Dornafield Touring Park

+1

John, I'm not you're sure on the same wavelength..no one is asking for a freebie night anywhere...🤷🏻‍♂️

pub stops do provide a parking place in exchange for the use of the pub for a meal..

those members who would like to use their own club facilities for impromptu water/waste dumping are not advocating that this be a free service. 

the size of one's tanks just allows for a longer stay away from sites.

I'm not surprised at the clubs stance, the design of their sites isnt conducive to extra vehicles on site, all adding to the one way stream. Their MHSP aren't in out of the way places, most being on the main A1 of each site which interferes with other club traffic at the best of times.

Retrofitting MHSP into sites designed for touring caravans takes some thought and understanding of MH usage, hence part of the congestion issue.

How are other organisations, presumably CAMC, having their customers inconvenienced? The suggestion of a visiting "splash & dash" creating a queue is spurious. If the same MH was at the MHSP at the same time, having stayed on the site, there would still be a queue inconveniencing the one waiting behind. If the service is being paid for, he would be as entitled to use it as would the overnighter or are you suggesting that people who stay overnight are, by virtue of their money, more entitled?

They have stayed overnight CY. Not sure by virtue of there money comes into it, they have paid the going rate. As such it is not unreasonable that they should not expect to queue behind someone who has not stayed on site, for which the facilities are in almost all cases positioned. I suggest you find an overnight stopping place that includes fill / dump, then you wouldn’t have a problem. Or you could stay on the CAMC site for a night.

Perhaps the Club fear loss of revenue by opening up their MSP's to casual use? If the service was widely available would it not just encourage more motorhomers to seek out overnight parking, legal or not when they might have otherwise spent nights on Club sites?

David

More likely complaints from those trying to leave, caravaners included, when they meet splash and dash MH’s on narrow approaches. I know those probably wouldn’t be included in the scheme. However, folk get confused by the one o’clock rule, how can they be expected to know where and when they can splash and dash.😉

Not spurious at all CY, I've seen two Mhs queuing, but at least they are both staying on site. I don't mind if someone is in front of me filling their aquaroll or in the showers, we're all on site, all paying the same amount, first come first served, but adding some more passing through is just going to inconvenience those staying on site in addition to driving through the site in the first place, adding extra unnecessary traffic..

Those staying on site paying perhaps 10 times the splash and dash rate might feel more entitled, I think that's fair personally.

You say you won't use club sites, even if the EHU is taken off, so you won't be contributing to their upkeep to the same extent as someone who is paying to stay, yet you expect to use a not small part of the site and possibly cause problems to those paying full price? Is that fair? Does your membership fee alone justify that in your mind? I wonder how much the membership fee gets allocated to sites compared to funds from site fees?

But CY the thing I have slight trouble understanding is why you keep posting (daily) about wanting this service on a club site. Why does it have to be a club site for you? Even to the extent of looking at google street view to find possible places like you did at Seacroft, are they that good that you have to have a club site?

Why not use the CCC as there must be a CCC site on your route or near to a club site? or Or a basic CL low price?

If you have used FM ,a busy weekend site, and seen the queue to use the( at this time) poor West side motor caravan service point on a summer Sunday (less families use West side)the most we have seen was seven in the queue as the one at the front trays to get in position to empty ,

CY wrote:

"The suggestion of a visiting "splash & dash" creating a queue is spurious."

I accept that a queue may be formed behind a MH that has stayed on site - indeed in a recent post on another thread I made mention of the fact that I never use MSPs for the very reason that I am too impatient to wait in a queue - there always seems to be one at the time when one might want to use it, namely on arrival or departure. I find it much easier, and more convenient, to use my Wastemaster or a serviced pitch. That way I am in control. 

But I think you have intentionally misinterpreted SteveL's point (the post to which you were responding).

If you widen the customer base (whether they pay or not), it is inevitable that the probability of a queue, and/or a longer queue, is greater. That, surely, is irrefutable. It is plain that that is what SteveL meant and he is absolutely right. 

Moreover I agree with SteveL's original point. Anywhere that offers overnight camping should be required to offer basic facilities. It seems surprising to me that it is not already the case - most things of that kind are a matter of regulation.    

I doubt very much that the club would lose revenue from those who choose not to use sites😉 Club or otherwise as they'll be overnighting elsewhere.

On the contrary, the club 'might' make a little revenue from those very same folk who aren't interested (at all) in staying on sites but might wish to pay a small fee to dump their waste.

you're probably trying to mix oil and water...the 'club' and 'folk who don't do sites'  are probably as far apart in Camping/touring ethos as can be...hence the Twain shall never (or extremely rarely) meet😉