Solo Campers NOT Allowed

We campers go on holiday to relax and enjoy ourselves. Perhaps with their obsession with their rule Bible this company has lost sight of the fact that "The Customer is always right" and is the one who has their wage packet in his or her pocket. I have stayed as a single in establishments across the globe and never experienced this stupidity. I am afraid that I would have told them to push it where the sun never shines and then settled down to plot my revenge.
 
I enjoyed that banter regarding the apostrophe but where does it leave us regarding the solo camper?

Why would a solo camper be excluded?
Maybe for the same reason people are banned taking photographs at school plays or swimming galas even though there is no law against it. They state they are " a family site for families ". I don't know why.
As I'm never likely to visit such a site maybe someone who does should ask them. The answer should be interesting.
 
Maybe for the same reason people are banned taking photographs at school plays or swimming galas even though there is no law against it. They state they are " a family site for families ". I don't know why.
As I'm never likely to visit such a site maybe someone who does should ask them. The answer should be interesting.
Oh heavens, where are we going... I fully understand concerns about school play areas and swimming pools. However, I think it's slightly over regulated. I can see why camera's aren't allowed at swimming pools etc (although at my local gym it's the mother's who break the rule every day with camera's next to the pool...)
I simply do not see the connection with me on a campsite with my two dogs minding my own business (which is my family)
I am single. Not my choice. (HE cheated). I am not interested in someone else's kids. Why punish me.????
 
I agree, a group from this forum would be formifable indeed. Ring Channel 4 to arrange for coverage and let the fun begin. Only problem: is the location...
 
I can think of a few reasons why a site owner may stipulate no singles.

It's of no consequence to me. A lot of sites have quirky rules, fair enough, that's their prerogative as it is also my prerogative not to visit certain sites for reasons that others may consider quirky.

The reason that I have a Cali is to give me the broadest possible versatility as to where I go and where I stay. The owners of Searles may possibly be terribly upset when I say that I find Hunstanton to be about as agreeable as piles and their resort to be less welcoming than Chernobyl but then that's my view and if they suddenly made singles welcome with open arms and offered a free night's stay I will still head somewhere else.
 
Thank you for the explanation, very informative, but the company involved have just reviewed their Terms and Conditions so I presume they have Legal Advice contrary to your explanation and reasoning.

You are assuming they had any legal advice... we have no evidence they did?
 
You are assuming they had any legal advice... we have no evidence they did?
Nor do I have any evidence to the contrary. Seeing as they are supposed to have reviewed their Terms & Conditions after the complaint and confirmed that to the BBC and local journalists and they are part of the Hoseasons Leisure Group then I presume that Hoseasons would approve them. I could be wrong.
 
The Searles family got awarded Norfolk in 1066, don't know who the original Saxon Lorde was
 

Similar threads

Back
Top