Who was in the wrong - bakery or me?

[Doijb]

I take my kids to a bakery after swimming. Most of the time they choose sausage rolls or similar. There is a tiny table with two chairs. I plop one of my kids on my lap and we eat our treat. I prefer this as otherwise the flakes would go everywhere.

Anyway, after going every week to this place for a year one of the staff members tells me we’re not really a sit down food place. I inquire about the chairs and she said it’s more for people who wait.

I just found this odd. My kids are brilliantly behaved and I make sure not loud. My oldest will wipe down the table with a serviette.

Who is being weird?

You don’t need a table to sit down and wait so I would have assumed the same as you tbh. I am ND if that makes any difference. They’re giving mixed messages by putting the table there. Unless it’s a low one meant for magazines or whatever? They’ve let you know now so no issues.

Yeah, I don't think you are unreasonable as there is a table there. If they wanted to put seating for waiting people, why not just put chairs?

The table causes confusion.

Well I don’t think that is blatantly obvious at all. My local takeaway has a waiting area, seats only, no table. Why would you need a table if you can’t eat in there?

I haven't seen MN go off on a thread like this for a while, it's clearly hitting some nerves!

For creating a potentially embarrassing situation like having a customer sit by at a table they are not meant to sit at (with no clear indication) I decree that the cafe are weird and unreasonable. Good customer service means not making your customers unsure of what they can and can't do.

All of you who are there saying "of course it's obvious you shouldn't sit at the table beccause you should know the cafes VAT status/staff break situation/because you're only allowed to sit at a table when there is another table as well" cop on

Bangs gavel

I'm sure you would give up the chairs for someone who needed them, but the owner's point is that they are a not an eat-in establishment so you need to take the food away to eat it. You made an honest mistake about this and she's corrected it - no need for anyone to be angry or feel bad.

Chairs imply waiting.
A table implies eating.

So you could say "Sorry, didn't realise. Is it ok if we still sit there if no one is waiting?" and then don't sit there if the answer is no.

Everybody knows that all decent people eat their snacks in an attitude of strict penitence and humble self-flagellation.

So do you never sit down in a waiting room or a bus or anything just in case?

If they’re not charging the extra for sit in then they’re not allowed to be a sit in place. They should really remove the table and just have chairs out for people waiting.
Now that you’ve been told though, you need to stop sitting in to eat.

You could get them shut down or fined... they are simply informing you of the laws.

They are not an eat in establishment likely because they do not qualify as one (you need to have customer facilities like washrooms, it was the big issue when greggs bakery tried to open eat in areas) and so they cannot offer that option.

At the very least you should hold a wall sit for the full eating time or hit yourself around the face with the sausage roll numerous times before eating.

I can’t imagine for a moment that the OP is going to continue buying her sausage roll and sitting down. I think they’ve definitely stopped that aspect of her patronage.

Exactly, I have to say I’m 99.9% sure that the OP would have moved should somebody else have needed to only sit there but not use the table.

I do think it a little odd that they took an entire year to inform you that the table and chairs were for waiting, not eating at.

She was just telling you facts, why is that weird? There would probably be different insurance for sit in, definitely different prices, and don’t you need toilets to have a sit in eating place?
They have probably felt awkward about saying to you but since it’s gone on so long felt they should. Do you think they are wrong in telling you or that they didn’t tell you sooner? You know now.

I see why they may have chairs for people waiting.

I don't know why they'd have a table too. I think it's understandable that you thought it was to eat at.

I'd say you can't be the only person to sit there and eat something. But I can see why they don't want to clean up crumbs and mess, and they aren't charging VAT on the items. Just do as she says in future. You don't really need to sit at a table to eat a sausage roll out of a bag.

Why would you need a table??

To put your hot drinks on whilst waiting for the rest of your food order being cooked/warmed up?

To help you read your book or paper whilst waiting, or somewhere to put your phone whilst looking at it?

Somewhere to rest your handbag or shopping bags whilst waiting instead of on a potentially dirty/wet shop floor?

Many bakeries/hot food shops cook to order - it's not all serving ready cooked stuff from the counter. So a customer could be waiting 10-15 minutes for specially ordered cooked items.

That's certainly the case for our village "bakery" that does all kinds of hot foods such as burgers and chips, toasted sandwiches, etc., causing a fair wait for them as no one wants burgers and chips that were cooked an hour ago and kept "warm" in a hot counter!

Not if it’s a priority seat, the same way I wouldn’t use a disabled toilet.

They will be charging VAT if the sausage rolls are hot, wherever they are to be eaten. But there might be other regulations being broken. It turns out the situation is not so weird after all. But some of the PPs are interesting.

That sounds like an excellent reason to not have a bloomin table

Objection!

We're working on the assumption there that the cafe staff knew that a customer sitting in wasn't allowed. Before I climbed the ladder to the dizzy heights of management and became enlightened on such matters as VAT, a customer sitting at a table we've provided, to eat something we've sold to them, wouldn't have been an issue to me in the slightest, because alongside OP I also wouldn't know.
And if management/owners are not around at the times this happens, then they'd have no reason to believe that it was happening. Strikes me as either a comment has been passed to enlighten the staff/management/owners and a conversation ensued or there's been a complaint about it happening and an investigation into the cafe serving food for eat in and not sticking to the rules on that.

But of course it cannot ever be as simple as that on MN, someone's just got to have an agenda to make other people's lives an absolute misery for absolutely no reason whatsoever.

Again, the presence of a dining table may imply the possibility that people would dine.

They should replace it with a one armed bandit or a fruit machine like cafes had in the 80s. Far less confusion