Jim
Ringleader
Some might recall the thread where I highighted the fact that the MCC appeared to have a dispensation to allow the public to use their CLs, while the rest of us exempted organisations were restricted to licensing sites strictly for our own members.
This was a disadvantage to MHFun because landowners could make more money if licensed for public use rather than limit themselves to one clubs members. So they would (and did) choose the MCC over us for that very reason.
It seems the MCC have now been made "aware that this is not acceptable. All exempted organisations holding a para 5 certificate are subject to the members only rule on their certificated sites"
This appears to be the position of Natural England and IMO it is the correct view to take and is in the spirit of the planning exemptions for club use. However, I would have been happy with either view, as long as we are all treated the same, hopefully from now on we will be.
This was a disadvantage to MHFun because landowners could make more money if licensed for public use rather than limit themselves to one clubs members. So they would (and did) choose the MCC over us for that very reason.
It seems the MCC have now been made "aware that this is not acceptable. All exempted organisations holding a para 5 certificate are subject to the members only rule on their certificated sites"
This appears to be the position of Natural England and IMO it is the correct view to take and is in the spirit of the planning exemptions for club use. However, I would have been happy with either view, as long as we are all treated the same, hopefully from now on we will be.