โDec-23-2017 02:14 PM
โJan-05-2018 01:46 AM
โJan-04-2018 05:56 PM
โDec-28-2017 04:55 PM
doxiemom11 wrote:
In the parks I have worked at( several in the past 7 years) the people already on the site would be told they are welcome to stay, but they must move to another available site because the one they are on is already reserved for the month of March and not available. They are not handling this in the proper manner and I would call and politely ask why the above is not how it is being handled. It is possible there was a new employee involved who did not know the proper way this should be handled.
โDec-26-2017 06:59 AM
โDec-26-2017 06:25 AM
GordonThree wrote:
oh jeeze, how many pages are we going to debate this sillyness. Haven't received any updates from the OP about his talks with the park, just defensive responses to sound and logical advice. There have been no updates because it was Christmas and we were very busy. I was hoping for some sound legal advice from someone who had experienced this sort of thing. We have been RVing since 1987 and have never ran into a situation like this. We have a recipe with no fine print that says we paid in full for site # __ for the month of March. We will not ask everyone to move with us but know that my family member would move because of this. Here is the rub. With 500,000 new RV's hitting the road every year and no mew parks being built, things are going to get ugly. Between poor repair facilities and reservation problems like this, our hobby of snowbirding is starting to lose its appeal. I guess it is time to seriously look at boon docking. I know these people who run these parks can do anything they want but to be treated in this manner after being a loyal customer for so long leaves a bad taste in my mouth.
Edit: fix typo, thanks 2oldman ๐
โDec-24-2017 01:30 PM
โDec-24-2017 01:24 PM
โDec-24-2017 01:13 PM
โDec-24-2017 11:17 AM
โDec-24-2017 08:58 AM
โDec-24-2017 06:28 AM
โDec-24-2017 06:08 AM
azdryheat wrote:So far it appears this would be correct. It's not the easy thing, it's the right thing, as mentioned previously. The office is trying to do the easy thing.
A reservation is a reservation. The people already occupying the spot need to move..
โDec-24-2017 06:05 AM
Horsedoc wrote:
Not all damages are monetary as one responder seems to imply, and implying one is stupid is a relly good way to make friends, whether it is on a discussion board or in person. Poor taste and rude!
That said, is it worth going to the amount of trouble this will entail? Of course you are right if what you say is indeed what you have. It is a 'contract' even it lacks all the leagal jargon associated with a formal contract. Speak with the owner, explain your position and ask if the young woman you spoke with failed to notice your existing reservation.
If this approach does not wprk then it looks like you move or take legal action - which will likely result in your winning in the short but losing in the long terms.
โDec-24-2017 05:33 AM