Adults Only CLs Annoyance..

The user and all related content has been Deleted User

Folks

Can we stick to the general topic of AO sites please?

This is not a discussion about dogs.

Cheers

Bugs

 

apologies, it was a joke, hence the smiley, sorry for any misunderstanding and responding to an off topic post!

Tried to get on a CL that Banned Dogs , Children and Adults .............. found out it closed last year !!!!!!!!!! :)

Not read all the post so don't know if it been pointed out before but there are only 378 AO CLs out of a total of 2343 that are open at the moment. That's about 7%, so obviously there's a huge choise on CLs that allow children.

 

Hi All, Apoligies if this has been raised before but couldn't find any previous threads on the topic.. 

Whilst carrying out my usual serch for the perfect CL in the Perfect location etc, one thing stuck me that hasn't jumped out at me before  -  The large number of CL's that seem to be "Adults Only".

It just seems that the CL lifestyle isn't pitched towards the family unit.. 

 

Just come home and playing catch up on here. I don't intend to scroll through all posts on this topic but a quick search for "Adult Only" cl's shows there are 378 in total. That's quite a small percentage to me.

 

Not read all the post so don't know if it been pointed out before but there are only 378 AO CLs out of a total of 2343 that are open at the moment. That's about 7%, so obviously there's a huge choise on CLs that allow children.

 

I get the percentage to be 16% NTH but a year or so ago it was much higher. I wonder if recent closures have included more of the AO CLs or if some have decided to allow families again.

Either way I'm pleased to see the percentage reducing and long may that trend continue

 

Usually they are AO for a reason, possibly some hazard for children and the owners find it too expensive to protect it and have no wish to be sued for not doing so.

peedee

Usually they are AO for a reason, possibly some hazard for children and the owners find it too expensive to protect it and have no wish to be sued for not doing so.

peedee

I know that's what is usually said but I suspect it's far more to do with what they consider the market demands to be.

AD was quite correct in his reponse to this issue so I won't repeat it

 

I think peedee makes a valid point. AD was talking about a number of years ago and times have changed, particularly in our view of H&S and the affect ambulance chasing law firms have on insurance premiums. I remember 30 or so years ago stopping on a farm site with my young son. To get to the facilities in the morning, you had to negotiate the cows queueing for milking in the farm yard. He thought it was great, and there was minimal risk, but I hate to think what current H&S thinking would make of it.