Have you been turned away ! Not nice (1 Viewer)

[jumartoo]

What about the scenario (far-fetched possibly) about a couple who have been loyal customers of a campsite for many years and then when one of them dies, the surviver is then banned from using the same place they have been welcomed to for many years and where the single person would feel comfortable on their own? How would you feel in these circumstances?

If any business wants to enforce rules then they should be up-front about it in their advertising and not hide it in terms and conditions which, to be honest, very few of us read.

 

[Poohbear]

After reading this thread I still have no idea why this site has this particular rule at all. The pedophile angle doesn't make any sense because a single person is no more likely to be a pedophile than one of a couple or a one of a group of people staying there. Has anyone actually asked them why they have the rule or do they not actually know why? Someone here seems to have assumed the pedophile thing and I think that is possibly a red herring and nothing at all to do with the real reason for the rule.

 

[jumartoo]

After reading this thread I still have no idea why this site has this particular rule at all. The pedophile angle doesn't make any sense because a single person is no more likely to be a pedophile than one of a couple or a one of a group of people staying there. Has anyone actually asked them why they have the rule or do they not actually know why? Someone here seems to have assumed the pedophile thing and I think that is possibly a red herring and nothing at all to do with the real reason for the rule.

I've wondered myself about this.

If this is the reason for their policy it seems ridiculous. What are the percentages of paedophiles in the population? And .. out of these how many are motorhomers or caravanners? .. and how many choose this particular site?

I would think the users of the pool and other facilities would be the ones to be monitored, if any!

^{_{Subscribers  do not see these advertisements}}

 

[sdc77]

It's not that uncommon. I believe it's because it deters single males turning up and being disruptive.
Causes me no issues. In that position I would go somewhere else.

 

[MattR]

Just for info I had to have a CRB (at the request of the church) check to be Godfather to my mates Daughter.

Duty of care from the side of the church.

Sorry but that sounds like a pile of bull. The church shouldn't be doing that. If a parent asks someone to be a godparent, it is because they trust them. A CRB shows that someone hasn't been caught - it doesn't say that they are a decent person.

 

[bartiny]

Sorry but that sounds like a pile of bull.

Do you want to put money on it?

^{_{Subscribers  do not see these advertisements}}

 

[jumartoo]

I'm glad we spend a large proportion of our time in Spain where this sort of suspicion has only just started to encroach.

Martin went to a local school, on the invite of the Headteacher and Deputy, to speak English to the youngest classes. He was admitted on their recommendation.

We also spend a lot of time training young children in forests!!!! on how to orienteer. So far we haven't had to prove we are not doing this for ulterior motives!

 

[MattR]

Do you want to put money on it?

No. I believe that it happened - I just think that it is a cr*p thing to do.

 

[Deleted member 29692]

Just for info I had to have a CRB (at the request of the church) check to be Godfather to my mates Daughter.

Duty of care from the side of the church.

Sorry but that sounds like a pile of bull. The church shouldn't be doing that. If a parent asks someone to be a godparent, it is because they trust them. A CRB shows that someone hasn't been caught - it doesn't say that they are a decent person.

I would go for pile of bull as well.

CRB/DBS checks don't work like that. Nobody is allowed to request that you get one done. If they wish to see one they have to complete the whole process themselves. Once they have it they are not allowed to disclose the results to anyone.

If by some chance it isn't a pile of bull and you did get one done and then passed it on to anyone else both you (by passing the data on) and the church (by asking you to) have acted illegally.

^{_{Subscribers  do not see these advertisements}}

 

[big map]

I don't think the church can ask for DBS for someone to be a godfather.
https://www.gov.uk/disclosure-barring-service-check/overview

Nick beat me to it. We can apply as an employer working with a vulnerable client group

 

[Deleted member 29692]

Well spotted Andrea. Didn't think of that

 

[frogijock]

Why do Searles accept single if they are part of a rally but not if they are travelling on their own?

^{_{Subscribers  do not see these advertisements}}

 

[Charlie]

Firstly I would like to congratulate the OP of this thread and her friend for finding the courage to continue motor homing after life events of such incredible magnitude. I'm not sure I would have the courage to continue alone .

There are some bloody silly rules and regulations on the sites we visit . I'm not going to go into them or why they are right or wrong other than to say this kind of blind discrimination has no place in the world we live in today.

I actually have no idea where this site is but one thing is for sure we will never visit it that's for sure.

All I can add is to the OP and her friend just carry on as best you can. Don't let the mindless stupid actions of a very small minority put you off..

And all the very best !

 

[Briarose]

I don't want to destroy them I want them to allow single people of either sex to"enjoy" the facilities.

And that is all we want to do...and asking why it is a rule. Which at the moment they don't seem to be clear on. Why assume we want to destroy them ? We just want a reason, nothing more and nothing less.

 

[Briarose]

Why do Searles accept single if they are part of a rally but not if they are travelling on their own?

And we can't understand that either.

^{_{Subscribers  do not see these advertisements}}

 

[Briarose]

Firstly I would like to congratulate the OP of this thread and her friend for finding the courage to continue motor homing after life events of such incredible magnitude. I'm not sure I would have the courage to continue alone .

There are some bloody silly rules and regulations on the sites we visit . I'm not going to go into them or why they are right or wrong other than to say this kind of blind discrimination has no place in the world we live in today.

I actually have no idea where this site is but one thing is for sure we will never visit it that's for sure.

All I can add is to the OP and her friend just carry on as best you can. Don't let the mindless stupid actions of a very small minority put you off..

And all the very best !

Thankyou. I also felt for the lady that had she not seen my post on the FB page would in fact have arrived on the 22/12 for her Xmas break ( she is single) and has now had it confirmed yesterday on the phone that she would indeed have been turned away.

 

[bartiny]

I would go for pile of bull as well.

CRB/DBS checks don't work like that. Nobody is allowed to request that you get one done. If they wish to see one they have to complete the whole process themselves. Once they have it they are not allowed to disclose the results to anyone.

If by some chance it isn't a pile of bull and you did get one done and then passed it on to anyone else both you (by passing the data on) and the church (by asking you to) have acted illegally.

I did not pass anything on, I was asked to go through the check, I never saw any result of said check.

 

[Briarose]

After reading this thread I still have no idea why this site has this particular rule at all. The pedophile angle doesn't make any sense because a single person is no more likely to be a pedophile than one of a couple or a one of a group of people staying there. Has anyone actually asked them why they have the rule or do they not actually know why? Someone here seems to have assumed the pedophile thing and I think that is possibly a red herring and nothing at all to do with the real reason for the rule.

At the moment on being asked....no one seems to know. Other than its a management thing. Maybe on their part somewhere money comes into it...who knows. The pitch is the same price ! It's a reply to one email that brings about some of the comments.

^{_{Subscribers  do not see these advertisements}}

 

[Briarose]

I have to agree with @MinxyGirl and others. It does seem a silly rule but it's not that unusual. Its not discrimination and there are plenty of sites that you could go to instead. I'd have just moved on (or checked in advance). I'd be livid about the cheque though.
Also I'm sure they never said a single person was a threat. .. in any way. Just that they're not allowed.

Read the last lines of one of the recieved replies by email.

 

[jonandshell]

The problem is that Seales is the only place to stay in Hunstanton.
A singles ban from them is as good as a singles ban for the whole town.
They need a kick up the backside. Seales is an over priced monopoly in Hunstanton that needs cutting down to size.

 

[Deleted member 29692]

I did not pass anything on, I was asked to go through the check, I never saw any result of said check.

Gone past that now. We've already established that it didn't happen because the circumstances you describe are not ones where a check would be permitted. The regulations governing these checks are strict. They can only be requested by certain people for certain things. Not by anyone, for only old reason. Having dealt with several of the licensed agencies that carry out the actual checking I can assure you that a check would not have been carried out unless the church lied about the reason for requesting it.

If you click Andrea's link you will find in the second paragraph another link with eligibility guidelines

^{_{Subscribers  do not see these advertisements}}

 

[bartiny]

I just think that it is a cr*p thing to do.

I must admit thinking about it now, it would have been very hard to refuse without causing suspicion, I never gave it a second thought at the time.

 

[bartiny]

Gone past that now. We've already established that it didn't happen because the circumstances you describe are not ones where a check would be permitted.

I do not like being called a liar, so I will do further checks as to why I was asked to submit to one and get back to you.

 

[Poohbear]

It's not that uncommon. I believe it's because it deters single males turning up and being disruptive.
Causes me no issues. In that position I would go somewhere else.

Why would anyone think that a single male would be disruptive? Are single people more disruptive than couples? No. Are males more disruptive than females? No. Completely illogical

^{_{Subscribers  do not see these advertisements}}

 

[Deleted member 29692]

I do not like being called a liar, so I will do further checks as to why I was asked to submit to one and get back to you.

I didn't call you a liar. Read the rest of the post. You may well have filled a form in if the person who asked you to didn't know what they were doing but the reason you describe is not one that would be eligible for a check so either it wasn't carried out or the person submitting the request lied about the reason.

 

[bartiny]

I didn't call you a liar. Read the rest of the post. You may well have filled a form in if the person who asked you to didn't know what they were doing but the reason you describe is not one that would be eligible for a check so either it wasn't carried out or the person submitting the request lied about the reason.

Its ok you have got me wondering now, I need to know.

 

[Poohbear]

I did not pass anything on, I was asked to go through the check, I never saw any result of said check.

That can't be true. The results of the DBS are sent to both the person who applies for it and the subject of the check. I currently have three for different organisations and I have copies of them all.

^{_{Subscribers  do not see these advertisements}}

 

[bartiny]

That can't be true. The results of the DBS are sent to both the person who applies for it and the subject of the check. I currently have three for different organisations and I have copies of them all.

Hell why am I defending myself, anyway, it was not a DBS it was (i am told) a CRB check, all I did was gave my details and have NOT seen any result.

Although I am her Godfather.

 

[big map]

And that is all we want to do...and asking why it is a rule. Which at the moment they don't seem to be clear on. Why assume we want to destroy them ? We just want a reason, nothing more and nothing less.

I didn't assume you wanted to destroy them. I was accused of trying to destroy them by a poster.

 

[big map]

Hell why am I defending myself, anyway, it was not a DBS it was (i am told) a CRB check, all I did was gave my details and have NOT seen any result.

Although I am her Godfather.

DBS is the new name for CRB same rules apply and you should have received an original through the post and then the organisation applying should have received their copy a day or two later, again through the post. The system is now a lot faster but you do still receive your DBS through the post although the applying organisation will receive their copy by email. You would have had to hand over ID eg Passport, driving licence, something less than three months old with your address on etc., These would have to be verified by an authorised person. Hope this helps. Further info here

^{_{Subscribers  do not see these advertisements}}