A tale of two sites

Both members and non-members use pods and cabins, Novaman. CAMC is obviously looking to the future by installing them as the availability of decent towcars decreases and fuel costs still remain high. 

It’s a shame you didn’t ask the wardens at Chapel Lane about the poor state of the site and closure of the facilities as there could be any number of reasons. People will no doubt appreciate being warned about it. 👍🏻

The user and all related content has been Deleted User

My main grump over the last few years has been the condition of facility blocks on quite a few sites, some are very poor indeed and in dire need of updating. It must be difficult for site staff to keep things looking good when the facilities are in urgent need of an upgrade.

The pods are/were (by trying to book a few and by looking when on site) very popular both with those members like myself who want to bring family members with them or don't ant to tow/drive a MH anymore especially in the winter, and by people who don't have an outfit yet want something different from other self catering accommodation.

It gets people on club sites and generates income.

There are some sites that the club can't upgrade the facilities as the site isn't owned by the club, is Chapel Lane one of them?   

I can’t comment on facilities on any site as our motorhome has built in facilities that we use 

I think the problem with whether site facilities are upgraded is often dependent on the ownership of the site. If the Club own a site outright it is a fairly easy process. However if the site is leased, as so many seem to be, I can see the club being reluctant to invest in things that might not provide a return. They need a long term guarantee. As members, of course, we have no idea of these arrangements until we see details of a site upgrade or we are told the lease has not been renewed!

David 

There is also quite a cost difference between the two sites mentioned £8 / £10 a night this June for two on a standard hardstanding. If upgraded Chapel lane prices would almost certainly increase. We have always found it a perfectly adequate site. It’s not really a holiday destination, often running at well below capacity, Crufts accepted. Personally I see no good reason for spending lots of money trying to make it more appealing.

The user and all related content has been Deleted User

I've accepted this in the past and I tend to use our van facilities but when OH decided to use the showers at a CAMC site this year he wasn't impressed. No shower curtain and two hooks for clothes etc, all very dingy and worn. This was just after we'd been on a private site with luxurious individual facilities for a lot less money. 

Although the sites might be leased it now seems that prices can be increased whatever the condition of the worn out facilities.

Mind you we have been directed to cold cobwebbed converted cowshed showers on private sites in the past but I hope CAMC doesn't follow that trend.. 

 

I have visited Chapel Lane more times than any other site and, in my last review, I made the point that each time I come it feels more run-down than the time before.

On my last two visits it looked particularly care worn, not helped by long-term residents with various elements of largely ramshackle outfits sprawling over every square inch of their pitches. The OP point about hard standings full of weeds and various organic detritus spread around is one with which I would certainly concur.

I did wonder, as DK surmises, whether this was one of those sites on a lease which might now be now getting short and at risk of not being renewed. It certainly has that feel about it - although there is also a storage site there.