six meter rule (1 Viewer)

[swanseajack13]

I have been on a few FUSTERS rallies and I would say we must be the best gang of marshals out there I for one now that they always have safety in mind ray xx lol stil lol I want to be a sheriff I like the badge

 

[swanseajack13]

red wine I know not now ray xx lol still lol hic

 

[GJH]

Anyone's thoughts that the 6 metre rule is inappropriate is irrelevant whilst it forms part of the model standards. As posts above have shown, the situation we have is that those charged with maintaining the model standards think it is appropriate and that stance is backed by insurers.
May I suggest that anyone who feels strongly that the 6 metre rule is inappropriate forms a lobby to have it amended in the model standards rather than just saying so

^{_{Subscribers  do not see these advertisements}}

 

[Deleted member 29692]

If it was dry grass going up then 6 metres, 9 metres or 90 metres wouldn't have made much difference.

 

[Deleted member 29692]

Anyone's thoughts that the 6 metre rule is inappropriate is irrelevant whilst it forms part of the model standards. As posts above have shown, the situation we have is that those charged with maintaining the model standards think it is appropriate and that stance is backed by insurers.
May I suggest that anyone who feels strongly that the 6 metre rule is inappropriate forms a lobby to have it amended in the model standards rather than just saying so

I keep asking the question every time this comes up and never get an answer other than abuse so might as well try again:

What research is the figure of 6 metres based on? What evidence is there that 6 metres is the most appropriate spacing as opposed to say 5, 7 or 9 metres?

Surely, given that it's enshrined in the official standards and the 1960 Act, it's not jut some arbitrary figure that somebody has guessed is it?

I know it's one of those questions that you're not allowed to ask so I'm standing by for the attempts at flaming me

 

[GJH]

I keep asking the question every time this comes up and never get an answer other than abuse so might as well try again:

What research is the figure of 6 metres based on? What evidence is there that 6 metres is the most appropriate spacing as opposed to say 5, 7 or 9 metres?

Surely, given that it's enshrined in the official standards and the 1960 Act, it's not jut some arbitrary figure that somebody has guessed is it?

I know it's one of those questions that you're not allowed to ask so I'm standing by for the attempts at flaming me

I don't see any reason why the question should not be asked but I don't know what the evidence used was.

In my post #5 I included links to model standards for touring and residential sites. Looking at the latter document (which was updated in 2008) I see that the distance can be varied depending on the fire resistant materials used. From that I would guess that the assessment was based on a form of evidence.

The 2008 document was published by the Department for Communities and Local Government. There are contact details (including an FoI enquiry address) at the foot of the page. I would suggest, Nick, that sending a FoI request to them, asking what research is the figure of 6 metres based on, would be the most appropriate way of obtaining an answer to your question.

^{_{Subscribers  do not see these advertisements}}

 

[The Wino]

An interesting question is how insurers react if claiming followimg a fire on a French aire or a UK rally where there is less than a 6m gap surely they can't react differently on the 2 claims?. The danger with well intentioned recommendations is they can easily morph into legislation and insurance get outs.

 

[Deleted member 29692]

I would suggest, Nick, that sending a FoI request to them, asking what research is the figure of 6 metres based on, would be the most appropriate way of obtaining an answer to your question.

Request sent

At present I don't park it anywhere that insists on this particular spacing so it doesn't impact on the way I use my motorhome. I'm asking the question purely out of interest and because I don't like seemingly arbitrary rules that nobody is prepared to justify.

 

[GJH]

An interesting question is how insurers react if claiming followimg a fire on a French aire or a UK rally where there is less than a 6m gap surely they can't react differently on the 2 claims?. The danger with well intentioned recommendations is they can easily morph into legislation and insurance get outs.

I don't think it can be said that the 6 metre requirement has morphed into legislation. The legislation requires the secretary of state to produce model standards so they are an integral part of the legislation.
Given that (and assuming a reasonable evidential basis) I shouldn't have thought that it is unreasonable for insurance companies to apply the same (as with Fun's insurers as noted above).

^{_{Subscribers  do not see these advertisements}}

 

[GJH]

Request sent

At present I don't park it anywhere that insists on this particular spacing so it doesn't impact on the way I use my motorhome. I'm asking the question purely out of interest and because I don't like seemingly arbitrary rules that nobody is prepared to justify.

Nice one. It will be interesting to see the reply.

 

[Deleted member 29692]

An interesting question is how insurers react if claiming followimg a fire on a French aire or a UK rally where there is less than a 6m gap surely they can't react differently on the 2 claims?. The danger with well intentioned recommendations is they can easily morph into legislation and insurance get outs.

There's nothing whatsoever in my insurance regarding minimum spacing to other vehiclewhen parked.

I doubt there is in anyones.

If there was you wouldn't be able to leave your MH in a car park if you were using a supermarket or just perhaps parked up to wander around a town.

 

[Vanman]

I keep asking the question every time this comes up and never get an answer other than abuse so might as well try again:

What research is the figure of 6 metres based on? What evidence is there that 6 metres is the most appropriate spacing as opposed to say 5, 7 or 9 metres?

It's 6m so that if I'm late in arriving (in my 5.4m van) I can find plenty of places to park. Now I just have to perfect that handbrake spin parking manoeuvre

^{_{Subscribers  do not see these advertisements}}

 

[GJH]

There's nothing whatsoever in my insurance regarding minimum spacing to other vehiclewhen parked.

I doubt there is in anyones.

If there was you wouldn't be able to leave your MH in a car park if you were using a supermarket or just perhaps parked up to wander around a town.

I don't think there is any such clause in our policy either. Having said that, the level of risk when a vehicle is simply parked will be lower than when the vehicle is being camped in (e.g. the use of gas appliances).

 

[2657]

I keep asking the question every time this comes up and never get an answer other than abuse so might as well try again:

What research is the figure of 6 metres based on? What evidence is there that 6 metres is the most appropriate spacing as opposed to say 5, 7 or 9 metres?

Surely, given that it's enshrined in the official standards and the 1960 Act, it's not jut some arbitrary figure that somebody has guessed is it?

I know it's one of those questions that you're not allowed to ask so I'm standing by for the attempts at flaming me

Does it matter? That's the rule like it or lump it, if you don't like it then don't go to where it is applied, which is apparently what you do.

The rule is no problem to me , if I go on a site that insists on it then I usually concur but if there is an attitude problem then I go somewhere else.

Regarding 6m, 7m, 8m, 9m etc the same argument could be used for any seemingly arbritrary limit, is 30mph any safer than 31 mph, or 32, or 33. Is 29mph much safer than 30 etc....etc..

If there is a need for a rule, which may or may not be debatable, then somebody has to draw a line, whether we agree with it is seemingly, in this case, open to much discussion

 

[GeriatricWanderer]

I think it's a con dreamt up buy the Society Of Caravan Club Warders in order to provide suitable employment for their members.
Membership is open to all people of a surly demeanour. Ownership of a 6 meter tape measure is compulsory.

^{_{Subscribers  do not see these advertisements}}

 

[Jean-luc]

Being a member of the CC our Centre go a letter quoting the ruling by Rural England which we are required to follow (don't know why as we're not in England).
However the ruling appears to refer to campsites and places where caravan and motorhome users rally and act like they are on a campsite, tables,chairs, BBQ's, awnings, etc. etc. all deployed.

When I use an 'Aire' or supermarket car-park or other parking place I am 'parked' as defined in Parking Law & Legal Definition. Parking typically is defined as "the stopping or standing of a vehicle whether occupied or not". It is the standing of a vehicle otherwise than temporarily for the purpose of and while actually engaged in loading or unloading merchandise or passengers, therefore if I do not treat the parking space like a camping pitch I am not engaged in 'camping'.

The bye-laws controlling 'Aires' specifically prohibit 'camping' type activities, So IMHO the RE rules have nothing to do with parking, on an 'Aire' or any other parking place.

 

[two]

It seems wee need guidance for everything these days and spacing is one of them. Over here the '6m rule' has been created. Most of us are intelligent enough not to expect any scientific rationale for it, though. Maybe, if we don't Brexit, we could adopt the EU rule as that would override anything we Brits wish to dream up?

 

[WSandME]

Does it matter? That's the rule like it or lump it, if you don't like it then don't go to where it is applied, which is apparently what you do.

I disagree. There needs to be some questioning, debate, and then maybe campaigning for change. If everyone always "liked it or lumped it", no rules would ever change except when it suited those who have the power to make or change them.

This particular rule seems innocuous, even benign and sensible, but in my view it is too idealistic. I'm not particularly keen on parking on aires with only a meter or so between us, but the problem is that there are too many motorhomes, and they all want to be in the best places. Sometimes I'm willing to forgo some privacy (and possibly safety) in order to be where I want to be.

^{_{Subscribers  do not see these advertisements}}

 

[Deleted member 29692]

Regarding 6m, 7m, 8m, 9m etc the same argument could be used for any seemingly arbritrary limit, is 30mph any safer than 31 mph, or 32, or 33. Is 29mph much safer than 30 etc....etc..

If there is a need for a rule, which may or may not be debatable, then somebody has to draw a line, whether we agree with it is seemingly, in this case, open to much discussion

What's wrong with challenging the rule if it is arbitrary? If there's no research or evidence to back it up for all anyone knows it could have no affect at all.

Speed limits aren't arbitrary. They are evidence based, the evidence being the stopping distances of cars at the time the limits were introduced and, in the case of the 30mph limit the likelihood of serious injury to pedestrians.

There probably would be a good case, with modern cars and modern braking systems, for some of those limits to be looked at but that's a discussion I'm not getting in to

 

[JockandRita]

The 6 mtr rule is not a figure plucked out of the sky.

Advice has been sought in years gone by from industry experts, as to the behaviour of materials in a fire situation, used in the construction of leisure accommodation, such as caravans, motorhomes, caravanettes, etc, etc, just as the same would have been done for marine leisure craft.
Amongst those industry experts are............
The Institute Of Fire Engineers.
The Building Research Establishment.
Fire Safety Experts
Fire Investigation Engineers

The overriding factor in the reasoning behind the size of safety gap, is the "life risk" based on the knowledge and advice from those learned institutes listed above.

I was a Fire Fighter, and not a Fire safety Expert, nor a Fire Investigation Engineer, however, I can categorically state, that when a leisure vehicle such as a caravan or a motor home is subjected to fire, they go up almost instantly, and during my time in the job, I did not see any survive the ravages of fire, and I have attended a few.

Before anyone comes back with some "smarty pants" type remark, please have a think about the contents and construction of your mobile weekend and holiday accommodation, ie..........
soft wood, plastics, fibreglass, polystyrene, thin sheet aluminium, foam padding, carpets, linoleum, etc, etc. Add to that, LPG, petrol, diesel, sulphuric acid, 12v electricity, 240v electricity, naked flame pilot light...................and in the wrong hands (carelessness or a lack of respect for safety), you have a fire situation, (or an explosion even) waiting to happen. If it should happen, the 6 Mtr gap affords occupants of the adjacent leisure vehicles, time to make their escape safely.

Regards,

Jock.

 

[two]

It's a shame that similar rules are not applied to car parks. Spaces, there, are getting far too close together.
Land is finite, so I suppose we should expect even greater controls over its distribution as demand increases.

^{_{Subscribers  do not see these advertisements}}

 

[BusyBuilder]

Being a member of the CC our Centre go a letter quoting the ruling by Rural England which we are required to follow (don't know why as we're not in England).
However the ruling appears to refer to campsites and places where caravan and motorhome users rally and act like they are on a campsite, tables,chairs, BBQ's, awnings, etc. etc. all deployed.

When I use an 'Aire' or supermarket car-park or other parking place I am 'parked' as defined in Parking Law & Legal Definition. Parking typically is defined as "the stopping or standing of a vehicle whether occupied or not". It is the standing of a vehicle otherwise than temporarily for the purpose of and while actually engaged in loading or unloading merchandise or passengers, therefore if I do not treat the parking space like a camping pitch I am not engaged in 'camping'.

The bye-laws controlling 'Aires' specifically prohibit 'camping' type activities, So IMHO the RE rules have nothing to do with parking, on an 'Aire' or any other parking place.


View attachment 130202 View attachment 130203

Nobody expects the Spanish Inquisition !!

 

[Tea Bag]

It's a shame that similar rules are not applied to car parks. Spaces, there, are getting far too close together.
Land is finite, so I suppose we should expect even greater controls over its distribution as demand increases.

Hi.
"And the little one said move over..." God stopped making land,but he is still making people,a Jewish friend once said.
Tea Bag

 

[GJH]

Being a member of the CC our Centre go a letter quoting the ruling by Rural England which we are required to follow (don't know why as we're not in England).
However the ruling appears to refer to campsites and places where caravan and motorhome users rally and act like they are on a campsite, tables,chairs, BBQ's, awnings, etc. etc. all deployed.

When I use an 'Aire' or supermarket car-park or other parking place I am 'parked' as defined in Parking Law & Legal Definition. Parking typically is defined as "the stopping or standing of a vehicle whether occupied or not". It is the standing of a vehicle otherwise than temporarily for the purpose of and while actually engaged in loading or unloading merchandise or passengers, therefore if I do not treat the parking space like a camping pitch I am not engaged in 'camping'.

The bye-laws controlling 'Aires' specifically prohibit 'camping' type activities, So IMHO the RE rules have nothing to do with parking, on an 'Aire' or any other parking place.


View attachment 130202 View attachment 130203

That raises a number of points.

The CC has its exemption certificate issued by Natural England because it is based in England. It saves the CC (and any similar organisation) having to obtain certificates separately from Scotland, wales and Northern Ireland.

The 1960 Act applies whenever as caravan (including a motor caravan) is used "for the purposes of human habitation" and activity like deploying furniture outside is not required for habitation to occur. In the UK, therefore, when we use our vans for the purposes of human habitation we are camping (no matter what a USA definition of parking might state) and that is different from simply leaving a vehicle empty in a car park (e.g. using a supermarket or other parking place).

The bye-laws controlling 'Aires' are irrelevant in the UK.

^{_{Subscribers  do not see these advertisements}}

 

[GJH]

If it was dry grass going up then 6 metres, 9 metres or 90 metres wouldn't have made much difference.

Reminds me of this story. Thankfully, though, the SK doesn't frequent most car parks

 

[Jim]

There is no law, there are caravan club rules, that have, over time, become an industry wide "accepted practise" On an official Rally; should we park vans closer than 6m, then in the event of your van being damaged by a fire in a neighbours van. Your insurance company (whether you agree or not) will chase us. They will ask us why we were negligent in that we did not follow the accepted practice of providing a 6m gap between motorhomes. We might thereafter be paying a lot more for our insurance.

 

[2657]

What's wrong with challenging the rule if it is arbitrary? If there's no research or evidence to back it up for all anyone knows it could have no affect at all.

Speed limits aren't arbitrary. They are evidence based, the evidence being the stopping distances of cars at the time the limits were introduced and, in the case of the 30mph limit the likelihood of serious injury to pedestrians.

There probably would be a good case, with modern cars and modern braking systems, for some of those limits to be looked at but that's a discussion I'm not getting in to

If you look at what I said 'seemingly arbritrary' implies a lack of knowledge on what facts the decision was made.

I am certainly in no position to know what research has been done on this 6m rule, do you know for a fact that no research has been done? I am perfectly happy to accept 6m, the further away the better for me

I certainly don't stress whether the rule is applied or not, if I am asked to site in a position that I consider to be uncomfortably close to another unit then I don't.

^{_{Subscribers  do not see these advertisements}}

 

[Gaston aires]

Ever been on an aire in France on a busy weekend or bank holiday ? your lucky to get 6 feet.
Phil

 

[2657]

Ever been on an aire in France on a busy weekend or bank holiday ? your lucky to get 6 feet.
Phil

And do you like that?....because I certainly don't

 

[Gaston aires]

And do you like that?....because I certainly don't

I dont like it but it sometimes happens in the busy season on popular aires.

^{_{Subscribers  do not see these advertisements}}