Holiday cottage - Booting family out, AIBU?

[HolidayCottageAnnoyance]

I have a holiday cottage which does not allow children under 12. This is for health and safety reasons (think steep stairs, pond, open and functioning fireplace etc). It says on the listing at three different points on the listing page that children under 12 are not allowed. This includes babes in arms. It also makes it clear when you book (i.e. once you've selected dates and you get through to payment) that children are not allowed. There is literally no way this can be missed.

I had a phone call from a neighbour this morning as they had seen a toddler in the garden and had noticed that the car that the 'couple' arrived in has a baby-seat in it. I rang the cottage company before lunch and received a rather passive response that made it clear they didn't want the grief of turfing the family out. I was very firm and said I wanted them out by the end of the day. Long story short they are still there (I have texted said neighbour to check).

So here is my AIBU: would I be completely unreasonable to send a relative tomorrow to boot them out if they are still there? As it's all done through the cottage company I have no way of getting in touch with them myself, so either relying on the ineffectual cottage company or sending a relative are my only choices.

YABU: Let it go, the child hasn't been injured so far and it's only four more nights.
YANBU: They're cheeky fucks and you should boot them out even if the holiday cottage company isn't going to help. Then you should find a new holiday cottage company to list through.

You literally cannot exclude children legally.

you can, but it's a different kind of insurance.

I attend a regular event that is 18+ only.. we literally are not covered to have under 18s at the event.

Your or the venues public liability still covers everyone.

and presumably, if you aren’t allowed under 18s at the venue you actually do something to ensure they aren’t there, like have a doorman?

regardless, under 18s who sneak into over 18s nightclubs are covered by public liability insurance if say, the nightclub burns down. It’s outrageous to suggest they’re not.

Why would she have to child proof it, the rules say that children shouldn’t be there. If someone takes their child then as long as no negligence (ie there should be bannisters) then if something happens , it’s on them.

How can you not exclude children legally? If there are issues with the property which OP does not want to make childproof then surely that’s that! And ties in with insurance. If

From the insurance policy.

That’s an event.

This is a property - you cannot legally exclude children from public liability policies.

I can’t link but I just googled and legally you can do this. Simpson Millar.

Policies maybe. The fact remains it’s OP’s property. If she says she doesn’t want dogs, children etc that’s her right as the property owner.

The relative has gone to the offices, and…..?

It is a very odd that you even thought a relative rocking up on their door step, a complete stranger and not the owner or agency staff, telling them to get out. Very very odd.

She can exclude children from her property.

she can’t exclude them from the insurance that covers her property.

not sure why you would want to even if you could tbf. It’s not like it would be any cheaper

Simpson milllar is just the name of a legal firm?

But that’s where the AI answer came from. Just giving the source.

And to support that legal obligation, public liability policies that exclude certain groups don’t even exist.

I don’t get this. So OP can exclude children from her property. So are children covered under the insurance policy or is OP not allowed to specify that they are not covered?

So don’t google Simpson millar google some AI question that you haven’t shared with us?

sounds like robust knowledge of public liability insurance 😆

I’m not claiming to have robust knowledge of public liability insurance!

Children are covered by insurance

this instance has ZERO to do with insurance as OP has stated herself. Poster after poster are hysterically insisting OP will be liable for the death of a child and needs to evict them immediately.

OP is allowed to exclude children from
her holiday cottage if she wants. If any happen to get in, they are covered by insurance

I can’t share the AI answer. It have SM as the source, I didn’t look on SM webpage.

Agree with everything you've said

Understood.

She can say she doesn’t want them but if ultimately they go and something happens, they/parents can still claim under the public liability of the house insurance (we all have PL under our house insurance btw). Whether they are successful would depend on if OP has been negligent. My guess would be that a child drowning in a pond when a warning was given, wouldn’t be negligence, but say the edge of the pond collapsed due to poor maintenance and the child feel in that way, that could be negligence.

Competley agree with this.

Well that’s alright then isn’t it? The tenants are still in breach of their contract.

Regardless the child isn’t meant to be there in the first place. Like I said before CFers for doing this.