trying to book restaurant

Juliette, yes we considered doing table of four and one of three. BUT....felt that as to have us all on one table would not have breached any guidelines, did not feel inclined to continue to go there. As Merystreep has said, 'Their Loss'. Just wish these places would know their own guidelines, and not just think they know them.

Franburn
We had the same problem. My Son in law was trying to make the booking and he's a walking encyclopaedia on the rules so he pointed out the rules. They wouldn't have it. Their loss.

There was a family group of ten in the restaurant we visited on Wednesday night. A table for six and one for four.
Although they weren’t all on the same table Grandpa celebrated his eightieth birthday with nearly all his family together.
Might be an idea for you Franbern, two tables of four.

I checked the government guidelines to restaurants. It does NOT have any limits for numbers per table. Provided there is space. The restaurant that refused us most definitely has plenty of indoor space. Think they have skim read the guidelines and seen the SIX which is referring to outdoor activitIes. But, even that is strange, because further down it states this as a maximum of 30. It really is all very confusing.

So, that restaurant does not get our custom, Pity, as they have just announced the closure of several of their branches - next restaurant we enquired at stated they had a rule of EIGHT people per table - but that was more due to their own limited indoor space, than anything else.

GOVERNMENT GUIDELINES TO RESTAURANTS -

Indoor gatherings should only be occurring in groups of up to 2 households (including support bubbles) while outdoor gatherings should only be occurring in groups of up to 2 households (or support bubbles), or a group of at most 6 people from any number of households. It is against the law to gather in groups of more than 30 people in private homes (including gardens and other outdoor spaces).

The same here at our favourite restaurant max 6 people only.

As with any rule involving numbers there has to be a cut off point that participants stick to. If the number was seven, there would be those who said why not eight. I would imagine that the number was decided upon as an average where most restaurants could seat people safely under new guidelines. It’s fairly unlikely that any restaurant would want to buck the system so soon after reopening.
There have always been problems over cut off numbers. Years ago I remember twins who were born either side of midnight which meant they were technically in different
‘school years’, when it was announced that an exception would be made it caused an outcry from other parents of late August born children. It was ever thus.

I am rather bewildered at this strange rule. One household, seven people in a restaurant are a danger to themselves and everyone else. But, if we left one person at home, then we would not be a danger!!! Could someone explain the reasoning behind this??

Yes. Our local one won't take groups of more than five.

We have loads of birthdays in June/July and as we can’t go to a restaurant we’re having a BBQ in my garden. Not ideal but with everyone contributing it should fun. I think it will be next year before things are anywhere near Normal.

Yes, I have. And even if there aren't many of you, no more than two households can be on a table.
We would normally go out for a meal with our son who lives with us, our other son who lives alone and my Dad who lives alone: five of us, but three households.
Dad's been here as in "joined our bubble," but I don't know if a restaurant would count that and call us two households.
We just ordered a nice takeaway for our two birthdays in May and June!

Yes, that's how I understand things - max 6 people from no more than 2 households.