Time allowed in restaurants these days

[Toots22]

AIBU

Went to a fairly nice cafe / restaurant for lunch today - 4 of us. The booking was for 90 minutes so I knew that up front. Place is busy, it’s a Saturday, I get it. But after paying £45 for my 13 year old and I for lunch, for a main and a drink each and then get pretty much kicked out the door before we’ve even finished our drinks, when we get the bill without asking and the server appears with the card machine immediately (there were empty tables). I know the cost of living etc is through the roof but is it unreasonable to be hacked off these days at the cost of things and the little time you’re allowed in a place for that price to just to enjoy your food and have a little bit of chat over lunch?

I don't have an issue with this. As long as their service is prompt and we are able to order the food we want (e.g. time for dessert) then I am happy to have a time limit and not be stuck trying to chase someone to get the bill. My children don't see sitting and eating as a leisure activity so maybe if it was a catch up with friends then I would feel differently, but then I would choose a venue without a time limit.
While you mention tables were empty, you don't know who was was booked in next. A popular carvery near me do two sittings for lunch so need the first bookings to be out on time to sort the tables into different arrangements (based on group size) and cleared.

You have taken an option I agree with not to go there again. I wonder if you have had this because of other people previously being unreasonable and expecting to be there say 3 hours, or some instances of so-called 'dine and dash' (a form of theft).

Your entire backstory is irrelevant, especially the amount you paid. If 90mim is the time limit then that's what it is. We paid 180ish for lunch about two weeks ago and a 2hour limit. I'm not sure what's the issue. There's a demand and these places have these restrictions because of it.

15 people for 300 isn't a big amount that you think you're paying .

Paying the bill 10 minutes early doesn’t mean you can’t finish your drinks. It makes sense to pay at that point rather than when the 90 minutes are up

Everywhere else I've had beef on a roast it's pink yes, but this beef was blue. There's rare, then there's just plain raw beef which is not what most would expect.

Ok fair enough

This seems to be the norm now. Had it recently with a 3 course lunch for a group of us - the bill was well over £400. I went to the loo and when I got back everyone had their coats on as they’d suddenly announced we had to leave! If it hadn’t been for us they would only have had 4 customers.

I’ve never had this problem. I’m guessing those of you that have are in busy towns/cities or tourist regions?

Why on earth would I book and pay all that money for lunch to then be rushed out the door and have to go to somewhere else to pay for more coffee to allow us to have a bit more chat?

Because you booked a place that you knew had the 90 min rule? Surely it’s not rocket science?

You're being very unreasonable to be unhappy they came to offer the bill with 10 minutes to go. If you have a 90 minute slot, you're meant to have vacated the table at the end of the 90 minutes. It takes about 10 minutes to get the bill, check it's correct, divide the cost if necessary, pay and get your coats and bags together etc.

If you don't like being expected to stick to a 90 minute slot, don't go to a restaurant where you know that's how they operate.

@WinterUnder Firstly it wasn't £300, it was well over though I can't remember the exact amount. Secondly when it's a cafe and you're there for breakfast/brunch not dinner and the most expensive thing on the menu is the 'special' at £14.95. I'd say a spend of £25-30pp is a decent amount. I really cannot believe the issue that posters seem to have with the amount 😂

If they piss too many people off they will loose business and many can't afford to do that at a time when there is a lot of competition and restaurants are shutting everywhere. Obviously there is a balance but some restaurants aren't getting it right.

90 minute slots are fine as long as the restaurant does their bit and brings menus, takes orders and serves food on a timely basis. They should move matters along discretely not harass people out the door.

I think that’s annoying- especially if there were lots of empty tables!

Usually 90mins/2hours is fine if it’s just me and my boyfriend, or me and one of the girls, but on occasion I’ve found it annoying when with a larger group. Only last Sunday, myself and a group of 11 went out for a three course festive meal in a nice pub. I emailed in advance and asked if we could extend the two hour limit by an hour, I said I didn’t feel two hours would be enough, and said we’d be spending a lot of money etc. They didn’t reply, but on the night as we got seated, I mentioned it to our waiter and he said he’d check with management and came back and said that would be fine. Which is a good thing- as we’d been there 50mins before we even got our starters. We stayed the full three hours, and there’s no way two would’ve been enough, we wouldn’t have had a chance for desert.

Your assumption would be wrong, as is your "fact". Time slots existed way before COVID, though they were never widespread and still aren't. Which is why it's so bizarre that the OP chose one of the few places that has a 90 minute slot.

I guess you don't eat out enough.

I can manage a main course within 90 mins and chat and drink at the same time.
However..if the staff made us wait a fair few minutes before they came to take our order and wait again before they brought the food...I wouldn't happy at being rushed. If they want us out in 90min then step up and deliver

It really depends on the time it takes for your food to arrive. If it's there in less than 20min, fine. If it's a 40min wait then clearly not ok.

Fortunately round here London ways have not caught on and the more upscale places with limits say 2 hours. 90 min is a nice amount of to spend on a lunch anyway, but of course it's dos rely on prompt service. We had a 3 course lunch for my birthday in a restaurant with a 2h restriction and we were out in plenty of time. The service was great.

To be fair. For most people 90 min for lunch would be fine and they need to put a time limit so they know when to book the table again for.
You could argue they should allow 2 hours for lunch just in case but that's bad business as you'd end up with a sotting or two less over the day to accommodate the occasional slow eater.

This is why after eating once at a restaurant with a 90 minute slot, I would never go back. It is not long enough.
If you just want to eat, rather than it being a relaxing experience, you go to a fast food place. To enjoy eating, you need time. Not just a quick eat your meal and bugger off as soon as you have put your fork down.

Your reluctance to buy a second cup of coffee after 90 minutes is exactly why restaurants have to put time limits on tables.

But in answer to your question as to why should you pay all that money to be “rushed out the door” after 90 minutes…because that is what you agreed in the T&Cs when you booked.

@StormingNorman 90 minutes is not enough for a meal and a first cup of coffee. Or should we only eat out if we are fast eaters?

So you spent just over £20 a head? Of course they can't have you hanging around all night. How long do you feel entitled to for £20? They'd never make any money

@Toots22

Yes of course, I said that I knew that. I just think it’s a bit crappy that you can’t just relax and enjoy a catch up with friends, for all that money, and not get thrown out the door
All that money? £45 for two of you!!! How long do you feel your £25 owes you?