# When is an awning not part of the pitch?



## pacific (Dec 17, 2007)

Having just come back from a lovely week ambling around East Anglia, the grumpy other half has been having a moan about some sites (non CC) charging up to a couple of pounds per night for putting out an awning. The argument goes that if you have paid for your pitch, why if you choose to wind out the awning fixed to your van should you pay more?? Anyone have a good answer?


----------



## carolsrig (Jul 12, 2007)

*greed*

i believe that if you pay for your pitch you can do what you want on it ,like a awning/tent/park car. as long as you leave it as you found it!!
some sites are just plain greedy.


----------



## spykal (May 9, 2005)

Hi Pacific

Just modify your description of your unit when booking in or registering at the campsite.... your wind out sunshade is NOT an awning...but if you tell the reception you have an awning can you blame them if they charge you for one?

see This <<<< thread

mike


----------



## 107925 (Oct 27, 2007)

There doesn't appear to be much logic to how things are charged for on a pitch. If we look at the fundamental difference between motorhomers and caravanners, the latter will have their caravan and a car on their pitch as a matter of course. A tent and car is much the same. A motorhome can take up far less than either of the aforementioned, being just the one 'item' on the pitch. However, if an awning is attached to the motorhome, the pitch is deemed to be put to greater use and up goes the cost. But where's the rebate for only having the one item on the pitch to begin with, rather than two?

Shaun


----------



## pacific (Dec 17, 2007)

Great move Mike, thanks for the tip and thread. We will be touring with our wind out sunshade in future!


----------



## artona (Jan 19, 2006)

Hi

Its a good one about the sunshade isn't it lol.

However pricing is often quite complex. The site we are on has been taken over this weekend by a private party. There are 24 caravans and each and everyone seems to have at least three children. They are playing havoc and there have been complaints all day apparently. The site owner has spent the day trying to calm things.

So with all that extra work should a caravan with three children pay more that maybe one with just a couple.?

Lets take it to the extreme should a small motorhome with one occupant expect to pay less than a 28ft caravan with a massive awning, a seperate tent, a four wheel drive and a second car, 4 children and 2 dogs?

stew


----------



## pacific (Dec 17, 2007)

Oh dear - poor you Artona, sounds like you'll be glad when they all leave! The rant is that you do usually pay per person as well as the pitch fee so more children more cost, plus extra car is usually charged - but your pitch should be your pitch to put on what you want within the space allotted. Hope your peace returns soon.


----------



## Telbell (May 1, 2005)

I had a bit of a "do" last year at a site when we put up a gazebo (for extra shelter for v small grandchildren during day) to be told "sorry-no tents allowed" :roll: 

After protesting and pointing out that it ain't a tent and "what about those caravans over there with v big "awnings" attached to their 'vans?" I was told that was ok because they were attached.

So I found a piece of string and tied it between the gazebo and the wing mirror and they said that was ok!!! :roll: :roll: 

Sorry to digress but thought it might be an interesting anecdote!


----------



## 107088 (Sep 18, 2007)

Telbell said:


> I had a bit of a "do" last year at a site when we put up a gazebo (for extra shelter for v small grandchildren during day) to be told "sorry-no tents allowed" :roll:
> 
> After protesting and pointing out that it ain't a tent and "what about those caravans over there with v big "awnings" attached to their 'vans?" I was told that was ok because they were attached.
> 
> ...


you cant believe people like that actually exist uuntil it happens to you....... 8O


----------



## oldun (Nov 10, 2005)

*Re: greed*



ollynfizz said:


> i believe that if you pay for your pitch you can do what you want on it ,like a awning/tent/park car. as long as you leave it as you found it!!
> some sites are just plain greedy.


This is a very strange concept.

If you rent a pitch on land owned by someone else then surely they have the right to say under what conditions you may stay there.

They also have the right to make whatever charges they see fit.

If we don't like the site, conditions or charges then we have the right to refuse to stay there.

Just look around in shops of all kinds. Some sell a particular product cheaply and others charge more. What is wrong with that/ If we have any sense we will choose the shops/sites that suit us best.

I agree that some sites owners are very greedy and i shun these like the plague.

Some owners ban motorhomes or caravans or tents or children or teenagers or dogs or..........

How can we possible have the right to make then change the rules simply because we have paid a fee? If we pay a fee we are effectively agreeing to the rules laid down and will only have recompense if they are illegal.

I am amazed!!


----------



## davesport (Nov 12, 2006)

I could understand if they gave you a discount for NOT putting out an awning :lol: 

I'd vote with my Hymer, leave & never return, ever. 

£0.02

Dave.


----------



## Sonesta (May 10, 2005)

At the end of the day these campsites are running a business and as such have to make a living and of course a profit like any other business has to do and let's face it with a full size awning, whether it be just a wind out sun canopy styled one or an enclosed awning with windows and a door, it is inevitable that the grass beneath the awning will be used far more by the occupants ....... result being an increased risk of grass damage on that particular pitch! Obviously, to repair any damage to the grassed area will require someone having to spend a bit of time and money rectifing it and this is probably why a lot of campsites charge extra for awnings of any description. Also, a lot of guests who put up enclosed awnings choose to put portable heaters and lights in them and of course this too will be a major factor towards why the campsite charge extra for awnings!

I think it is fair to charge more depending on the size of the vehicle and the amount of occupants therein as the larger the vehicle etc the less space that is availble for others PLUS the greater the volume of guests staying the greater the drain will be on the water and electricty supplies etc and it seems only right that we all pay for what we use!

A group of us with a motorhome, tent and a caravan have just returned from a 4 night stay at a popular Haven site in Great Yarmouth where there was a special low season deal going on for the period we all stayed and they only charged us in our unit for 4 adults £24.00 in total for everything and everyone - so basically it only worked out at £1.50 EACH per night! We had an extra large pitch, especially set aside for larger motorhomes, EHU plus a 3m x 3m driveaway awning! The £24.00 also included 4 entertainment passes which allowed us FREE admission into the indoor swimming pool and the licenced clubhouse which had both adult and childrens entertainment on daily at varying times throughout the day and night. However, I was quite shocked to discover that they charged a further £24 on top for our 2 little dogs but of course our 2 dogs were not going to be using the electricity, the showers. the toliet facilities, the swimming pool or the onsite clubhouse etc were they? I did feel the charge was rather a little on the steep side if the truith be known and wondered how they could justify such a hefty fee? I have no objections to paying for our dogs at all and I respect and appreciate that campsite owners and their staff have to provide and empty doggy bins and also have to keep any dog walks maintained etc but I did feel the cost that Haven charged at the particualr campsite we were staying on for dogs was rather OTT, especially as they did not provide a designated dog walking area for their paying guests! Still never mind, I mustn't complain and we had a lovely few days there and that's the main thing isn't it?

Sue



Sue


----------



## 107088 (Sep 18, 2007)

I take your point about the grass traffic Sue, but I'd ask how the use of an awning causes more damage than a car parked next to a caraven.

Having said that I have been on some sites which actually dont let you park next to the van, but do provide a car park area near to the Unit .

What I find really bizarre is the all in price for adults etc, then as you describe, charge person rate for pooches, whatever the size of the dog.

I s'pose, ineveitably, the replies that say
" thats the price, pay it or move on" are right.

Maybe, with the costs involved with camping sites these days, it would be best if there was an industry code of practice, thats states the operator of sites put their prices as an itemised list, e.g. Pitch £ 5.00; awning £2.00 ehu etc.etc. 
That way, nobody would get any surprises, and we, as customers would have an easier job of costing our stay. dunno, perhaps thats too simplistic.


----------



## Sonesta (May 10, 2005)

Gawd knows how they work it all out - some things are beyond me LOL!

I suppose with an awning it could be that you will have chairs, tables and lots of feet tramping over a small confined area of the grass and then with a awning carpet on top too and no light getting to it, it might then be considered more damaging or something? Whereas, with a car it is more likely to be moved daily so that maybe decreases the risk of damage to the grass or something? To be honest I am no grass expert so I aint got a clue really and so I am just simply guessing what the reason might be!

As for pooches I share your feelings and this does tend to baffle me somewhat too and although I expect to pay a small fee to cover the cost of any dog facilities the site provides I do resent £6.00 per night for 2 small toy dogs!

Sue


----------



## 107088 (Sep 18, 2007)

Sue, agreed, but then I got 2 larg-ish dogs, and I dare say apart from ..well, size and volume of exhaust products.. :lol: , theres no diffrence in their needs. 

I think that as motorhomers, we have a problem with pushing our needs to campsite operators on a commercial basis, when you look at the number of tenters(?) caravanners and motorhomers, we arent exactly a huge majority, so operators will say they provide, as a good business does, for the majority of their customer base. and once more, if you dont want to pay sick squid for a dog, ( as I dont) then dont go there.

I would like to know, out of curitosity if theres a campsite operator on the forum that could tell me if theres additional costs involved with dogs, or pets in general, possibly there may be a health and safety aspect of dog walk areas which require specific cleansing, as well as the obvious poo bin emptying. ( not a task I'd enjoy)


----------



## Sonesta (May 10, 2005)

Hi Bandaid, I see what you are saying and yes apart from the 'waste' products from a large dog there is no difference in your dog's needs so all dogs should be charged the same as another just as we humans are LOL! Thank gawd too or otherwise I would be charged double LOL!

Like I say I dont mind paying for my dogs at all and I am happy to pay for any services provided but I do think £6.00 per night was and is rather hefty to charge for 2 dogs and although we all have the freedom to go elsewhere - this was the site the rest of my family had already booked several weeks ago and as my granddaughter was going along too I wanted to be there with my family and friends also.

I think because it was such a reasonable pitch fee due to it being a special offer in the first place, the charges for the dogs wasn't such a big issue on this occasion but once Haven start to charge the correct fee later in the season when business picks up and demand is high I would definitely NOT be willing to pay their charges for 2 dogs then - but then again a Haven site without the grandkids in tow, slap bang in the middle of their peak season would NOT be my preference anyway! :roll: :roll: :roll: 

Sue


----------



## 107088 (Sep 18, 2007)

I didnt think you should pay less than me, ( I got 2 as well) I just wonder why a dog costs so much, which is why it would be nice to know what the owner provides for the dog or does because of the dog. 
can make it a dear stay at a site tho'.


----------



## Sonesta (May 10, 2005)

bandaid said:


> I didnt think you should pay less than me, ( I got 2 as well) I just wonder why a dog costs so much, which is why it would be nice to know what the owner provides for the dog or does because of the dog.
> can make it a dear stay at a site tho'.


I know you didn't mean I should pay less than you - I think we must have all our wires crossed over and upside down somehow ha ha but I did realise what you meant tho. :lol: :lol: :lol:

Hopefully, someone will come along soon and explain all the charges etc as I too would like to know why some sites feel the need to charge quite so much and as we all appreciate there is a definite need for some kind of fee (as nothing in life come for FREE) I suppose it would be nice to know why some sites with little or no provision laid on for dogs can justify charging as much or more than a campsite with far superior facilities?

Sue


----------



## tonyt (May 25, 2005)

Sonesta said:


> ................... I suppose it would be nice to know why some sites with little or no provision laid on for dogs can justify charging as much or more than a campsite with far superior facilities?
> 
> Sue


They don't have to justify their charges to anyone - they're in business to make a profit and it's very much a case of take it or leave it - but being British we mostly pay up and shut up. Having said that, if I were a campsite owner I would prefer not to have any dogs on my site and would discourage them by charging a sizeable fee. I reckon £3 per day is not too much to charge for disposing of someone elses dog excrement.


----------



## Telbell (May 1, 2005)

> . I reckon £3 per day is not too much to charge for disposing of someone elses dog excrement.


We don't own a do but occasionally "dog sit" for daughter/son in law-and all that entails :roll:

In all the campsites I've visited I've never seen wardens/managers go round picking up dog muck from the site. On the contrary I believe most owners do their own pooper scooping.

Doesn't Russsel work on a club site at the moment? Perhaps he could give his views on my comment, and also the justification for such a high fee for dogs.


----------



## tonyt (May 25, 2005)

[quote="Telbell"...................... On the contrary I believe most owners do their own pooper scooping.
[/quote]

.....and take it home with them?


----------



## 107088 (Sep 18, 2007)

yep, I clear up after my dogs, but I dont take it home, I use the dog poop bag bins...??? provided by the site.

After all, I pay for those to be provided, in the same way as my site fees include dustbin emptying and stuff like that.


----------



## Telbell (May 1, 2005)

May have lost the plot here but aren't the bins emptied/collected anyway? If the argument is taken to the extreme campers should be charged on the number of empty bottles/cans, newspapers and other waste.

In othere words, what "tenpence Brown" wants to do with our household waste...or does he intend to charge extra to take dog owners' poo away from their homes too? :roll:


----------



## blondy (Aug 23, 2007)

WE have never been charged for our wind out sunshade, when asked have we an awning we rightly say no.


----------



## Briarose (Oct 9, 2007)

tonyt said:


> Sonesta said:
> 
> 
> > ................... I suppose it would be nice to know why some sites with little or no provision laid on for dogs can justify charging as much or more than a campsite with far superior facilities?
> ...


 I think if you were in business you would probably not make a lot of money then :wink: as lots of folk with MH and caravans also have their best mates with them.

My personal view is like others I pick up anything that my dogs might do, I understand that there are doggie bins to be emptied in the same way as human rubbish and personal waste :lol: and I don't mind paying for that but I feel a £1 a day would be a fair price to pay..............Bainland at Woodhall now charge £2 a dog per day, and also even if you turn up and book.............a booking fee of £1. You then get a nice little letter thanking you for your booking :roll: now thats a waste of paper if you have just turned up for a couple of nights.


----------



## krull (Jul 22, 2006)

blondy said:


> WE have never been charged for our wind out sunshade, when asked have we an awning we rightly say no.


That's our position too.


----------



## MaxandPaddy (Mar 18, 2006)

Hi Pacific,

Hope you have both been enjoying your trips out and about in your Motorhome  .

Didn't you have a trip across the channel? Hope that went well!

Now funny you should start this awning debate because I have always wondered if you should declare your wind out awning or not :? .

We have only had ours out that one time at Poolsbrook to investigate what colour it was after we saw you taking a look at yours :!: 

If the sun is going to shine then bring it on,we want to sit in it not hide from it 8) .

But there might just be a chance that we may want to put it out,highly unlikely we would leave it out but if we did is it classed as an awning?

Clearly in the opinion of some of you it is a sunshade so I will try that next time I am asked if I have an awning!

I mean although it is a 4metre awning it does not take up the space of the all engulfing awnings that dwarf the caravans that they are attached to.I mean what do they put in there 8O ?

So we shall now refer to our awning as a roll out sunshade and see what response we get that!

If we end up in bother Pacific then I blame you!

regards,

Val and Martin


----------



## tonyt (May 25, 2005)

Just to confuse things a little more - Fiamma describe the F45i as a "wind out canopy". It's mostly the canopies with sides/fronts that they describe as awnings (but even they have exceptions).

Omnistor describe all wind outs as awnings.


----------



## 96299 (Sep 15, 2005)

tonyt said:


> Omnistor describe all wind outs as awnings.


Blast.I`ve got a omnistor one. 8O

steve


----------



## Sonesta (May 10, 2005)

tonyt said:


> They don't have to justify their charges to anyone - they're in business to make a profit and it's very much a case of take it or leave it - but being British we mostly pay up and shut up. Having said that, if I were a campsite owner I would prefer not to have any dogs on my site and would discourage them by charging a sizeable fee. I reckon £3 per day is not too much to charge for disposing of someone elses dog excrement.


Hi there tonyt,

I appreciate they are in business to make a profit and I have absolutely no problems with that whatsoever and as we run our own business ourselves I can fully relate to the need to be both profitable and cost effective. However, if we wish to attract and retain our customers we do to some extent have to justify our charges and the view you describe of "take it or leave it" and "pay up or shut up" is not one that I would like to adopt in my shop and I don't think it would prove to be very profitable long term if all businesses took that same brusque approach. To be honest with you I think it wouldn't be long before people voted with their feet and took their custom elsewhere and for a campsite where I would guess returning cutomers are a very important factor it could prove to be financially catastrophic! So contrary to your belief Tony I truly do believe that businesses most certainly do have to justify their charges a lot of the time, especially if they wish to encourage and develop good customer relationships and you cannot just go around making charges without being seen to offer some kind of explanation for these fees!

I think most dog owners are prefectly happy to pay extra for their dogs in order to cover any costs incurred by the providing and emptying of special bins for our "doggy poop" and also towards the maintananence of dog walks etc but I think we just wish to be charged a fair price for this and not be penalised for having a dog or dogs.

As for your comments regarding if you owned a campsite you would then charge a sizeable fee for dogs so as to discourage dog owners from staying on your site, then of course that would be your choice to do with your business exactly what you wished and I am sure you have your reasons for being so anti dogs - but surely a more honest and less aggressive approach would be to have a NO DOGS ALLOWED campsite so that all those likeminded people who are also not too keen on dogs either can come and stay without having to mix with those of us who truly do love and appreciate our faithful 4 legged friends.

As for the clearing up our dogs excrement - we certainly do not expect anyone else to clear up after our 2 dogs I can assure you. I dread to think which or where the campsites are that you must have been staying on are located Tony but I have never seen evidence of anyone having to clear up left behind dog excrement on any of the campsites I have stayed on thank goddness and I would be both shocked and disgusted if I did. In my experience most dog owners are vigilante about such matters and would never dream of leaving others to clear up after their pets. Of course we do not and cannot be expected to take our dog excrement back home with us (as you suggested) that would after all be most unhygienic to store in our motorhomes for several days and such a suggestion is quite ludicrous. However, we do clean up after our dogs using special doggy bags and once these bags have been carefully tied up they are then placed into the dog waste bins provided and of course this is the kind of extra facilities that we dog lovers are all more than happy to pay for but at a price that is realistic for the task in question!

Sue


----------



## Telbell (May 1, 2005)

> Blast.I`ve got a omnistor one.


Tell em it's a Fiamma steve-they won't know the difference........unless the "awning police" come round during the night to check :lol:


----------



## DTPCHEMICALS (Jul 24, 2006)

Last year in France when told that i would have to pay per night for our "sun canopy" i agreed with the miserable English site owner.
Every night i wound the caopy in but left the chairs out.

Dave P


----------



## MaxandPaddy (Mar 18, 2006)

Chigman said:


> tonyt said:
> 
> 
> > Omnistor describe all wind outs as awnings.
> ...


Me too!

Val


----------



## 102731 (Jan 30, 2007)

What is the point of this endless speculation? Has any body got facts? ie has any body asked? What do the C&CC say, or the CC?
Just remember, _you pays yer money, you makes yer choice._


----------



## Telbell (May 1, 2005)

> What is the point of this endless speculation? Has any body got facts? ie has any body asked? What do the C&CC say, or the CC?


? Speculation about what?

Pacific started the thread with a reasonable point about sites charging fior awnings. ("non-CC") Others came on with their experiences and views.

Some "facts" are included in the posts, and Dave P has just said he would have been charged for leaving his roll-out awning "out"- a "fact"!

Not sure what else you want?

As has been said many times if you don't like the thread and don't want to contribute to it, then..............................don't!


----------



## tonyt (May 25, 2005)

C&CC siting wardens almost always ask if you have an "awning" but only to help them site you so you can deploy it nicely. They make no extra charge.


----------



## 107088 (Sep 18, 2007)

The thread did wander a bit off topic, but only in a pleasant way, like all good conversations between friends. 

I'm not sure the thread was posted originally as a research for accuracy type question, more, rhetorical, ( blimey now thats a bit word,) and consequently, the chat was nice. 

In my bizarre, virtual mind, I see the threads on the forum having 2 different styles, one style is the " heres a serious question, posed as I have a problem," so....like someone going for a diagnostic check, its like a free consultancy at the G.P.

The other, is more of a group of friends, meeting for a coffee/tea/hot chocolate and large bun, having a natter in a chummy informal way, sort of mid- shopping stylee.


----------



## Sonesta (May 10, 2005)

bear1 said:


> What is the point of this endless speculation? Has any body got facts? ie has any body asked? What do the C&CC say, or the CC?
> Just remember, _you pays yer money, you makes yer choice._


Jeez! We are only discussing the fees and charges made for certain extra facilities on campsites etc and whether we all think they are fair or not? Some campsites charge, some sites don't and some seem to charge way over the top for any extras. Surely to goodness we can come onto a motorhome forum such as MHF and air our own personal views, experiences and opinions with others without fear of reprimand?

Basically, all we are discussing in this thread is our own personal queries and opinions and the "pays yer money, you makes your choice" argument is quite irrelevant in this particular instance as people are not actually saying they refuse to pay these charges or refusing to stay on certain highly priced campsites but merely just questioning the tariffs and the facilites provided by them.

Of course we have the freedom to choose and quite rightly so and I am sure if any of us ever felt particularly strongly about the charges being made by any individual campsite, we would obviously vote with our feet and would look elsewhere to stay but primarily, that is not the point of this thread and we are simply discussing and debating our opinions and our findings and I personally think such discussions can not only be interesting but also informative and I enjoy both reading and participating in such topics.

Sue


----------



## Sonesta (May 10, 2005)

bandaid said:


> The thread did wander a bit off topic, but only in a pleasant way, like all good conversations between friends.
> 
> I'm not sure the thread was posted originally as a research for accuracy type question, more, rhetorical, ( blimey now thats a bit word,) and consequently, the chat was nice.
> 
> ...


Here here Bandaid! Very eloquently put and exactly how I saw the thread too. Nothing too serious just a bunch of likeminded friendly people discussing their experiences and findings with no axes to grind. 

Sue


----------



## Telbell (May 1, 2005)

> a group of friends, meeting for a coffee/tea/hot chocolate and large bun, having a natter in a chummy informal way, sort of mid- shopping stylee


Agreed! Mine's milk.no sugar and a great big eccles cake please :lol:



> I personally think such discussions can not only be interesting but also informative and I enjoy both reading and participating in such topics.


Agreed! Don't care if I'm a synco...sinco.....creep! :lol:


----------



## pacific (Dec 17, 2007)

Hi All
As originators of the post we have really enjoyed the debate and reports of experiences, so thank you everyone for your contributions. We hope that posts such as this are taken in the spirit of discussion intended, as this forum is such a great font of knowledge and experiences on just about everything it seems without a need for getting ratty!
Hi there again MaxandPaddy, yes we had a great time in France thanks. Don't blame us if the wind out sunshade police get you!!


----------



## Telbell (May 1, 2005)

WEell done pacific-it's always good when the originator of a thread comes back and indicates whether its purpose has been achieved....even if it does go off at a tangent sometimes :lol:


----------



## bigbazza (Mar 6, 2008)

*friend's*

Hey Bandaid stop imagining you've got friends   

By the way you forgot to mention sarcasm in your post :wink: 
Bazza


----------



## 107088 (Sep 18, 2007)

I did say it was a virtual world, and therefore, not reality.


----------



## Sonesta (May 10, 2005)

Telbell said:


> even if it does go off at a tangent sometimes :lol:


Telbell - you know I haven't heard that phrase for simply ages and it took me back to my childhood when my dear sweet mum used to regularly use all kinds of different and wise old sayings and proverbs. The phrase "going off on a tangent" I recall as being one of her favourites and she often used that phrase when referring to the verbal actions of others!

Sue


----------



## 102731 (Jan 30, 2007)

artona said:


> .
> 
> So with all that extra work should a caravan with three children pay more that maybe one with just a couple.?
> 
> Lets take it to the extreme should a small motorhome with one occupant expect to pay less than a 28ft caravan with a massive awning, a seperate tent, a four wheel drive and a second car, 4 children and 2 dogs?


Just 2 quotes from 1 thread on this post. If it ends in a question mark it's speculation.
I, for one, would have welcomed a factual answer to the question and hoped that, with all the experienced motor homers on this site someone, by now, would have asked the question of the two largest clubs. But no, so I'll do it myself.

So as I said, if you don't like the rules, don't join the club.
Any site owner can charge what he likes for what he likes. If he wants to charge for toilet paper, he can. If he wants to charge for brushing the grass upright after you've left, he can. Don't like it? Go somewhere else, or ask him why and persuade him to change his ways.


----------



## Sonesta (May 10, 2005)

bear1 said:


> Just 2 quotes from 1 thread on this post. If it ends in a question mark it's speculation.
> I, for one, would have welcomed a factual answer to the question and hoped that, with all the experienced motor homers on this site someone, by now, would have asked the question of the two largest clubs. But no, so I'll do it myself.
> 
> So as I said, if you don't like the rules, don't join the club.
> Any site owner can charge what he likes for what he likes. If he wants to charge for toilet paper, he can. If he wants to charge for brushing the grass upright after you've left, he can. Don't like it? Go somewhere else, or ask him why and persuade him to change his ways.


Ooooh my word - no need to sound quite so angry, it is not a deadly serious issue we are discussing here Bear! If we did feel as strongly as you appear to think we all do about the differing charges I daresay we are all eloquent enough to telephone either of the 2 clubs you are referring to and ask them how they arrive at their figures etc or we would at least enquire about the site charges prior to booking onto any campsite and If we after m,aking enquiries we then decided that the price was far higher than we were happy to pay, then of course we would more than likely choose to take our custom elsewhere? Surely this is not the point of this thread though and we were all merely discussing how we view the differing charges we have come across during our travels!

As for a sentence ending with a question mark, I was always of the opinion that a writer who chose to use the question mark was not necessarily ALWAYS asking a direct question of the reader or because the writer was necassarily in complete ignorance of any relevant facts but rather that he/she could be simply questioning the reader as to what their personal thoughts were on a particular subject or viewpoint? Maybe the writer is just simply inquisitive as to whether what they believe to be right was in fact shared or endorsed by others and used the question mark to indicate their curiosity? Then again, the writer may simply just wish to open up an innocent debate and therefore decided to end their sentence with a question mark in order to initiate the start of a debate? I certainly do not think the vain in which Stew (artona) asked the question that you have seen fit to quote, was in any way speculative and I think it's simply a matter of how you chose to interpret his post!

Once again I must reiterate a point I attempted to raise in an earlier post and say that campsite owners, like any other business are free to charge whatever they like, for whatever they like and when it comes to working out their pricing strategies they are not answerable to we their paying customer in any way whatsoever - however that aside, I do think it is a wise business man or woman who takes into account the importance of keeping their customers happy and as a result satisfied customers will return time and time again and of course as a forum likes this proves happy and unhappy customers talk and word of mouth is a very powerful tool!

Anyway, I think for me personally I have little more to add to this thread and certainly cannot see the point of arguing the toss about it any longer and so I will leave those of you who wish to continue to make a mountain out of molehill to get on with it. I find it sad though cos folk were only posting their opinions on a relatively harmless topic but sadly there are always those who are not happy unless they are creating hostility amongst members.

Sue


----------



## Telbell (May 1, 2005)

> Just 2 quotes from 1 thread on this post. If it ends in a question mark it's speculation.


So that's a definitive statement as per "Bear1"?- Never heard of a rhetorical question?

Don't answer that-I don't need a response-and I'm not speculating about anything :wink:



> The phrase "going off on a tangent" I recall as being one of her favourites and she often used that phrase when referring to the verbal actions of others!


Sue-Yes I think I recollect it from my Geometry days at school years ago-that's all I remember about Geometry though :roll:

Like you I've finished with this thread now. I,m off to find another where I can "speculate" by sticking a question after a statement, do a cosy tangental digression, and hope the big bears don't follow me round :lol: :wink:


----------



## Grizzly (May 9, 2005)

As far as I can see the CC and C&CC do not charge extra for an awning but they do impose rules as to where it can be erected. The CC will get their knickers in a twist if you attempt to overhang the grass at the side of your pitch hoping to put your chairs etc on the grass under your wind-out canopy.

The rule seems to be that you can have what you want on your bit of gravel - huge caravans, 4x4s, monster awnings and windbreaks, but woe betide you if you try to move onto the grass on either side. 

We once made the mistake of trying to point out that all we wanted was to put out 2 chairs on the grass for an afternoon and that we had no carpet or wrap around awning but we were told we could not. In vain to point out that we would be doing less damage than the cars and vans driving over the grass to get to their pitch or the children running on it.

As Pusser says; they make the rules but it is worth remembering that we are members of a club and should, perhaps, have a say in the rules

G


----------



## 107925 (Oct 27, 2007)

Hey, Grizz, when I was at the C&CC, Canterbury, recently, it was busy and there were no hardstandings. I was led (as they do) to our pitch on grass. There were lots of others there and the guy concerned (ever so pleasant) was at pains to ensure that suitable distances were kept between all the other caravans and motorhomes. We said we had a pup tent, which wasn't a problem, but he asked if we could situate it...... then he hurriedly counted out the appropriate distance in all directions, until he said "that should do it just there." 

It was all to do with fire regulations, whereby the main vehicles had to be, if I recall, not closer than 6 metres apart. Then, if anyone had an awning or pup tent, or whatever, they had to be no closer than 3 metres from the adjoining pitch. In other words, if both pitches next to each other had 'extras', they must be at least 3 metres apart. 

Anyway, having watched this guy measuring in various directions, to ensure that all vehicles and their extra bits were kept at correct distances, I can see why campsite people might get very stroppy if some recalcitrant were to place even something as innocent as a chair in a spot which would - God forbid - breach the minimum distance rule.

Shaun


----------



## oldun (Nov 10, 2005)

*Re: when is an awning not part of the pitch?*

Surely the method of charging is up to the retailer.

Some cars are sold with every conceivable "extra" included in the price. This can be annoying when you do not need most of them.

Other cars are sold as basic and so every "extra" is listed at an extra cost.

It' shard to say which of these methods is the best bu surely the method adopted is up to to retailer.

Why should caravan sites be any different? Some charge an all in fee for pitch, outfit, electricity and two adults. Not very good if there is one of yo in a small ten and don't need electricity.

Others charge an individual fee for each item.


----------



## krull (Jul 22, 2006)

Grizzly said:


> We once made the mistake of trying to point out that all we wanted was to put out 2 chairs on the grass for an afternoon and that we had no carpet or wrap around awning but we were told we could not. G


I sat on the grass on my chairs at CC Sandringham as did lots of people with no issue.

In fact I would love a warden to try to tell me I couldn't sit on the grass.


----------



## tonyt (May 25, 2005)

Has anyone had any experience of trying to park parallel to the usual roadway ie at right angles to your neighbours?

My mh is a tad over 15 ft. long - less than the width of many motorhomes or caravans with awnings so pitch width should not be a problem. 

I've not tried it but it would be my preferred positioning - back to the roadway and not overlooking or being overlooked by anyones doorway.
I can't see a fire escape issue as tugging cars seem to be free to park facing whichever way they happen to park.

Maybe I'll try it next time.


----------



## camper69 (Aug 30, 2007)

Although I have had only limited dealings with the CCC I once nearly sent a Assistant Holiday Site Manager into a fit because I was putting a tent up an few inches out of alignment with the line of the pitch and more than a an inch from the corner.

I would love to know how the CCC or infact the CC deal with the problem of the habitation door being on the wrong side (ie an import) of a motorhome when they want them all to face the same way.

Derek


----------



## Grizzly (May 9, 2005)

camper69 said:


> I would love to know how the CCC or infact the CC deal with the problem of the habitation door being on the wrong side (ie an import) of a motorhome when they want them all to face the same way.
> Derek


We've always parked the way round we want on a pitch, CC or C&CC and never had it commented on.

At Densole we had to park diagonnally in order to get level and this was accepted without comment. We remarked on the fact next day as we checked out and were told that the pitches were due to be levelled and we were not the only ones to find parking difficult.

G


----------



## buttons (Dec 19, 2005)

How about this, I can tow a caravan with my 4 berth camper van onto a site and only get charged for the caravan. Put up a pup tent and it is extra. 
Another grey area is towing a car, if you tow the car you pay extra. If the car tows you its free.....


----------



## DABurleigh (May 9, 2005)

As life isn't fair, I'm not sure why business should be expected to be.

Dave


----------



## oldun (Nov 10, 2005)

There is nothing in law that states that the charges made at campsites must be logical or reasonable.

The charges are entirely at the discretion of the owners.

Naturally if you find the charges too high or discriminatory then you should leave and find another site.

I hate paying huge charges at large commercial sites to cover huge swimming pools, bars, discos etc hat I never use so I do not go to them. Others of course enjoy these facilities immensely so they keep them packed out in season.


----------



## Codfinger (Jan 11, 2008)

*campsite charges*

Hi just to add my 2 pence worth, In my limited experience of campsites most seem to have very little going for them other than a large grass field most make no atempt to plant privacy hedging or level or drain the pitches, charge silly money for a pitch, what the difference if you have a dog or want to put your awning up!!??????


----------



## carprus (Jun 22, 2008)

Shark said:


> There doesn't appear to be much logic to how things are charged for on a pitch. If we look at the fundamental difference between motorhomers and caravanners, the latter will have their caravan and a car on their pitch as a matter of course. A tent and car is much the same. A motorhome can take up far less than either of the aforementioned, being just the one 'item' on the pitch. However, if an awning is attached to the motorhome, the pitch is deemed to be put to greater use and up goes the cost. But where's the rebate for only having the one item on the pitch to begin with, rather than two?
> 
> Shaun


Here here , just plain greedy :twisted: .


----------



## RobMD (May 9, 2005)

As has been said, a site owner can charge what they like - it's up to us to accept or reject the site as we see fit.

However, All Prices should be listed and transparent so that the actual cost of staying on a site is easy to calculate.


----------



## oldun (Nov 10, 2005)

*Re: campsite charges*



Codfinger said:


> Hi just to add my 2 pence worth, In my limited experience of campsites most seem to have very little going for them other than a large grass field most make no atempt to plant privacy hedging or level or drain the pitches, charge silly money for a pitch, what the difference if you have a dog or want to put your awning up!!??????


What's the difference if you have a car, caravan, awning, three dogs, 2 pup tents, a gazebo and two family members each with their own cars.

Surely these little extras do not matter - do they!!!

Come on be serious - limits have to be imposed in this age where everyone believes (so it seems) that they can take anything they like from life, whenever they want and pay as little (preferably nothing) for it.

Do all you moaners allow your friends into your house and let them do what they want no matter how significant the effect on you?

Of course you don't and similarly others set their own limits.

As said time and time again if you don't like the charges move to another site.

By the way I have nothing whatsoever to do with any campsite. I do not support many of the charges levied by campsites so I do not go to those type of sites.


----------



## camper69 (Aug 30, 2007)

As has been said before if you don't like the price or the rules don't camp there.

Also has anyone who is complaining about prices actually done a rough calculation on how much it costs to run a campsite and what you have to charge to make a living from it. 

Its not such a lucative occupation as some would suggest.

Derek


----------



## TwoplusOne (Nov 9, 2008)

I agree with your logic Oldun when it comes to commercial parks. However I cannot see that it is out of the realms of possibility for clubs to adopt a uniform and logical practice in terms of hiring out a pitch. A pitch is a plot of land of a certain size which you agree to hire for a period of time. It could readily be agreed by the clubs to charge a standard uniform price per night regardless of whether you have a car and caravan, or a motorhome with or without awning. I have travelled in other parts of the world and it is only over here that I have come accross this differential pricing practice.
Whilst I am at it ,another gripe. More and more families with school going children enjoy caravaning/motorhome over week-ends.
The tarriffs are not structured in favour of these families. Working parents cannot arrive before 5-6pm on a Friday and then have to be out by 11 on a Sunday. Hardly a week-end unless you subsidise the club with an extra night on Sunday which in most casescannot be used.
Why not have a week-end tarriff for working families of say from 4pm on Friday to 4pm on a Sunday to make the break more worth while.
May also change the nature of some of the parks from retirement villages over week-ends (with a hush-hush culture) to a better mix of age groups with lot more life and spirit in having more children around. We were all young once!
Before you think I am agegist I am well into my sixties myself.
Yet despite all this I do use the cc and cc and camping sites but I do believe constructive critism should be welcome by those in charge.


----------



## eddievanbitz (May 1, 2005)

We have a have a fairly low "Pitch fee" and then charge for extras. Not everyone wants an awning so we don't build that into the costs.

Wind a awning out from the van FOC as far as we are concerned, put up sides, a ground sheet, start to move in we charge a little extra for the possible incoonvenience you leave us with after the event. 

Yellow slimy grass (yes I know everyone on this forum uses eco mats :wink: ) Tent pegs left in as their stuck or forgotten that then cause the next guest pain or damage or knacker a £80 set of lawnmower blades to name a couple of reasons.

It is what you end up paying that is important, not the way that the bill is calculated.

Eddie


----------



## Rainbow-Chasers (Sep 2, 2008)

I think what eddie has just said are valid comments and fair enough! That is not to say that there are sites that do try to pull as fast one - in which case, you have the power to move on!

On one trip recently, we stayed on freshwater in dorset. It was priced at £18/night (£26 high season) and the site had a nice position, but was fairly aged and had very little in terms of amenities such as waste diposal and fresh water was a good drive! It was noted here that they charged extra for more than one person, children (we didn't have any!) and the shocking bit for me was £6/night for the dog!!

Has potential, good position, poor amenities, high price won't go again!

But you do have to be fair when looking at prices, as some sites do have a good reason and don't charge extortionate amounts for the damage or mess we potentially might leave behind.

If it is fair then fine - profiteer steer clear!


----------



## oldun (Nov 10, 2005)

I just wonder at how many of those complaining here consider the welfare of their employers when requesting a wage rise or do they just consider themselves, as do most of the campsite owners.

I have never met anyone who put the economic welfare of others foremost in his considerations. It seems that a huge proportion of the populations fiddled their expenses, their tax returns, their benefits - just look at the MPs for example.

Why should campsite owners be different? They are running a business and wish to optimise their profits.


----------

