Active discussions

Meet the Other Phone. Child-safe in minutes.

Meet the Other Phone.
Child-safe in minutes.

Buy now

Please or to access all these features

Talk
AIBU?

Share your dilemmas and get honest opinions from other Mumsnetters.

Original poster

To think it's rude for restaurants to give you a time limit

110 replies

msrisotto · 11/03/2017 13:07

I hate it! I've just had a restaurant call to confirm my booking and remind me that they need the table back after 2 hours. If the service is prompt then that shouldn't be a problem but don't like feeling like i'm being pushed out the door and this is a naice restaurant you know?

OP posts:
NotYoda · 11/03/2017 14:36

limited

I see your Vietnamese in Soho and raise you Israeli in East London Wink

NotYoda · 11/03/2017 14:36

msrisotto

That is v poor service

Original poster
msrisotto · 11/03/2017 14:37

Different restaurant obvs, I wouldn't return after that!

OP posts:
Gwenhwyfar · 11/03/2017 14:46

" I don't enjoy sitting at the table once I have finished eating. I just want to get up and go home and relax."

It's not very nice on your friends to just get up from the table once you've finished eating. If I go to a restaurant it's to socialise, not to see someone leave the minute they've finished their food.

Livelovebehappy · 11/03/2017 14:50

I try and avoid places that do this. Went to a big family meal a couple of months ago, where the service was really slow, and we had practically just taken our last mouthful when they asked us to go into the bar area as our table was needed/booked for the next customers. Its okay to have time limits, but at least make sure your staff are up to speed with their service.

Iamastonished · 11/03/2017 14:51

I don't get up and leave friends. Usually it is just us, and since OH's stomach surgery he finds it uncomfortable to stay sitting at a table when he has finished eating.

LucklessMonster · 11/03/2017 14:53

YANBU. "It's common practice" doesn't mean it should be.

TheOnlyLivingToyInNewYork · 11/03/2017 15:06

It should be for perfectly valid reasons.

Clear to see no-one complaining has ever run a restaurant!

Sirzy · 11/03/2017 15:11

Presumably those who have issue with this would be happy to turn up at their booked time and wait an hour or so for the table as the previous people are still there?

HelenaGWells · 11/03/2017 15:23

Wouldn't bother me. Two hours is a decent amount of time to eat. If you felt that you needed longer presumably you could ask and they could decide if they wanted to agree. I'd rather a restaurant told me the policy than just kick me out. If it's upfront then I don't see an issue. It just means they can gently remind you they need the table for X time if you are dawdling. If you weren't finished due to their service I would assume they would extend the time.

If it's a busy restaurant then they would likely take bookings for 5.00, 7.00 and 9.00 for instance allowing 3 lots of diners in and out in the evening shift. I really don't see a problem with it.

If you don't like it then go somewhere else where no one goes because it's shite so they are happy for you to sit there for 4 hours.

apotheke · 11/03/2017 15:51

It's totally understandable for any booking earlier than 7:30 I think. Why anyone would want to stay at the same table for hours on end (when they could move on to a comfier pub) is beyond me.

I don't mind at all, so long as the service is good and they let us know at time or booking.

haveacupoftea · 11/03/2017 15:54

No, whats rude is having your meal then sitting around with your empty coffee cup cluttering up the place for hours afterwards.

NotYoda · 11/03/2017 15:55

I have been scarred for life by sitting through endless meals with the ILs in France. With toddlers sometimes. Urgh

2 hours is enough for me, but of course, sometimes you need longer, especially when out with friends, so you go to places who don't do timed bookings

Fucktifyno · 11/03/2017 16:00

Actually, it is giving you the option, some people like to eat and linger, which is great, as ling as there is the table room.
Others like to eat and leave. If they say they need the table back after two hours (which on a saturday night is pretty standard) you will know it's not a lingerer table, if you are a lingerer you can make the choice. That way it isn't awkward and you won't be disappointed. Nobody is forcing you to book the two hour slot.

It's communication. (Rastaurant owner)

Fucktifyno · 11/03/2017 16:01

Restaurant... fuck you ipad

Jux · 11/03/2017 16:08

If you're going to actually enioy the food and the company then dinner can take a lot over 2 hours. I'd cancel and go elsewhere.

When I'm out for dinner with friends/family, it can take 4 or 5 hours. We'll have at least 2 courses, probably 2 different wines (number of bottles dependent on how many we are), pudding, coffee, liqueurs. With conversation it'll take ages. I'm not going to pay for the privilege of gobbling down my food while not really talking to the people I'm with.

2hours! Bloody hell.

TheOnlyLivingToyInNewYork · 11/03/2017 16:12

Then thats a different kind of meal and usually a different kind of restaurant. And it costs you!

melj1213 · 11/03/2017 16:20

YABU

My friend and I regularly eat out at an upmarket restaurant and bar that is very popular and often very busy on a weekend night so you have to book in advance. Each table is allocated a 2 hour window for the table and on really busy nights they will make it clear on your booking that the table will be needed back by X time for the next booking, especially if you are in for an early sitting.

If they don't need the table they will let you sit there all night with drinks but if they need the table and you have finished eating, they will come and ask you, politely to vacate the table for other paying customers, but then they have a bar seating area with booths, sofas and relaxed seating as well as seating at the bar so you can move over and finish any drinks/chat for as long as you like without holding up the table indefinitely.

Two hours is more than enough for people to comfortably finish a three course meal without being rushed, but they pride themselves on prompt service, so they don't suffer from slow service eating into the "table time". If it did then I would be wanting to speak to the restaurant manager as their service would be the issue with the evening, not the time limit, and if they have a time limit they need to make sure their staff can deliver the meals within that time.

Jux · 11/03/2017 16:20

Yes, you're right.

Iamastonished · 11/03/2017 16:25

"When I'm out for dinner with friends/family, it can take 4 or 5 hours"

4 to 5 hours - bloody hell! I would hate that. Having said that we don't go out for meals at places that would stretch a meal out for so long. We never eat a three course meal as portion sizes round here are ridiculous. As we live rurally I have to drive, so no lingering over a bottle of wine. We never have liqueurs or coffee after a meal either.

Crumbs1 · 11/03/2017 16:30

I wouldn't go to a restaurant that insisted on a time limit if we had booked in advance. I'd be ok if they squeezed us in and told us the table was booked for later in the evening.

CruCru · 11/03/2017 16:37

The only time I get cross about the two hour limit is when the service is slow and / or the waiting staff keep forgetting drinks etc. It's stressful to say "Don't you need this table back by x o'clock?" when the restaurant are taking their sweet time.

bertsdinner · 11/03/2017 16:42

I dont really care for the time limit thing but can see why they do it, and 2 hours would be enough for me. I find sitting at a table gets uncomfortable after a couple of hours so would be ready to move on. I can see slow service being a problem though. Large groups could need a bit longer, too.

BigGreenOlives · 11/03/2017 16:50

Central London restaurants will limit you at 9pm as well, they'll have another booking at 11pm.

Onthecouchagain · 11/03/2017 17:00

Fucking campers.