requiring extra training or a test (which is yet to be decided by the UK government). The 4250 combination is, of course advantageous to caravanners who use SUVs to tow a large 'van and it was introduced to placate the caravan lobby. But the 3500 limit means motorhomers who want to tow a small trailer will have to take the extra training or test, since there are no motorhomes under about 3000 MAM except for a few very tiny ones. When I pointed out that the new rules were disadvantageous to most motorhomers who can currently pull a trailer up to 750 MAM without the extra training or test, the attitude was: " it will not affect the vast majority of our motorhome members as they have very small motorhomes." The CC clearly doesn't know what motorhomes its members have - it's not even information they collect. So how can an official make such a sweeping statement? In other words, this proposed change is good for the caravan members, so sod the rest!

Mel

Tedious I know, but have you put your query to then again in writing, and sought a written response?

I might be interesting to see what they have to say on this, on reflection.

[michele]

Actually on reflection I would like to aplogise to MEl E .

I totally got him confused with someone else. Sorry.

Please except my sincere apologies.

 

[Guest Frank Wilkinson]

I'm sorry Michele, I understand now. If I put a reasoned response to a post, such as the one I put to Mom, I'm attacking her.

You wrote:

You seem to attack people do you not think that you could handle it a better way? why do you seem to jump down peoples throats just because they disagree with something you say? (Maybe that's the way I see it.)
Mom Has just come on and said the above straight away you jump .

I realise now that when I responded to Mom that it wasn't a response, but an attack and I 'jumped down her throat'.

I also now understand that when you attack me it isn't an attack at all, but that you are allowed a point of view, 'your perogative' I think you said.

I'm really sorry that I hadn't understood your special position here in that you can attack the CC or anyone else that you wish to attack, you can even tell people to 'Sod off'. Oops, sorry again, you don't attack anyone do you? That's just little old me!

[michele]

Frank are you little and old ? (?) *-) Mom is a man just for your info ;-)

[Guest Frank Wilkinson]

michele - 2007-01-16 3:53 PM Frank are you little and old ? (?) *-) Mom is a man just for your info ;-)

Sorry Michele but I'm not psychic! Most Moms I know are female! Well, my mom was anyway.

[michele]

Not Psychic? Umh Yes but are you little and old?

[Guest Frank Wilkinson]

michele - 2007-01-16 4:05 PM Not Psychic? Umh Yes but are you little and old?

Sorry Michele, I'm not little, wish I was a bit thinner though like you! OK, I'll admit to being fairly ancient though (unlike you again)!

My problem is that I love a good argument - no, to hell with it, it's not a problem, there's nothing wrong with a good debate!

[livewire]

Frank Wilkinson - 2007-01-16 3:48 PM

I also now understand that when you attack me it isn't an attack at all, but that you are allowed a point of view, 'your perogative' I think you said.

I'm really sorry that I hadn't understood your special position here in that you can attack the CC or anyone else that you wish to attack, you can even tell people to 'Sod off'. Oops, sorry again, you don't attack anyone do you? That's just little old me!

 

 

>:-) Thats ok then, so Sod off Frank and get off your high horse.

[twooks]

It's reading the Telegraph wot does it, innit Frank 

and if CC come back with a favourable response I may even be moved to rejoin, but I won't be holding my breath.

ps and I still can't smileys working properly, I shall now cry all over my keyboard n make it soggy, that'll show it!

pps if you check it out you will see that mom is made up from initials

[Guest Frank Wilkinson]

livewire - 2007-01-16 4:24 PM

Frank Wilkinson - 2007-01-16 3:48 PM

I also now understand that when you attack me it isn't an attack at all, but that you are allowed a point of view, 'your perogative' I think you said.

I'm really sorry that I hadn't understood your special position here in that you can attack the CC or anyone else that you wish to attack, you can even tell people to 'Sod off'. Oops, sorry again, you don't attack anyone do you? That's just little old me!

 

 

>:-) Thats ok then, so Sod off Frank and get off your high horse.

You're another prat. God, I love this!

[michele]

In that case you are RIGHT Frank .....It is you .............. (lol)

[livewire]

Tell you what Frank, why not give us another lecture about your last SAGA outing to Nepal to try and convince us all you are a really an exciting person, instead of a bitter old man who spends too much time reading the Daily Express

[Guest Frank Wilkinson]

livewire - 2007-01-16 5:12 PM Tell you what Frank, why not give us another lecture about your last SAGA outing to Nepal to try and convince us all you are a really an exciting person, instead of a bitter old man who spends too much time reading the Daily Express

You did tell me to sod off, what do you expect, a kiss?

[Mel E]

Frank,

 

This thread has got away from me - 26 posts in under 8 hours!

 

I think you missed the point in your initial post. This legislation has been on the stocks since 2003 and has been the subject of statutory consultation which the CC has contributed to. It is the CC and caravan lobby that has caused the changes to the originally proposed legislation to make it easier for caravanners.

 

The person I spoke to was not some 'junior' but someone who was aware of the proposal. And I am complaining of the rather trenchant reply I got - 'won't affect our motorhome members because they all have small motorhomes.' There's no way the person could know this and in fact it is clearly wrong!

 

I am in process of writing to the CC to get a more 'ordered' response. I will let you all know what I get.