# More Than 5 on a CL. Does it cheese you off ?



## Freddiebooks (Aug 9, 2008)

Having spoke to most of the CL owners whose sites i have stayed at. I get the impression some of them, IF they have the room, don't mind a couple more caravans or motorhomes on there site.

Do you think they should ? If they have the room.

Personally, i think they should. Lets say 8 vans over half an acre. Surely it's not a problem, and it's not as if they do it all the time. 

They must only make a few quid out of the whole year, so a few extra pounds here and there must keep the sites cost down for us, and make them a couple of extra bob too. 

Just my opinion, for what it's worth.

Freddiebooks


----------



## artona (Jan 19, 2006)

I think they definately should, specially if I am the sixth. Some of them do take it OTT though, 14 on one once, thats a lot of people

stew


----------



## Freddiebooks (Aug 9, 2008)

artona said:


> I think they definately should, specially if I am the sixth. Some of them do take it OTT though, 14 on one once, thats a lot of people
> 
> stew


"Especially if I'm the sixth". Very funny. Yes, i sometimes find i'm the black sheep too.

I've never seen as many as 14 i must admit.

Having said that, i once stayed somewhere and the lady said on one particular weekend every year they have over 20 for the folk festival. She only charged £4 per night. So i still find it hard to object if it's one weekend out of 52.


----------



## autostratus (May 9, 2005)

Freddiebooks said:


> Having spoke to most of the CL owners whose sites i have stayed at. I get the impression some of them, IF they have the room, don't mind a couple more caravans or motorhomes on there site.
> 
> Do you think they should ? If they have the room.
> 
> ...


If they do they risk losing their Certification by the Caravan Club which takes it's role in the Certification process very seriously.
We used to use a CL in Derbyshire regularly which lost it's Certification.

We were also using a CL in Cornwall when one of the inspectors visited.
The owner was out at the time and the inspector laid into us for being there as part of the 8 or 9 on site. This despte the fact that we'd been there over a week and when we arrived we became the fifth or the 5 allowed.


----------



## drcotts (Feb 23, 2006)

as far as i remember it the council are the ones that allow this to happen on the understanding that the cc will monitor it. Same for the CCC.

They risk not being insured if the exceed it

Its the same legislation that means some static van sites cant be occupied for part of the year.

Phil


----------



## Telbell (May 1, 2005)

More than 5 wouldn't bother me providing:

i) t doesn't compromise on space-in other words I wouldn't want to be cheek to jowl on as CL/CC

ii) If you're also paying for facilities there should be enough for the number of 'vans/occupants there


----------



## Landyman (Apr 3, 2010)

I think it is time the rules were changed and relaxed a little.
Our economy needs people to stay at home more, rather than spending money abroad. It makes sense to allow for more pitches to be available and to make it financially viable for land owners to provide those pitches and the hook ups that most of us want.
Therefore, it makes sense to me to allow more pitches on larger sites.
How about up to 10 pitches on sites of over 1 acre?

None of us want to be crowded in but we all want as much choice as possible.
These sorts of options could still be policed in the same way by the clubs and would give new owners the required incentives.
I assume it would require a small change in planning law but surely that would be simple to enact.
The clubs should be pushing for change.

Landyman.


----------



## H1-GBV (Feb 28, 2006)

The CCC Archive dept ran a feature recently about the mass trespass on Kinder Scout, how that opened up access to the countryside and the subsequent legislation which allowed camping and caravanning to develop. One thing which simplified the process and gave us the freedom we have today was the establishment of 5 (FIVE) van sites, regulated by the clubs. Although a "few more here, a few more there" is unlikely to result in a total revamp of the rules, if we don't stick to them we will only have ourselves to blame.

Meanwhile, some people are wanting to prove how responsible motorhomers should have aires provided for them! "We" will of course abide by all the rules and not take advantage of facilities provided by THE SAME local authorities who accept 5 van sites!.


----------



## spartacus (Jul 10, 2008)

If we start making them 10 vans per site and insisting on hook-up we'll end up with a slow creep to full blown camp sites. Yes, I've been on sites where there was more than five vans, in some cases the size of site could cope with the numbers, in others they couldn't.

I don't often need a hook up from a CL, all I want is basic, clean facilities at a low cost, if I wanted more than this I'd go on a club or commercial site and pay more.

The answer to overcrowding is for the CC and C&CC to grow their network not increase the amount of vans. The essence of these sites is the small scale low volume rough with the smooth element that make them a different option to the warden controlled shower block rules and regulations micro managed conformity of the club sites.

I like them the way they are, I just wish there were more of them.


----------



## sallytrafic (Jan 17, 2006)

A local CL is being dropped by the CC on the grounds that the occupancy rules were being breached both number and length of stay. This came up at a planning application that also revealed what I think I already knew that under planning rules they can all have 28 days a year worth of events where the 5 unit rule doesn't apply.

I find in general the CC sites keep to the rules more than the C&CC sites.


----------



## peejay (May 10, 2005)

I'm (with) Spartacus.  

I like them exactly as they are, small informal places to get away from it all, as soon as you start allowing more pitches then that will detract from the whole ethos of the scheme.

Pete


----------



## Joris (Apr 7, 2008)

sallytrafic said:


> A local CL is being dropped by the CC on the grounds that the occupancy rules were being breached both number and length of stay. This came up at a planning application that also revealed what I think I already knew that under planning rules they can all have 28 days a year worth of events where the 5 unit rule doesn't apply.
> 
> I find in general the CC sites keep to the rules more than the C&CC sites.


As far as I can recall, having been a District Councillor, the over riding rules are the planning application. 5 is the limit, after that you're into a full blown planning application for a camp/caravan site.
I suggest more sites of 5 are better and should be encouraged.
Joris


----------



## Losos (Oct 28, 2009)

autostratus said:


> We were also using a CL in Cornwall when one of the inspectors visited.
> The owner was out at the time and the inspector *laid into us *for being there as part of the 8 or 9 on site. *This despte the fact that we'd been there over a week and the 5th. arrival*.


Aren't some people amazing, so the inspector laid into you :!: What the hell did he expect you to do when the sixth person arrived :?: pack up and go away :lol:

Personally I would have been very upset at that, but I have to admit I'm becomming more and more anti human there are so many stupid people around and so few sensible ones.


----------



## paulmold (Apr 2, 2009)

I am more bothered by the C&CC CS's that take tents. There appears to be no rule as to how many tents are allowed in addition to the 5-van rule.
A couple of years ago we stayed on a CS in Nothumberland. On arrival there were already 6 motorhomes/caravans so our friends and us took it to 8. Also on site were 15 tents, 3 ready-erected tents for hire and a bunkhouse. We had booked this CS because it listed showers (one male and one female), toilets (again one of each) and washing machine. These facilities were shared between everyone and totally inadequate.
We sent a report to the C&CC and the CS was removed from the next edition of 'The Big Site Book' although the 'site' is still being advertised in the club magazine.

For the above reasons we are going to join the CC as well to get a wider choice of '5-van' sites.


----------



## 96299 (Sep 15, 2005)

peejay said:


> I'm (with) Spartacus.
> 
> I like them exactly as they are, small informal places to get away from it all, as soon as you start allowing more pitches then that will detract from the whole ethos of the scheme.
> 
> Pete


I'm from this stable to. We go away to get away from the crowds, not to go into them. As far as we're concerned, the less vans on site the better. 

Steve


----------



## autostratus (May 9, 2005)

Losos said:


> autostratus said:
> 
> 
> > ..Aren't some people amazing, so the inspector laid into you :!: What the hell did he expect you to do when the sixth person arrived :?: pack up and go away :lol:
> ...


----------



## clodhopper2006 (Aug 13, 2006)

Doesn't bother me at all so long as my space is not restricted but if I lived in the house opposite I might be a bit cheesed off if all I could see from my window was a sea of caravan/motorhomes.


----------



## Pard (May 1, 2005)

I'm with Spartacus and Peejay. 5 is enough, but more sites would be welcomed. 

Incidentally, I get the impression that the CC & C are less particular than the CC about breaches, and also less bothered about recording membership details etc. Anyone else found that?


----------



## rowley (May 14, 2005)

I agree that the threshold should be increased to 7/8 if the site is large. The Clubs have lost some CLs and CSs due to non viability. On most of the CLs that I have been on this year we have been the only occupants. However, we do not tend to go in holiday time when the site owners are more likely to be able to make up their shortfall.


----------



## Hobbyfan (Jul 3, 2010)

Can a CL also be part of a small camp site? I ask this because we stayed on a super farm-CL outside Glastonbury. It had EHU for many more 'vans than five. It also had a separate field for tents and other motor-home and caravans.

Perhaps he was able to get temporary permission for the Glastonbury Festival? If not I can see no point in him having spent all this money on several EHUs and maintaining another field.

So, if a small camp site for instance has a separate field, can he designate it as a CL? Having it listed in the CC book would certainly give him more exposure.

Edited to say: I'd have no objection to more than five a site as long as it was spacious and, if increasing the numbers slightly makes it more worthwhile for the landowner, it may encourage more of them to join. Sometimes I wonder why some of them go to all the trouble of running a CL for the paltry returns.


----------



## dodger148 (May 9, 2005)

I too dont have a problem with CL's having more vans provided there is space. If they have an issue kick the CC in touch and apply through the C&CC as tents are not included in the 5

At the end of the day, none of these folks can make a living out of being a CS or CL


----------



## artona (Jan 19, 2006)

rowley said:


> I agree that the threshold should be increased to 7/8 if the site is large. The Clubs have lost some CLs and CSs due to non viability. On most of the CLs that I have been on this year we have been the only occupants. However, we do not tend to go in holiday time when the site owners are more likely to be able to make up their shortfall.


I magine when the 5 sites were initially started most were simply fields or a bit of turf with access to water and drainage.

I can also remember going on plenty of sites where they were not run as commercial enterprises to make money but just to allow peopel into the country, for company and to share.

Now people hunt out the ones with electric hook up and other facilities first and the site owners feel they must lay these extras on to attract people. Extra running costs demand extra revenue jsut to break even
and make money
stew


----------



## peejay (May 10, 2005)

Hobbyfan said:


> Can a CL also be part of a small camp site? I ask this because we stayed on a super farm-CL outside Glastonbury. It had EHU for many more 'vans than five. It also had a separate field for tents and other motor-home and caravans.
> 
> Perhaps he was able to get temporary permission for the Glastonbury Festival? If not I can see no point in him having spent all this money on several EHUs and maintaining another field.
> 
> So, if a small camp site for instance has a separate field, can he designate it as a CL? Having it listed in the CC book would certainly give him more exposure.


Yes they can, read this previous thread....

http://www.motorhomefacts.com/ftopicp-467202.html#467202

Pete


----------



## Jented (Jan 12, 2010)

Hi.
There are another set of rules that apply to Rallies,so maybe the extra hook ups are on a rally field?,i am sure someone will know,and these involve acceeo??.
Ted..
PS. When on site between Bedale and Leyburn,at bank holidays the farmer could put vans on a field at the side with the councils permission,1.It allowed more people to enjoy the area,2.it brought in more MONEY,result,everyone happy.
Ted.


----------



## karlb (Feb 22, 2009)

paulmold said:


> I am more bothered by the C&CC CS's that take tents. There appears to be no rule as to how many tents are allowed in addition to the 5-van rule.
> A couple of years ago we stayed on a CS in Nothumberland. On arrival there were already 6 motorhomes/caravans so our friends and us took it to 8. Also on site were 15 tents, 3 ready-erected tents for hire and a bunkhouse. We had booked this CS because it listed showers (one male and one female), toilets (again one of each) and washing machine. These facilities were shared between everyone and totally inadequate.
> We sent a report to the C&CC and the CS was removed from the next edition of 'The Big Site Book' although the 'site' is still being advertised in the club magazine.
> 
> For the above reasons we are going to join the CC as well to get a wider choice of '5-van' sites.


it might just be me.....but to report a site for the above reasons, i think its very petty, if you dont like a site make your feelings known to the owners/warden and move on. its hard enough to make a living as it is.
live and let live is far easier the moaning and whining to the authoritys. :x :x


----------



## Carl_n_Flo (May 10, 2005)

Flo and I are based on a site in X, Dorset that once WAS a CL, but the owner fell out with the CC over the 5 van rule.

There are 3 of us full-timing here - and we are on a hardstanding enclave separated from the 'field'.

This summer we have had a maximum of 9 units (and 1 tent!) at any one time.....and absolutely no feeling of overcrowding.

X, (the owner), has said he would only take a maximum of 10 (plus us 3 F/T ers) at any one time..... He isnt bothered about the loss of CC listing....

Carl

edited to protect the innocent!!!!
PLUS
We only stay a maximum of 28 days - as we like to pop off every few weekends for a change of scenery - we have never stayed here more than 28 consecutive days!!! In fact, even the other two are in and out on a regular basis....we just call this place 'home' as a base for me to get to work...


----------



## hblewett (Jan 28, 2008)

spartacus said:
 

> If we start making them 10 vans per site and insisting on hook-up we'll end up with a slow creep to full blown camp sites. Yes, I've been on sites where there was more than five vans, in some cases the size of site could cope with the numbers, in others they couldn't.
> 
> I don't often need a hook up from a CL, all I want is basic, clean facilities at a low cost, if I wanted more than this I'd go on a club or commercial site and pay more.
> 
> ...


Well said


----------



## spartacus (Jul 10, 2008)

dodger148 said:


> I too dont have a problem with CL's having more vans provided there is space. If they have an issue kick the CC in touch and apply through the C&CC as tents are not included in the 5
> 
> At the end of the day, none of these folks can make a living out of being a CS or CL


They aren't meant to make a living out of them, it stands to reason a maximum of five vans even if full up every night all year round would be unlikely to provide sufficient income for someone to live on.

They are "designed" as a bolt on extra bit of income for someone with the land and minimal infrastructure already in place, farms and suchlike.


----------



## paulmold (Apr 2, 2009)

karlb said:


> it might just be me.....but to report a site for the above reasons, i think its very petty, if you dont like a site make your feelings known to the owners/warden and move on. its hard enough to make a living as it is.
> live and let live is far easier the moaning and whining to the authoritys. :x :x


We would have complained to the owners if we had ever seen them. We were there for a week, never saw them once. A note was pinned to the door instructing new arrivals to put money through the letter-box. 
Hard to make a living! - this 'CS' was run as a camp-site, what with the 'Euro-camp' style ready-erected tents and the bunk-house. Obviously to have it listed as a CL meant two-fingers to the planning authorities!


----------



## bertieburstner (May 1, 2005)

*no room!*

we stayed on a CCC "CL" in the summer, a site behind a pub in Somerset.

As a previous poster has said the CCC let tents on as well as 5 motorhome/caravans.

When we got to the site on Friday it was nice and quiet, but by the Sunday night it was busy, with at least 8 big tents. We weren't very happy when a tent pitched between us and the next pitch, about a foot from our van! :lol:

The owners just seemed to want to get as much money out of the land.

We won't go back. :roll:


----------



## barryd (May 9, 2008)

Keep them as they are and (for me) as basic as possible. Yes its fine to squeeze the odd extra van in and we have been grateful for that in the past but I like the fact that you know there is never going to be more than 5 vans and usually loads of space.

The CC CL's are in my experience better than the C&CC and they certainly dont have tents thank god.

Im a little concerned that some, especially CS sites seem to be getting expensive. Putting in showers and EHU and then charging £15 plus! If you want these sort of facilities go on a campsite.

That said we managed to tour for a month in Sept / Oct with an average nightly charge of around £6. Some blinders as well.

Long may they flourish.


----------



## teemyob (Nov 22, 2005)

*6*

If it keep them in a profitable business and more importantly in business for me to return in the future, good luck to them.

TM


----------



## peedee (May 10, 2005)

How many outfits may stay on any site and for how long is controlled by Acts of Parliament and the Planning Laws. It requires changes to these to provide for increased occupancy otherwise owners are breaking the law.

If you want to know more, read >Natural England's Guide<

I have been turned away many a time because 5 outfits were already booked in or already on site. Being a law abiding citizen I have accepted that. If I was already on site with 4 other outfits and more arrived I would be a bit peeved.

peedee


----------



## barryd (May 9, 2008)

There a quite a few I have been on where there are clearly more than 5 pitches. Some have marked pitches often with EHU and I have seen pitch numbers 6 and 7 before. Wonder what the CC inspector thinks of that. I presume they just say we still only take 5 and they would have to catch them.

I think some do much better than others though so I dont blame the owners if they take the odd extra van when they are busy, half the time they are empty or just the odd van.

We have always got on a CL even in the summer holidays and in September half of them were empty.


----------



## quiraing (Feb 12, 2007)

Most M/Homes nowadays have all the on board facilities to allow holidays without the Cl's/Cs's supplying the luxuries like Electricity,Showers, toilets and water/waste to every pitch. Why then are members demanding them. If they want an all singing all dancing pitch they should go to the appropriate club camping sites and leave the basic amenities spaces on the Cs's and Cl's for those motorhomers who enjoy self sufficiency.


----------



## barryd (May 9, 2008)

quiraing said:


> Most M/Homes nowadays have all the on board facilities to allow holidays without the Cl's/Cs's supplying the luxuries like Electricity,Showers, toilets and water/waste to every pitch. Why then are members demanding them. If they want an all singing all dancing pitch they should go to the appropriate club camping sites and leave the basic amenities spaces on the Cs's and Cl's for those motorhomers who enjoy self sufficiency.


Agreed!!!


----------



## Pard (May 1, 2005)

Grateful thanks to peedee, who posted earlier this morning. It's clear that many are blissfully unaware that the 5 van limit is a planning requirement as the law stands and not one imposed by the clubs or the owners. It seems highly unlikely that government time will be devoted to amending that in their scheme of priorities right now. 
Whatever our opinions about the ideal number of vans on a CL, by tacitly encouraging owners to flout the law by squeezing in more vans is more likely to work counter to our interests than to promote them. Let's use the facility as it is, and keep an eye open for possible new locations to add to the numbers of sites available.
It is a pity that the CC and C&CC have a virtual monopoly on certification as they are likely to be the only bodies able to prove the required prior experience of managing sites and the accompanying inspection procedures in place. Otherwise it might be possible to engage the hundreds of sports clubs with nice green spaces (and often club facilities) to look favourably upon the idea. In theory they could do it now in cahoots with one of the clubs, but few choose to do so. Others may think of other types of landowners who might be interested???


----------



## Jented (Jan 12, 2010)

Hi Barryd.
We manged to get on a site near Cromer,through a cancellation,when we arrived,there were 6 pitches with electric but only 4 vans,us being the fifth. The "Spare" pitch" was there in case one of the other pitches was damaged,they could have filled the field ten times over,but stuck rigidley to the 5 van rule,we have booked for two periods next year,and two couples on site had allready booked 2012!.
Also at this site,you have to be off the pitch for 11.30hrs,but are allowed to stay,by permission,on the car park part of the field,where is this site.............it will come to me......oh drat......Byeeee.
Ted.


----------



## olley (May 1, 2005)

Pard said:


> It is a pity that the CC and C&CC have a virtual monopoly on certification as they are likely to be the only bodies able to prove the required prior experience of managing sites and the accompanying inspection procedures in place. Otherwise it might be possible to engage the hundreds of sports clubs with nice green spaces (and often club facilities) to look favourably upon the idea. In theory they could do it now in cahoots with one of the clubs, but few choose to do so. Others may think of other types of landowners who might be interested???


The owner of another forum has just been granted the same certification as the CC & CCC without any previous experience of running a CC, so it would seem anybody after doing a bit of paperwork can as well.

Olley


----------



## peedee (May 10, 2005)

You are granted certification under various sections of the 1960 act. The main clubs are authorised under all three sections for rallies and for setting up CL/CSs. I think it is fairly easy to obtain certification to hold rallies but less easy to hold authority to create sites. 

peedee


----------



## Hobbyfan (Jul 3, 2010)

Decades ago when I was a tugger we stayed near Prawle Point in south Devon.

I was told to ask for Mr. xxxxx at the farm in the village (East Prawle I think) and he'd 'sort me out'. Mr xxxxx took us over a field to another field that was invisible from the road but had tremendous views over the sea.

We and the other dozen 'vans took our Aquarolls and chemical loos to the farm to be filled and emptied.

I bet he didn't declare most of it either, as it was all cash in those days! Nevertheless I was grateful for a superb pitch with stunning views at a very low price.

Is the Pig's Nose restaurant still open in the village I wonder? Fantastic lobster but it only seated about six people!


----------



## camper69 (Aug 30, 2007)

quiraing said:


> Most M/Homes nowadays have all the on board facilities to allow holidays without the Cl's/Cs's supplying the luxuries like Electricity,Showers, toilets and water/waste to every pitch. Why then are members demanding them. If they want an all singing all dancing pitch they should go to the appropriate club camping sites and leave the basic amenities spaces on the Cs's and Cl's for those motorhomers who enjoy self sufficiency.


The facilities comes in quite handy for tenters, for which the CS are also there for.

Derek


----------



## peedee (May 10, 2005)

Those with good facilities also seem to do very well. I stayed on one this year in September and the owner had already turned away 300 bookings this year and was booked up for the next two Christmases!

peedee


----------



## barryd (May 9, 2008)

peedee said:


> Those with good facilities also seem to do very well. I stayed on one this year in September and the owner had already turned away 300 bookings this year and was booked up for the next two Christmases!
> 
> peedee


Yes we got on one near Keswick just on the off chance a few months ago. Just turned up and they had luckily had a cancellation otherwise they are fully booked up. Cant remember the name but its the oldest CL in the network. £8.50 inc EHU. People book up over a year in advance. I never book anything more than a day in advance!


----------



## Freddiebooks (Aug 9, 2008)

barryd said:


> peedee said:
> 
> 
> > Those with good facilities also seem to do very well. I stayed on one this year in September and the owner had already turned away 300 bookings this year and was booked up for the next two Christmases!
> ...


I think it's Shoulthwaite Farm Barry.

I only know as i walked through it about a fortnight ago whilst walking in the lakes.


----------



## barryd (May 9, 2008)

Thats the one!

There is some waterfall there which we tried to walk to and I nearly broke my neck

Smashing couple. Great eggs as well!

No mobile signal though which is a pain for me.


One of the best ones (for us) we stayed on this year was Atlantic View in Cornwall. Just 6 miles south of Bude. All it is is a massive field off a very quiet single track road. There is only one way to get to it and if you follow the sat nav from Bude you and your van will surely meet a sticky end on the two 30% hairpin single track hills! You have to go south of it and then double back.

Once your in its brilliant though. Superb views in every direction. Just one tap for fresh tucked away in a hedge and another for waste and thats it. I think it was either £4 or £5. 

We had it to ourselves, just parked bang in the middle and used the bike. Thought we were going to die on the hills on the old scooter but the run into Bude was fantastic.

There are loads like that in that area and its great fun seeking them out.

Hell would freeze over before you would find me on a CC club site!


----------

