South Lakeland Parks (SLP) Forum

The picture



on the advert at

http://www.southlakelandparks.co.uk/kir ... opment.asp

takes a few liberties with reality doesn't it.

First of all it looks like there's about 40 yards between the top row and the next one, whereas there's about 20 feet in reality.

And then there's a non existent road where the bases for phase 2 have been placed. That would make quite a difference to your view if you were on the bottom row shown.

Is my artists impression more accurate I wonder?

See what you mean Greywolf. Do you think it will stop them selling?

are they selling them for (seems like they have sold quite a few)

Fallbarrow

These impressions never tell the truth. If there are as many sold as the drawing suggests i will eat my hat.

It didn't stop them selling because AFAIK people only found out about the REAL layout once the concrete bases were down

Now that the bases are down ,people might be less keen to part with £150k when they realise that they will be able to shake hands with their neighbours over the balcony.

As long as he maintains a legal distance within the lodges and does'nt overdo the numbers on the site licence he can put them where he wants!

.

Windermere wrote:

As long as he maintains a legal distance within the lodges and does'nt overdo the numbers on the site licence he can put them where he wants!

Questionable that - Presumably it is still an offence to willfully mislead customers with pictures that don't bear any real relationship to the reality. Especially if you have already laid the bases, so you can't even claim ignorance as an excuse.

OK they are probably not much worse than the average property developer's pictures, but I'd be a bit p***ed off if I had bought a lodge on the expectation of having space around me and then have them do that to me - especially at those prices.

Just as pi***ed off as I am that they keep putting the pitch fees up more than inflation and reducing the levels of service. They never told me about that when I was buying my lodge, not to mention ripping me off over rates.

Fallbarrow

On the up side SLP appear to be learning something. In the Morphet days they didn't bother with the following

- concrete bases
- structured piping and cabling
- road layouts

Furthermore, they had the lads on site doing all the infrastructure work and 'saving' money by not using outside contractors. A massive false economy for Morphet beacuse they had to discount lodges on Fell Side and park maintenance became a nightmare ....still don't belive the park manager has a full drawing containing all the stoptaps, man holes etc

At least Kirkstone has a scheme although I take the point that the lodges in front will adversely impact the view etc of lodges behind

Not clear to me why they built first on the old camp field for Kirkstone ....will the caravan and campers walk pas the lodges to rach the shower room etc ??????

You have to recognise that most of the time they are 'winging it' ..geting by which is hardly want you expect for a high quality park with site fees in excess of £3700 p.a.

lakeland wrote:You have to recognise that most of the time they are 'winging it' ..geting by which is hardly want you expect for a high quality park with site fees in excess of £3700 p.a.

I just wonder if we get a better quality of winging as we pay £5,800 in site fees.

FB

.

Windermere wrote:no the "winging" is charged according to what market forces will bear. You have a lake next to your lodge so you pay more for the winging than we do

Just leave your water turned on during the current cold weather and you too could have a lake, but inside your lodge.

FB

.

And of course they could now charge you £5,800 for being "on" the lake, if not more

FB