Bye Bye CAMC

[Langtoftlad]

You can only use CLs if you pay a CAMC subscription.

But you can use the CCC's CS network if a member, or the MCC's 5 sites or even MHF's authorised sites

 

[Coastal Cruiser.]

I’m not know to be lucky but it seems I am when it comes to staying on club sites
When we got our first van just over 2 years ago I joined both clubs so as to see what they are like and after probably a few dozen nights away on their sites I have never come across anyone fitting the description given on some of these post.
They have always been helpful and friendly indeed some times it’s hard to get away when they start talking

Worst site warden I had was on a private site and the owner didn’t have a clue about where larger vans can get and tried turning me away as soon as I turned up!!
Soon put him straight after a 5 hour drive to get there

Will keep on going to club sites as maybe my luck will run out one day

 

[seasideBill]

But you can use the CCC's CS network if a member, or the MCC's 5 sites or even MHF's authorised sites

Yes, MHF & CAMpRA sites, hopefully in the future they’ll provide the primary mechanism for licensing without the need for the cartel operated by CAMC & CCC. Those of us who wish can then ditch club membership.

 

[Langtoftlad]

Those of us who wish can then ditch club membership.

You are free to do so now.
There's no compulsion the be a member of any club.
There are any number of alternative options

 

[seasideBill]

You are free to do so now.
There's no compulsion the be a member of any club.
There are any number of alternative options

There are about 3,500 sites restricted to paying members, that’s a lot of ‘alternative options’ closed unless I want to shell out about £100 pa or thereabouts. It’s an unnecessary expense perpetuated by an outdated system that needs a radical shake up.

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

 

[Langtoftlad]

But that's freedom of choice... The clubs have created a product which you want to use without subscribing.

Pay or don't use
Your choice.

You also have choice to subscribe to BUPA and get access to many medical facilities, not available to everyone.

Or join a gym, and get to use their equipment...

 

[seasideBill]

But that's freedom of choice... The clubs have created a product which you want to use without subscribing.

Pay or don't use
Your choice.

You also have choice to subscribe to BUPA and get access to many medical facilities, not available to everyone.

Or join a gym, and get to use their equipment...

You miss my point. I’m talking about a system that no longer serves the best interests of motorhomers. Historically CAMC and CCC became the custodians of arrangements effectively granting planning permission to small businesses and the like to operate small campsites. By default they now maintain a stranglehold on that market by insisting that those to whom they grant a planning restriction only permit use by subscribers to CMC & CCC. In this day & age that’s just plain wrong. It’s a cosy arrangement that you might be comfortable with, but not for me. We’ve seen the beginnings of a booking system for CLs driven by collective action, next we need to see CLs & CSs migrating to CAMpRA style arrangements. The fact that so many have emerged offering CL & aire type arrangements in recent times independent of CAMC & CCC is encouraging. As for ‘pay or don’t use’, I hope others have a more progressive attitude than that!

 

[Langtoftlad]

The clubs purport to serve the best interests of their members, not the general public motorhomers
If you want to benefit from their network of facilities then pay the membership - it's not that difficult a concept to grasp is it?
Many organisations have the power to grant exemptions so hardly a stranglehold - there must be a reason why they don't?
[According to the government listing - there are over 300 clubs, societies and organisations that have the authority to exempt any landowner from needing planning permission to set up a five pitch site]
So your assertions are just plain wrong.

 

[Paulypaul]

"Or immediately after." (Somethings will never dislodge, will they!)

Correct

See, I've always said, there are some old bill or ex-old bill, who are intelligent, and I'm not being facetious when I say that.

 

[seasideBill]

The clubs purport to serve the best interests of their members, not the general public motorhomers
If you want to benefit from their network of facilities then pay the membership - it's not that difficult a concept to grasp is it?
Many organisations have the power to grant exemptions so hardly a stranglehold - there must be a reason why they don't?
[According to the government listing - there are over 300 clubs, societies and organisations that have the authority to exempt any landowner from needing planning permission to set up a five pitch site]
So your assertions are just plain wrong.

I’ve changed my mind…. I said by default they now maintain a stranglehold, but maybe it’s just complacency?

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

 

[busbuddy]

As a real green newbie to motorhoming, but with some camping and caravan experience of quite a few years, I called in at Ferry Meadows CMC site for a quick look, bit if advice on pricing and pitch availability.
I was not a member, but a member of the C and CC.
I was in my car only, and in my work suit and tie, and parked in a safe and correct area and went to the office to seek my answers rather than just waltzing in and having a nosey.
You would think by their attitude , and especially as a member of , in their words, “ the dark side” that I was some sort of social piriah.
I asked about plot layouts, ehu, fully serviced pitches etc and was met with a question about my van.
Soon as I explained it was a motorhome, 20 years old, in good condition and without an awning, the reply back was shocking.
“We put the older vans towards the rear of the site” said they.
“Oh, why”? Said I.
“It keeps the site looking neater”!
I was about to literally give them an absolute download of an argument, but realised that these poor, unfortunate, self- effacing, legends in their own lunchtimes were just a bunch of arrogant, ill prepared , judgemental pillocks.
So I just smiled ( that confused them) walked to my car and drove home, muttering under my breath that they must certainly bank with barclays!
Absolutely the wrong sort of persons running what looked like quite a nice site of what bit I saw.
I will not pleasure their booking system with my custom, ever.
Not everyone has a brand new, shiny, top of the range, dogs doo-da’s of a caravan or motorhome, and all should be treated equally.
I left secure in the knowledge that at least I actually own my van and its fully paid for, but they wont have the pleasure of it visiting.
Absolute disgrace and they dont seem to have moved on much in their attitudes frim when I caravanned with my parents in the late 70’s and as a family in the late 80’s and well into the 90’s / 2000’s.

Which part of the site is the rear and on which side of the main road to the park
Never had a problem there with my 2003 van and the one I had before was a 1988 model
I've only had a problem at cheddar site

 

[Wanders from Glos]

Which part of the site is the rear and on which side of the main road to the park
Never had a problem there with my 2003 van and the one I had before was a 1988 model
I've only had a problem at cheddar site

We just got back from Cheddar and found it a nice little nice with friendly helpful wardens.

 

[Captain Yoghurtpot]

Which part of the site is the rear and on which side of the main road to the park
Never had a problem there with my 2003 van and the one I had before was a 1988 model
I've only had a problem at cheddar site

I have absolutely no idea where they meant but assumed it was to be behind the reception area, ie further into the site, and not on the immediate pitches visible from the entrance barrier on the right-ish?
I wasnt there long enough to get exact details as the comment was enough to put me off.
Glad you have had better expieriences than I.

 

[Shrimp]

We never ‘Wardened’ a site, but helped, we saw both sides.
Mostly the customers are ok but you get the ones who think they know best and will stand and argue the toss.
We we’re told that a Wardens job is a way of life not a job and a warden is on call 24 hrs a day!

 

[Victor And Margaret]

We've been members of both clubs for over 25 years, mainly using them for CL's and CS's. Both clubs have their share of jobsworth pillocks that enjoy authority and the sound of their own voice but the vast majority of wardens in both have been friendly, helpful and go out of their way to assist anyone when needed.
What annoys us now is the fact that they both state they're none profit organisations but the cost of club sites in most cases is far more than other large sites (many with superior facilities). When you factor in the cost of membership on top, they're both raking it in and seem to be taking members for a ride. It's the management of both clubs at fat cat executive level that's the problem not the poor buggers getting the agro on a daily basis for peanuts.
We've paid for membership just to use the 5 van networks but having just upgraded to an off grid battery / solar system, at least one of them will go the journey.

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

 

[Brianmor]

We've been members for 3 years now of both CAMC and CCC and never had a problem so far, normally they are very friendly, and that is using their main sites reasonably frequently. You can only talk as you find.

 

[TheTwoOfUs]

What annoys us now is the fact that they both state they're none profit organisations but the cost of club sites in most cases is far more than other large sites (many with superior facilities). When you factor in the cost of membership on top, they're both raking it in and seem to be taking members for a ride. It's the management of both clubs at fat cat executive level that's the problem not the poor buggers getting the agro on a daily basis for peanuts.

But other large sites aren't acquiring land and building new sites are they? Certainly the C&MC have a continuing programme of upgrades throughout their network, something a single site will do once in a blue moon.
I don't think that the C&MC is perfect, especially the new booking system but overall we are happy with what we get.

 

[seasideBill]

But other large sites aren't acquiring land and building new sites are they? Certainly the C&MC have a continuing programme of upgrades throughout their network, something a single site will do once in a blue moon.
I don't think that the C&MC is perfect, especially the new booking system but overall we are happy with what we get.

But are they building what we want? New acquisitions and refurbishments all follow the same format - more EHU & full service pitches. Great for some, particularly tuggers, but not everyone’s choice. CAMC have never really understood motorhomers which is why they’ve never created anything like an aire even though their popularity is obvious. They’re also very reluctant to expand non-EHU pitches.

 

[Janine]

But are they building what we want? New acquisitions and refurbishments all follow the same format - more EHU & full service pitches. Great for some, particularly tuggers, but not everyone’s choice. CAMC have never really understood motorhomers which is why they’ve never created anything like an aire even though their popularity is obvious. They’re also very reluctant to expand non-EHU pitches.

That's true.

Moreton in Marsh CAMC site has built a whole lot of camping pods

 

[Nirvanauk]

That's true.

Moreton in Marsh CAMC site has built a whole lot of camping pods

And they are really ugly

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

 

[seasideBill]

That's true.

Moreton in Marsh CAMC site has built a whole lot of camping pods

Yes, CCC ditto.

And they are really ugly

At the risk of sounding like a grumpy old git, they can also change the character of a site, particularly at weekends when large groups rent pods/yurts/pre-erected tents for a party. I’ve had a few bad experiences.

 

[SpeedyDux]

But other large sites aren't acquiring land and building new sites are they? Certainly the C&MC have a continuing programme of upgrades throughout their network, something a single site will do once in a blue moon.
I don't think that the C&MC is perfect, especially the new booking system but overall we are happy with what we get.

CAMC seem to be buying a few of their former affiliated sites. That doesn't really count as new sites.

I get the impression that the Club management are still too caravan-focussed. Not all sites have motorhome service points and drive-over grey water dump points. They could have done that across the whole network by now. We motorhomers are tolerated, as long as we keep paying lots of fees, line up with the peg, and don't moan too much.

 

[poppycamper]

CAMC seem to be buying a few of their former affiliated sites. That doesn't really count as new sites.

As are the CCC.. one example.. Loch Ness Shores... used to be owned privately but associated to CCC until it went on market when owners retired and the CCC bought the site..

 

[iandsm]

The only benefit for me of this holiday sales company, for that's what it is, is the CL network. Same with C&CC

 

[TheAleMan]

The only benefit for me of this holiday sales company, for that's what it is, is the CL network. Same with C&CC

Same as us, but in late 2024 when we get our new van, both clubs will be surplus to requirements for us.

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

 

[Otter Spotter]

We've been members of both clubs for over 25 years, mainly using them for CL's and CS's. Both clubs have their share of jobsworth pillocks that enjoy authority and the sound of their own voice but the vast majority of wardens in both have been friendly, helpful and go out of their way to assist anyone when needed.
What annoys us now is the fact that they both state they're none profit organisations but the cost of club sites in most cases is far more than other large sites (many with superior facilities). When you factor in the cost of membership on top, they're both raking it in and seem to be taking members for a ride. It's the management of both clubs at fat cat executive level that's the problem not the poor buggers getting the agro on a daily basis for peanuts.
We've paid for membership just to use the 5 van networks but having just upgraded to an off grid battery / solar system, at least one of them will go the journey.

CAMC seem to push the ‘savings’ you can make by buying stuff via their website or affiliate sites, they may be right, but it does mean you have spend to save !

 

[Barryh]

As are the CCC.. one example.. Loch Ness Shores... used to be owned privately but associated to CCC until it went on market when owners retired and the CCC bought the site..

Loch Ness Shores was a privately owned site operated under a CCC franchise agreement. As part of that agreement the CCC has first dibs on purchasing the site when owner decides to sell his site. If the Club decides not to buy, for whatever reason, then they’ve got a shrinking network and this is what has happened with a number of franchises. More sites have been lost to the CCC network than have been acquired over the last 10 or so years.

 

[Spriddler]

The only benefit for me of this holiday sales company, for that's what it is, is the CL network. Same with C&CC

I also belong to the two main pitch timeshare companies just for the CL's/CS's.

 

[Quackers]

Lots of 5 van sites on Searchforsites, you might even find one in Old Sodbury on there too.

 

[seasideBill]

Lots of 5 van sites on Searchforsites, you might even find one in Old Sodbury on there too.

Just out of interest…. do you think the arrangements you have with CAMC are working effectively for you or do you think business could be better if anybody could access your site, club member or not?

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