PeteH
Free Member
- Nov 22, 2007
- 6,852
- 9,036
- Funster No
- 900
- MH
- Rapido, 999M.
- Exp
- 18+yrs plus 25+Towing
Hi
As a 35+ year member of the Caravan Club, who for very many years was also a regular, caravan towing, centre rallyer I am concerned to observe behaviour that could even be construed as "discriminatory", by the officers and some wardens, within the club. I refer to the growing tendency towards size limitation on Club sites. These limitations are effectively only aimed at members who use larger motorhomes, mostly, but not exclusively American, of 28ft (8.52M) and over The legal length of a caravan (in the UK) being 7M (22.98ft) NOT including drawbar, "long" caravans are deemed to be OK?.
However with the lengths of even European built motorhomes now reaching towards 9M, there is a growing requirement for access to sites with pitches capable of taking the bigger unit, and it is no longer the case that it is only American motorhomes (R-V`s) which are necessarily "oversized". In fact to be pedantic, it is the case that a 7M caravan plus a 7 seat tow vehicle can be an "oversize" outfit, indeed longer than mine @ 30+ft, and before the purists throw up their hands in horror, YES, I accept that your outfit bends in the middle, and is "detachable", BUT unless you have the experience, you can get into a lot of trouble accessing your pitch, that is after you access the site, and which is exactly the same for the driver of a motorhome.
Having driven, professionally, LGV`s as well as my own R-V`s, AND on top of a considerable number of years with caravan outfits large and small. I feel that I am best placed to decide which site I can get onto, and which pitch is useable and which not, and NOT to have to bow to the decision of someone who may not have this knowledge, ie if you ain`t done it, you are not in the position to criticise!.
Recently Dick Kingswell, Publisher of the "Big Pitch Guide", an excellent work of reference for those who do have large outfits, was forced to draw attention to this tendency within the CC circuit of "locally applied" size limitations, and his reasons , published elsewhere, (ARVE Magazine for those interested) included the fact of the inconsistency of behaviour by individual site wardens, some of which appear to be based on personal prejudice and not logic.
Now, before I am accused of "warden bashing", let me state categorically that my many years of experience as a CC member have, by and large, been good, the vast majority of wardens are of the "unsung heroes" variety. However this does not excuse the minority, and their managers, who for whatever reason DO perform acts of discrimination towards individual members with regard to the interpretation of "rules".
Recent personal experience, when as a regular user of the Rowntree Park site (York) I was advised that "you are oversize", has left me wondering how such decisions are made?. e.g. My R-V is 30ft+ long, BUT the wheel base is relatively short (largish overhang) this however means that I can manoeuvre as well as a Car/Caravan outfit add to that the wheel "cut" angle (for the uninitiated "wheel cut" is a term used for the maximum angle the steering will go to) which gives me a surprisingly small turning circle, relative to actual perceived size, (unlike a lot of front wheel drive, and FWD vehicles where the drive train design necessarily restricts the turning circle) the only real drawback is the length of front and rear overhang, a factor one gets used to (like most trucks) This overhang has a benefit viz; the use of smaller pitches in that I can sit on hardstand and overhang the grass area behind, without damaging the grassed area, OK, the warden may not be able to cut the little bit of grass during the period of my stay BUT I do far LESS damage to grass than the average caravan awning!!. The foregoing features have also allowed me to access some of the notoriously restricted Spanish pitches, when others have tried (and failed).
Another "bone of contention" current is the tendency among some members of the club to "book" pitches, and fail to advise cancellation, Recently on one site I asked the warden why when the site was "fully booked" I had had 10 pitches in "my" vicinity alone unoccupied for the whole period of my stay. The reply being that they had ALL been booked, some, had been cancelled, but most had not. This to me is non acceptable and I think it is high time a "non refundable" booking fee was introduced. Make it transferable , if cancellation is made early enough, but otherwise No refund. It has also been alleged that on "popular" sites members are booking a whole seasonal raft of pitches, most of which remain empty, even over the busiest periods. because the wardens cannot release them in case the member turns up!! IF this where found to be the case then those members engaged in that practice deserve to be sanctioned, even to having membership withdrawn.
What is the answer?. I must confess I am not too sure, but something needs to be done, and quickly, So come up with suggestions?, mine would be to amend the Caravan Club`s Constitution in order to clarify the foregoing situation(s) in order to make the member the lead figure, and also to give the member the responsibility for their own actions, not forcing the decisions onto the wardens who have enough to contend with as it is.
With this in mind I am proposing the following motion, to be submitted at the Caravan Club AGM. It is subject to debate and fine tuning, but along the lines of:-
This motion proposes that the current "ad-hoc" system of size limitation on some club owned or managed sites is reviewed along the following lines:-
1) decisions regarding maximum size to be allowed on any club owned or managed site are made advisory ONLY. Where a member has specific knowledge of previous use by themselves OR others, of suitable pitch(es), and is confident of their ability to access said site/pitch without damage or causing any more inconvenience than any other type of outfit. that decision should be for the member.
2) wardens/site managers should be advised that a member phoning ahead to clarify a pre-booked pitch, should be advised of which pitches are available and be authorised to make a limited reservation of such pitch until the end of that (arrival) day, the warden(s) are also authorised to take a members advises about the suitability or otherwise of specific pitches, where this information is known by the member, but may not be known to a warden (this would help to cover cases where wardens change etc.).
3) The current "rule" which currently precludes the general "reserving" of pitches should be amended to allow such limited discretionary reservation. To do this would also benefit those disabled campers. As, for example, in the case of "reservation" of pitches for disabled persons, for example close to facilities block, OR on a "hardstand" whereby to facilitate wheelchair use is desirable.
To assist in the reduction of "lost" site nights due to "failure to show" it is proposed :-
4) the introduction of a non refundable booking fee ,(£x) per night booked, under this scheme bookings would be held for (x) days pending arrival of fee, after which the pitches would be released . Other than for provable medical type emergencies, cancellation would result in loss of the fee OR in case of early cancellation, transfer to another booking, but no refund.
A side effect of the rule (3) change will also bring the club closer into line with current disability discrimination legislation.
I would welcome feedback on this proposal, And if I go ahead, will also need seconder(s) in order to place the motion on the agenda at AGM.
Pete
As a 35+ year member of the Caravan Club, who for very many years was also a regular, caravan towing, centre rallyer I am concerned to observe behaviour that could even be construed as "discriminatory", by the officers and some wardens, within the club. I refer to the growing tendency towards size limitation on Club sites. These limitations are effectively only aimed at members who use larger motorhomes, mostly, but not exclusively American, of 28ft (8.52M) and over The legal length of a caravan (in the UK) being 7M (22.98ft) NOT including drawbar, "long" caravans are deemed to be OK?.
However with the lengths of even European built motorhomes now reaching towards 9M, there is a growing requirement for access to sites with pitches capable of taking the bigger unit, and it is no longer the case that it is only American motorhomes (R-V`s) which are necessarily "oversized". In fact to be pedantic, it is the case that a 7M caravan plus a 7 seat tow vehicle can be an "oversize" outfit, indeed longer than mine @ 30+ft, and before the purists throw up their hands in horror, YES, I accept that your outfit bends in the middle, and is "detachable", BUT unless you have the experience, you can get into a lot of trouble accessing your pitch, that is after you access the site, and which is exactly the same for the driver of a motorhome.
Having driven, professionally, LGV`s as well as my own R-V`s, AND on top of a considerable number of years with caravan outfits large and small. I feel that I am best placed to decide which site I can get onto, and which pitch is useable and which not, and NOT to have to bow to the decision of someone who may not have this knowledge, ie if you ain`t done it, you are not in the position to criticise!.
Recently Dick Kingswell, Publisher of the "Big Pitch Guide", an excellent work of reference for those who do have large outfits, was forced to draw attention to this tendency within the CC circuit of "locally applied" size limitations, and his reasons , published elsewhere, (ARVE Magazine for those interested) included the fact of the inconsistency of behaviour by individual site wardens, some of which appear to be based on personal prejudice and not logic.
Now, before I am accused of "warden bashing", let me state categorically that my many years of experience as a CC member have, by and large, been good, the vast majority of wardens are of the "unsung heroes" variety. However this does not excuse the minority, and their managers, who for whatever reason DO perform acts of discrimination towards individual members with regard to the interpretation of "rules".
Recent personal experience, when as a regular user of the Rowntree Park site (York) I was advised that "you are oversize", has left me wondering how such decisions are made?. e.g. My R-V is 30ft+ long, BUT the wheel base is relatively short (largish overhang) this however means that I can manoeuvre as well as a Car/Caravan outfit add to that the wheel "cut" angle (for the uninitiated "wheel cut" is a term used for the maximum angle the steering will go to) which gives me a surprisingly small turning circle, relative to actual perceived size, (unlike a lot of front wheel drive, and FWD vehicles where the drive train design necessarily restricts the turning circle) the only real drawback is the length of front and rear overhang, a factor one gets used to (like most trucks) This overhang has a benefit viz; the use of smaller pitches in that I can sit on hardstand and overhang the grass area behind, without damaging the grassed area, OK, the warden may not be able to cut the little bit of grass during the period of my stay BUT I do far LESS damage to grass than the average caravan awning!!. The foregoing features have also allowed me to access some of the notoriously restricted Spanish pitches, when others have tried (and failed).
Another "bone of contention" current is the tendency among some members of the club to "book" pitches, and fail to advise cancellation, Recently on one site I asked the warden why when the site was "fully booked" I had had 10 pitches in "my" vicinity alone unoccupied for the whole period of my stay. The reply being that they had ALL been booked, some, had been cancelled, but most had not. This to me is non acceptable and I think it is high time a "non refundable" booking fee was introduced. Make it transferable , if cancellation is made early enough, but otherwise No refund. It has also been alleged that on "popular" sites members are booking a whole seasonal raft of pitches, most of which remain empty, even over the busiest periods. because the wardens cannot release them in case the member turns up!! IF this where found to be the case then those members engaged in that practice deserve to be sanctioned, even to having membership withdrawn.
What is the answer?. I must confess I am not too sure, but something needs to be done, and quickly, So come up with suggestions?, mine would be to amend the Caravan Club`s Constitution in order to clarify the foregoing situation(s) in order to make the member the lead figure, and also to give the member the responsibility for their own actions, not forcing the decisions onto the wardens who have enough to contend with as it is.
With this in mind I am proposing the following motion, to be submitted at the Caravan Club AGM. It is subject to debate and fine tuning, but along the lines of:-
This motion proposes that the current "ad-hoc" system of size limitation on some club owned or managed sites is reviewed along the following lines:-
1) decisions regarding maximum size to be allowed on any club owned or managed site are made advisory ONLY. Where a member has specific knowledge of previous use by themselves OR others, of suitable pitch(es), and is confident of their ability to access said site/pitch without damage or causing any more inconvenience than any other type of outfit. that decision should be for the member.
2) wardens/site managers should be advised that a member phoning ahead to clarify a pre-booked pitch, should be advised of which pitches are available and be authorised to make a limited reservation of such pitch until the end of that (arrival) day, the warden(s) are also authorised to take a members advises about the suitability or otherwise of specific pitches, where this information is known by the member, but may not be known to a warden (this would help to cover cases where wardens change etc.).
3) The current "rule" which currently precludes the general "reserving" of pitches should be amended to allow such limited discretionary reservation. To do this would also benefit those disabled campers. As, for example, in the case of "reservation" of pitches for disabled persons, for example close to facilities block, OR on a "hardstand" whereby to facilitate wheelchair use is desirable.
To assist in the reduction of "lost" site nights due to "failure to show" it is proposed :-
4) the introduction of a non refundable booking fee ,(£x) per night booked, under this scheme bookings would be held for (x) days pending arrival of fee, after which the pitches would be released . Other than for provable medical type emergencies, cancellation would result in loss of the fee OR in case of early cancellation, transfer to another booking, but no refund.
A side effect of the rule (3) change will also bring the club closer into line with current disability discrimination legislation.
I would welcome feedback on this proposal, And if I go ahead, will also need seconder(s) in order to place the motion on the agenda at AGM.
Pete
Wondered when this guy was coming up for air!
