Hi everyone,does anyone know of some caravan storage in/around the bristol area?Our van is currently stored near weston-super-mare,its safe,secure,but at 320 pounds per year for a twin axle,we feel its a bit steep,what do you think?
caravan storage
- Thread starter stuart12
- Start date
- Mar 14, 2005
- 18,639
- 3,915
- 50,935
Hello Gill and Stuart,
I am intrigued by the statement that "its safe and secure".
May I ask if the terms and conditions actually guarantee that statement?, I bet they don't. I am pretty certain that if your caravan gets damaged or is stolen from the site, the site tries absolves themselves of all responsibility by stating that storage is at owners risk.
Surely if their security is breached and an unauthorised persons get into their compound and do damage or steals something, why should you pay for their failure?
Ask your storage site why they they claim their site is secure, but do not cover your property whilst in their care under their insurance?
Is this money for nothing?
I am intrigued by the statement that "its safe and secure".
May I ask if the terms and conditions actually guarantee that statement?, I bet they don't. I am pretty certain that if your caravan gets damaged or is stolen from the site, the site tries absolves themselves of all responsibility by stating that storage is at owners risk.
Surely if their security is breached and an unauthorised persons get into their compound and do damage or steals something, why should you pay for their failure?
Ask your storage site why they they claim their site is secure, but do not cover your property whilst in their care under their insurance?
Is this money for nothing?
I think John L is being a bit pedantic in his explanation. It is quite normal for insurance cover for property stored on any commercial premises to be the responsibility of the owner. Just look at the signs in any carpark.
A secure storage area means that it has a primary secure barrier, usually a high wire fence and is watched either by cameras or by personnel, although obviously personnel are not normally on duty at nights. It cannot guarantee against breakins, as neither can a bank guarantee against robbery. However, in the general run of things a caravan is far more likely to be stolen from a driveway than a secure storage area, and this is reflected in most insurance Companies giving a discount for using such premises.
I use one for a number of reasons, not just the security factor.
I cannot store at my home due to Covenants and if I did it would clutter up the premises. I prefer it to be safe and sound (within reason) along with other vans out of the way. The site I use has 350 vans and motorhomes of values ranging from ultra low to extremely expensive so the odds of my van being the particular one picked is pretty low. People are always going in and out to see their vans (and have to sign in and out) so someone is usually about. To get through the gates and fences is not a quick job either so it would need to be well planned. At the end of the day my insurance is happy with what I do, and so feel satisfied. The cost is about
A secure storage area means that it has a primary secure barrier, usually a high wire fence and is watched either by cameras or by personnel, although obviously personnel are not normally on duty at nights. It cannot guarantee against breakins, as neither can a bank guarantee against robbery. However, in the general run of things a caravan is far more likely to be stolen from a driveway than a secure storage area, and this is reflected in most insurance Companies giving a discount for using such premises.
I use one for a number of reasons, not just the security factor.
I cannot store at my home due to Covenants and if I did it would clutter up the premises. I prefer it to be safe and sound (within reason) along with other vans out of the way. The site I use has 350 vans and motorhomes of values ranging from ultra low to extremely expensive so the odds of my van being the particular one picked is pretty low. People are always going in and out to see their vans (and have to sign in and out) so someone is usually about. To get through the gates and fences is not a quick job either so it would need to be well planned. At the end of the day my insurance is happy with what I do, and so feel satisfied. The cost is about
- Mar 14, 2005
- 18,639
- 3,915
- 50,935
Yes SL I am being pedantic but for a reason.
You mention the car park signs. Many of those signs have no legal strength following a court ruling some years ago. A customer's claim for loss whist his car was in a car park was upheld, but the detailed reason I believe was to do with the car parks access control by barriers. You may note that most car parks do not have barriers but are pay and display.
Many caravanners are being told by their insurers to use storage sites under the CaSSOA banner. These sites all claim to offer a secure place to store a caravan, and access to the sites is controlled by gates and other security measures. Not only do these sites use the word security they charge their customers a premium service rate. Some insurers will reduce premiums on the pretext that you are using a secure site, but the reduction does not offset the additional costs of using the sites.
If these sites have their way, then if you suffer any sort of loss whilst the caravan is behind their 'secure' gates and fencing, they can wash their hands of any responsibility, but why should they be allowed to do this?
Consider:- The sites are private property and they have access control, and that means the site owner decides who can be allowed in. This also means that the site owner has a responsibility to prevent unauthorised persons gaining access.
If an unauthorised person does gain access, then the site owner has failed to provide the service they are contracted to do.
Also if only authorised persons can be admitted, then the site owner has deemed such persons to be a fit and proper people to have access. As the site owner has control, all persons admitted are under the direction of the site owner, just as if they are employed, and as with any employed person the actions of the employee are the responsibility of the employer or in this case the site owner.
Therefore if any authorised person damages or removes property , the site owner is responsible. It is then up to the site owner to seek redress against the offender.
Banks take responsibility for your money left with them, Carriers accept responsibility for parcels they transport. Garages have to accept responsibility for customers cars left with them for service or repairs, Why should Caravan storage yards be different.
Clearly they should accept the same risks that other storage and carriage businesses have to cover.
You mention the car park signs. Many of those signs have no legal strength following a court ruling some years ago. A customer's claim for loss whist his car was in a car park was upheld, but the detailed reason I believe was to do with the car parks access control by barriers. You may note that most car parks do not have barriers but are pay and display.
Many caravanners are being told by their insurers to use storage sites under the CaSSOA banner. These sites all claim to offer a secure place to store a caravan, and access to the sites is controlled by gates and other security measures. Not only do these sites use the word security they charge their customers a premium service rate. Some insurers will reduce premiums on the pretext that you are using a secure site, but the reduction does not offset the additional costs of using the sites.
If these sites have their way, then if you suffer any sort of loss whilst the caravan is behind their 'secure' gates and fencing, they can wash their hands of any responsibility, but why should they be allowed to do this?
Consider:- The sites are private property and they have access control, and that means the site owner decides who can be allowed in. This also means that the site owner has a responsibility to prevent unauthorised persons gaining access.
If an unauthorised person does gain access, then the site owner has failed to provide the service they are contracted to do.
Also if only authorised persons can be admitted, then the site owner has deemed such persons to be a fit and proper people to have access. As the site owner has control, all persons admitted are under the direction of the site owner, just as if they are employed, and as with any employed person the actions of the employee are the responsibility of the employer or in this case the site owner.
Therefore if any authorised person damages or removes property , the site owner is responsible. It is then up to the site owner to seek redress against the offender.
Banks take responsibility for your money left with them, Carriers accept responsibility for parcels they transport. Garages have to accept responsibility for customers cars left with them for service or repairs, Why should Caravan storage yards be different.
Clearly they should accept the same risks that other storage and carriage businesses have to cover.
Sorry John L, but I still feel you are arguing on thin ice.
If the Law has changed as you state then I see no reason why every supermarket car park has not removed all their 'no responsibility' signs. You also mention persons accessing such a storage site have been 'approved' by the owners. Come on, even you I feel has to recognise that that is neither realistic, nor the case. If for instance damage was caused by another owner to your van, would you sue that owner, or the site owner. I suspect a Court would uphold the first, not the 2nd.
Garages will take responsibilty for vehicles that have been left with them for repairs, as they are going to move the vehicle to do so, but will only do so if the vehicle is roadworthy and legal. If for instance your car collapsed on the jack because of rust you may have difficulty getting a successful claim.
Banks themselves do not re-imburse you for loss, they get their insurers to do so, and those costs are reflected in what they charge you for keeping valuables with them.
If we follow your argument then every campsite would be responsible for every incident as they have accepted payment for 'parking/storing' the van on their land. If that were the case there would be no campsites or storage faciltiy of any type left in business, and if they were, then the costs would be extremely high.
It is the responsibility of every caravan or motorhome, or even car owner to decide where he/she wishes to leave their vehicle and has to accept the conditions that may be applied by a 3rd Party. It is a big world out there and we all have be reponsible adults. Plus as the caravan etc is insured anyway for 365 days per year, what difference would it make? You cannot have 2 insurances on the same item.
Enjoying the discussion and have a Happy New Year when it comes.
If the Law has changed as you state then I see no reason why every supermarket car park has not removed all their 'no responsibility' signs. You also mention persons accessing such a storage site have been 'approved' by the owners. Come on, even you I feel has to recognise that that is neither realistic, nor the case. If for instance damage was caused by another owner to your van, would you sue that owner, or the site owner. I suspect a Court would uphold the first, not the 2nd.
Garages will take responsibilty for vehicles that have been left with them for repairs, as they are going to move the vehicle to do so, but will only do so if the vehicle is roadworthy and legal. If for instance your car collapsed on the jack because of rust you may have difficulty getting a successful claim.
Banks themselves do not re-imburse you for loss, they get their insurers to do so, and those costs are reflected in what they charge you for keeping valuables with them.
If we follow your argument then every campsite would be responsible for every incident as they have accepted payment for 'parking/storing' the van on their land. If that were the case there would be no campsites or storage faciltiy of any type left in business, and if they were, then the costs would be extremely high.
It is the responsibility of every caravan or motorhome, or even car owner to decide where he/she wishes to leave their vehicle and has to accept the conditions that may be applied by a 3rd Party. It is a big world out there and we all have be reponsible adults. Plus as the caravan etc is insured anyway for 365 days per year, what difference would it make? You cannot have 2 insurances on the same item.
Enjoying the discussion and have a Happy New Year when it comes.
- Mar 14, 2005
- 18,639
- 3,915
- 50,935
Hi SL,
I hope I don't spoil your hogmanay (sorry if its wrong my spell check doesn't recognise it).
I am on a crusade! Because I feel for those who have been duped into paying extra where a storage site says or implies they offer a secure compound.
My argument is quite specific and is applicable to storage sites only, not camp sites, or repair workshops etc.
Customers may choose or are almost forced to use these sites by insurance companies, because they are supposed to offer a 'secure storage facility'. Yet when such a site fails to prevent loss or damage within its compound, why should the customer have to bear the cost of their own hiked insurance premiums through no fault of their own, but because the site failed in its contracted duty.
The telling argument we have used is the example of the Bank. If you put your money into a UK bank, and the bank losses it, the bank (or their insurers) covers the value of the loss. The same applies to valuables, and yes they must cover the cost of the insurance through their charges.
If the bank looses valuable items, the customer does not have to claim from their own insurance, they claim from the bank.
That is exactly the same principal that should be applied to a 'secure' caravan storage sites.
If a service provider fails to provide the service the are contracted to provide, that is breach of contract. If the site does not provide a secure environment, they should not imply it in their product description.
This needs a test case to prove the point. Until then it may only be conjecture, but it is not without merit.
I hope I don't spoil your hogmanay (sorry if its wrong my spell check doesn't recognise it).
I am on a crusade! Because I feel for those who have been duped into paying extra where a storage site says or implies they offer a secure compound.
My argument is quite specific and is applicable to storage sites only, not camp sites, or repair workshops etc.
Customers may choose or are almost forced to use these sites by insurance companies, because they are supposed to offer a 'secure storage facility'. Yet when such a site fails to prevent loss or damage within its compound, why should the customer have to bear the cost of their own hiked insurance premiums through no fault of their own, but because the site failed in its contracted duty.
The telling argument we have used is the example of the Bank. If you put your money into a UK bank, and the bank losses it, the bank (or their insurers) covers the value of the loss. The same applies to valuables, and yes they must cover the cost of the insurance through their charges.
If the bank looses valuable items, the customer does not have to claim from their own insurance, they claim from the bank.
That is exactly the same principal that should be applied to a 'secure' caravan storage sites.
If a service provider fails to provide the service the are contracted to provide, that is breach of contract. If the site does not provide a secure environment, they should not imply it in their product description.
This needs a test case to prove the point. Until then it may only be conjecture, but it is not without merit.
John L,Iwas'nt duped or told that where I store our caravan is safe and secure,that is my opinion as I have seen many storage sites that I would not store our van on.If I dont store our van on a storage site,where do you suggest we store it?Its too big for our drive.I originally posted to find an alternative site that may be nearer to home and possibly cheaper. stuart1
John,
Enjoy your 'crusade'. However, I ssupect there could be others where your chances of success could be significantly enhanced.
As Stuart has mentioned most people who use storage sites are not forced to do so, they do so out of choice. I for one do not really like having a dirty great big caravan or motorhome filling my drive (if I actually had one)and prefer to keep it away from the house. I also suspect the majority of Insurance Companies will give you a lot of data showing that the majority of thefts take place from driveways, probably because the caravan is much more accessible. However, the Insurance Company does not 'drive' you to using a storage site, merely gives you a financial bonus if you decide to do so. They will give you cover whatever you decide to do.
As I mentioned before, the site I use has 350 assorted caravans, boats and motorhomes in it and is usually full for the winter season. I doubt they are all restricted like me to lack of space at home, so many are using personal choice. As for 'security' as the owner advised me when I raised possible theft with him, was that the surrounding fields had horses on them that were far more valuable than my van and would likely be the 1st target. Plus as he was part of the 'local Mafia' I am sure any Ned that tried it on, would probably lose a kneecap or something pretty quick. Needless to say in all the years I have used it, nothing has happened apart from slight damage to a van from trees that blew branches off in a gale. That is not to say it never will, merely the probability is low.
By the way, Hogmanay was fine but quiet as we did not brave the cold elements for Princes Street.
Enjoy your 'crusade'. However, I ssupect there could be others where your chances of success could be significantly enhanced.
As Stuart has mentioned most people who use storage sites are not forced to do so, they do so out of choice. I for one do not really like having a dirty great big caravan or motorhome filling my drive (if I actually had one)and prefer to keep it away from the house. I also suspect the majority of Insurance Companies will give you a lot of data showing that the majority of thefts take place from driveways, probably because the caravan is much more accessible. However, the Insurance Company does not 'drive' you to using a storage site, merely gives you a financial bonus if you decide to do so. They will give you cover whatever you decide to do.
As I mentioned before, the site I use has 350 assorted caravans, boats and motorhomes in it and is usually full for the winter season. I doubt they are all restricted like me to lack of space at home, so many are using personal choice. As for 'security' as the owner advised me when I raised possible theft with him, was that the surrounding fields had horses on them that were far more valuable than my van and would likely be the 1st target. Plus as he was part of the 'local Mafia' I am sure any Ned that tried it on, would probably lose a kneecap or something pretty quick. Needless to say in all the years I have used it, nothing has happened apart from slight damage to a van from trees that blew branches off in a gale. That is not to say it never will, merely the probability is low.
By the way, Hogmanay was fine but quiet as we did not brave the cold elements for Princes Street.
Facebook
Twitter