Motorhome take over at CAMC

[Ivory55]

Caravans are often on sites for the entire season, but the owners there only a few weeks at a time.

I see, fires only break out if left there all season. Yes I can see that makes sense.

 

[Guigsy]

But hotel rooms \ facilities have to meet stringent fire regulations, etc. And, would guess, those staying in a hotel room are probably there for the same reasons as you in the car park?

I agree that there's definitely a greater risk of fire spreading if you pack motorhomes in that tight. But is the risk really that high? If you're not allowed to BBQ and there are no awnings (have you seen a tent burn?!?), then it's an acceptable trade-off for convenience for me.

 

[Guigsy]

I see, fires only break out if left there all season. Yes I can see that makes sense.

Fires are only likely to be seen and acted upon if there are people about. All I'm saying is the risks are a little higher on a camp site.

 

[Gellyneck]

I agree that there's definitely a greater risk of fire spreading if you pack motorhomes in that tight. But is the risk really that high? If you're not allowed to BBQ and there are no awnings (have you seen a tent burn?!?), then it's an acceptable trade-off for convenience for me.

Remember there is possibly \ probably naked flames in the "parked" motorhomes what with fridges \ freezers \ heating being in operation. So, I would guess a potentially higher risk that a hotel room where all would be electric \ remotely operated.

 

[Ivory55]

Fires are only likely to be seen and acted upon if there are people about. All I'm saying is the risks are a little higher on a camp site.

I think best you buy a site or aire then you can run it how you want. If I owned something I would get p####d off with people telling me what I should be doing and not be doing all the time, probably why I would never get involved with moaning campers.

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

 

[Guigsy]

Remember there is possibly \ probably naked flames in the "parked" motorhomes what with fridges \ freezers \ heating being in operation. So, I would guess a potentially higher risk that a hotel room where all would be electric \ remotely operated.

I meant that in terms of privacy, I don't care about being packed in. Yes, it's a higher fire risk than a hotel. But at least the people in the next pitch aren't cooking in their tent.

 

[Gellyneck]

Fires are only likely to be seen and acted upon if there are people about. All I'm saying is the risks are a little higher on a camp site.

In my opinion I would say the risk on a "car park" is higher given the ability for fire to spread quicker from vehicles containing flammable gases, etc not isolated at the source.

 

[Gellyneck]

I meant that in terms of privacy, I don't care about being packed in. Yes, it's a higher fire risk than a hotel. But at least the people in the next pitch aren't cooking in their tent.

Apologies, I thought we were only discussing fire hazard rather than privacy.
Under no circumstances should anybody be cooking in their "tent" given the risk of CO poisoning. Every site I've been on, independent and Club, has posters to this effect.

 

[bigtwin]

Somebody may correct me but I thought the spacing rules were just 'recommendations'.

My recollection is that a report was produced by the fire service that considered a range of scenarios and they ended up making a recommendation that units should be spaced at 6m. That recommendation appears to have been adopted (perhaps driven by insurance) as a requirement.
Interesting to note however that CampRA have commissioned a report from a Fire Safety Engineer (a source I’d personally give more credence to) that recommends a 3m spacing for MHs.

Ian

 

[Larrynwin]

Who’d have thought the best thing some have to moan about is having space around their motorhome when pitched.

Can’t begin to imagine what the complaints/comments would be like if CAMC packed us in like sardines to increase capacity and turnover.

Like Aires you mean

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

 

[Spawn_e_git]

A few of you mention it in this thread, but can someone show me evidence, any at all, of the C&MC lobbying against Aires? #notholdingmybreath.

Not gonna happen. I've searched and never come across even a shred.

I believe most decisions covering this would be down to LPA not central Gov. so the "lobbying" would have to be at local level every time an application/proposal was submitted. The only way this could be done with transparency is through an official objection to the planning application (if private) or during the LPA consultation.

Unless of course the CMHC has an army of people armed with brown envelopes slipping them under the table to local councillors.....
Maybe the reason there is not a proliferation of Aires in this country is land in a nice area/spot is very expensive and then add on the running costs such as sewage and waste disposal, public liability insurance and keeping another "mobile fraternity" from taking it over, plus the cost of managing the payments etc does not make it viable.

The benefits to the "local community" might not be that much when so many small village shops are now Tesco Express and pubs/restaurants are chains that they would not see or be concerned on any tangible benefit from a few motorhomes passing through.

I think the nearest we will get to Aires is the Britstop/Pubs that allow you to park overnight if you buy a meal/few beers.

 

[deleted79651]

Yeh, we've heard about these kind of meets!

Them's not 'Meets'; them's Liaisons ... [if you're lucky...]

Steve

 

[Littlewheels]

On a CMC site at the moment and asked which way round to park and was told to park anyway I chose. Warden looked at my rear lounge moho and said if i were you id go in cab first. The views from the rear lounge are wonderful ... well would be if it weren't for the wind and rain and clouds and .....naff weather.

Yes but they don’t charge for the naff weather .........not yet anyway

 

[Jim]

There is no law about spacing. The 6m 'Rule' has been around in the Caravan Club for decades and has become "best practice".

So if on a Fun rally a van caught fire and damaged another that was 4m away from it. The secondary damaged van's insurers would ask my insurers, who would in turn ask me; Why we didn't adopt best practice and ensure at least 6m between vans. By not adhering to best practice, we show ourselves to be negligent and leave ourselves open to claims.

 

[Gellyneck]

Them's not 'Meets'; them's Liaisons ... [if you're lucky...]

Steve

Yoo hoo Elaine!

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

 

[Ian Bosman]

Yoo hoo Elaine!

As a CAMC member I feel that this lengthy discussion would be better off on the CAMC website where there is a forum. Moaning about something to others who may or may not be members is not the way to make changes. As members we all have the right to make our views known in various ways including turning up at the meetings where there is the opportunity to raise issues.

 

[Jim]

As a CAMC member I feel that this lengthy discussion would be better off on the CAMC website where there is a forum.

You pop over there then, we’ll see you later,

 

[63720]

Any C&MC or C&CC members here been to a site in Europe where you've been given an 80sqm pitch and ended up 2m from your neighbour perhaps, but not always, separated by a hedge and subsequently complained to the site that the 6m rule is not being enforced on an organised rally? I haven't.

 

[Gellyneck]

As a CAMC member I feel that this lengthy discussion would be better off on the CAMC website where there is a forum. Moaning about something to others who may or may not be members is not the way to make changes. As members we all have the right to make our views known in various ways including turning up at the meetings where there is the opportunity to raise issues.

Not really sure why you quoted me on your reply as it's not me moaning about what the Club is doing, or not?
I'm trying to understand why some members \ non-members are complaining so it can be raised directly with the Club Directorship potentially through the recently founded association seeking to support motorhome users.
I do agree there is the opportunity to raise issues at meetings \ AGM, which I have endeavoured to do previously, but it has tended to be "a lone voice in the wilderness" so through an association may increase the opportunity. From some of the responses in this, and other threads, it appears I may not be the only "lone voice".

 

[GJH]

There is no law about spacing. The 6m 'Rule' has been around in the CMC for decades and has become "best practice".

So if on a Fun rally a van caught fire and damaged another that was 4m away from it. The secondary damaged van's insurers would ask my insurers, who would in turn ask me; Why we didn't adopt best practice and ensure at least 6m between vans. By not adhering to best practice, we show ourselves to be negligent and leave ourselves open to claims.

S5 of the 1960 Act is Power of local authority to attach conditions to site licences and includes a provision for the Minister to time specify model standards. The "6m rule" arises from those standards.
I thought there had been a lengthy discussion of the subject on a specific thread some years ago but can't find it.

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

 

[Gellyneck]

Any C&MC or C&CC members here been to a site in Europe where you've been given an 80sqm pitch and ended up 2m from your neighbour perhaps, but not always, separated by a hedge and subsequently complained to the site that the 6m rule is not being enforced on an organised rally? I haven't.

Not really clear on the point you are making so apologies if I've got the wrong end of the stick.
From memory, as I don't have the regs with me, but I think organised rallies are exempted from the 6m rule.

 

[GJH]

Not really clear on the point you are making so apologies if I've got the wrong end of the stick.
From memory, as I don't have the regs with me, but I think organised rallies are exempted from the 6m rule.

Organised rallies (though not referred to as such) are allowed without a site licence under Paras 4 and 6 of the First Schedule of the 1960 Act. Given that they require no licence then, obviously, local authorities can't attach conditions as they can with licensed sites. As Jim mentioned above, though, insurance companies will take into account the adherence to the model standards.
The C&CC and MCC (don't know about the CAMC as we weren't members at the time) started to insist on 6m a few years ago for that reason.

 

[Gellyneck]

Organised rallies (though not referred to as such) are allowed without a site licence under Paras 4 and 6 of the First Schedule of the 1960 Act. Given that they require no licence then, obviously, local authorities can't attach conditions as they can with licensed sites. As Jim mentioned above, though, insurance companies will take into account the adherence to the model standards.
The C&CC and MCC (don't know about the CAMC as we weren't members at the time) started to insist on 6m a few years ago for that reason.

Thanks Graham. I knew there was something about the "6m rule" or lack thereof for rallies and agree about the potential insurance implications.

 

[63720]

Not really clear on the point you are making so apologies if I've got the wrong end of the stick.
From memory, as I don't have the regs with me, but I think organised rallies are exempted from the 6m rule.

Without getting at anyone in particular I'm highlighting how members, who may include site wardens, are comfortable in abandoning certain safety rules when out of the country. Like many here I've been squeezed on Aires but if I don't feel safe I'll move. Imo the 6m rule is ridiculous, but as they like to say dem rules are rules.

 

[Gellyneck]

Without getting at anyone in particular I'm highlighting how members, who may include site wardens, are comfortable in abandoning certain safety rules when out of the country. Like many here I've been squeezed on Aires but if I don't feel safe I'll move. Imo the 6m rule is ridiculous, but as they like to say dem rules are rules.

I think the issue that's being highlighted here is the UK regs and local stipulations may be out of line with other foreign regs with UK motorhomers challenging the rationale behind this.
We, personally, don't like the "car park effect" on aires and appreciate the 6m rule when on sites giving us the "garden" around our "house". However, we fully understand and appreciate that, thank G*d, we ain't all the same clone and we all use our motorhomes in different ways.

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

 

[Ian Bosman]

Not really sure why you quoted me on your reply as it's not me moaning about what the Club is doing, or not?
I'm trying to understand why some members \ non-members are complaining so it can be raised directly with the Club Directorship potentially through the recently founded association seeking to support motorhome users.
I do agree there is the opportunity to raise issues at meetings \ AGM, which I have endeavoured to do previously, but it has tended to be "a lone voice in the wilderness" so through an association may increase the opportunity. From some of the responses in this, and other threads, it appears I may not be the only "lone voice".

Sorry, I should not have quoted you as you seem with me to believe that CAMC members should be dealing with CAMC through their forums and/or the Directors.

 

[Cheshirecat57]

Anyway.....to get back to the Original point....
we are currently on a very nice PRIVATE site in Anglesey
£35.50 a night for a ”deluxe” pitch, warer,wasre,ehu and a privacy hedhe to both sides and stone wall to rear
The site has
88 pitches excluding tent site
32 are empty
Of the 56 occupied pitches, 39 are caravans, 3 are VWs, 1 is a trailer tent leaving just 13 motorhomes

Only 1 of the 13 is not UK built

Make of all that what you will

 

[Gerby]

There is no law about spacing. The 6m 'Rule' has been around in the caravan club for decades and has become "best practice".

So if on a Fun rally a van caught fire and damaged another that was 4m away from it. The secondary damaged van's insurers would ask my insurers, who would in turn ask me; Why we didn't adopt best practice and ensure at least 6m between vans. By not adhering to best practice, we show ourselves to be negligent and leave ourselves open to claims.

The 6 Metre rule comes from the adopted approved code of practice and (like all ACOP's) are one method of achieving a safe standard of Fire safety, the ACOP may be totally ignored providing you can prove by full risk assessment that you are achieving a similar or better standard of safety (remember if you get this bit wrong you will probably be held liable as a site owner).

The original 6 metre spacing is based on expected spread by fire by radiated heat from the original source to surrounding occupied areas and is based on the expected fire output (I can't remember the exact output but a 3MW figure seems to stick in my head bearing in mind we only used a 5 MW figure when doing shopping mall calculations which shows just how large a fire you could expect).

Having been to a large number of Caravan fires over the years I am glad that the 6 metre rule is taken as a standard and only if construction materials and contents lead to a drop in the expected fire output should it be dropped (imho)

 

[Jim]

The 6 Metre rule comes from the adopted approved code of practice and (like all ACOP's) are one method of achieving a safe standard of Fire safety, the ACOP may be totally ignored providing you can prove by full risk assessment that you are achieving a similar or better standard of safety (remember if you get this bit wrong you will probably be held liable as a site owner).

The original 6 metre spacing is based on expected spread by fire by radiated heat from the original source to surrounding occupied areas and is based on the expected fire output (I can't remember the exact output but a 3MW figure seems to stick in my head bearing in mind we only used a 5 MW figure when doing shopping mall calculations which shows just how large a fire you could expect).

Having been to a large number of Caravan fires over the years I am glad that the 6 metre rule is taken as a standard and only if construction materials and contents lead to a drop in the expected fire output should it be dropped (imho)

I think thats precisely what I said, but without the acronyms

 

[emjaiuk]

It would be interesting if any French/German speakers could find out how many fires occur on Aires/stellplatz.

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