Why do solo train users take a table for 4?

[Badbadbunny]

Why do solo train users take a table for 4 and then huff and puff when a couple or family join them? Just on a train with lots of empty twosome seats but only one table for 4 free and a single woman takes it, and made a big fuss about moving her bags off the seat and clearing the rest of the table after she put loads of stuff on it when a family of 4 came on with one of them having to sit elsewhere.

“That met your requirements “ - not just anywhere and your requirements are as legitimate as a family’s although @Badbadbunny doesn’t seem to think so.

Your title says different, also you point out that there are loads of two seaters free which would imply you think that's where she should be sitting, in fact you specifically point out one of the foursome had to sit elsewhere, again implying you think the woman shouldn't be sitting there (even just taking up the one seat)

They certainly are for me and my lap top!

I once had a lady come sit at our table (me and 2 dc around 3 and 6. They are well travelled and well behaved but chatty. She had plonked herself at the window seat so had to negotiate. She sighed every time they spoke and complained dd 6 sitting opposite her was moving her legs every now and then and touching her . Insisted I moved her, so swapped her with dd3 then she complained dd6 touched her occasionally when she moved and that dd3 was looking at her . There were multiple empty double seats. I’d booked the table with the 2 window seats but annoyingly the bookings were faulty so it was a free for all as it wasn’t even her booked seat!

As a lone traveller i wouldn't want to sit in the middle of someone elses family

Dd3 was looking at her! Was she JLo or something

Huffing and puffing - not reasonable at all. But of course if it’s free then I’m taking the table seat! I’m amazed anyone would think it should only be left for groups.

They have the "right" to ONE seat and ONE QUARTER of the table. They have no right to anything else and are unreasonable when they make a big song and dance about moving their stuff.

I live on a commuter line from London and this happens a lot. I think it’s because some people want to use their laptops and other stuff, basically to take over the space as a personal office. I leave my work at work, and I’ve never understood working hours you aren’t paid for, but each to their own.

It might be annoying to families who want to sit together but there’s no rules to say they have priority. Why should they? There should be spaces for people with extra needs, of course, but otherwise, tough.

i sit in the flip down seats near the loo or take one of the double seats.

I’m a solo wheelchair user - I often get a table. I basically get seated at the convenience of the train company by a representative of Network Rail. I don’t get to pick and choose

But many travel during office hours, or have meeting etc. as soon as they get there. Because you have the option to not work, doesn't mean others do too. I was expected to be logged in while on the train, as they were paying me for my time. I'd have been happy to switch off and read my kindle and if I could wangle a bit of time, that's what I did.

This.

But you asked why they sat there at all!

IME it’s the families who don’t respect the space or peace of the travellers around them.

I imagine your huffing lady has experienced this also. HTH.

No I didn't. My opening poster clearly said...

"Why do solo train users take a table for 4 and then huff and puff when a couple or family join them?"

I hate sitting with strangers at a table, especially if others know each other and/or I’m trapped in the window seat. I only choose the table seat if there’s literally nowhere else.

There's 2 separate things here.
Choosing to sit by a table / booking a table seat as a single passenger is a perfectly valid choice. Using a laptop, eating etc are easier with a table and on some trains they are the only seats with charge points.

Using seats for bags, coats or anything else which isn't a human bottom is improper and the huffing is unnecessary.

Will also add that if seats can be booked (I know they can't on all trains) then the family of four can choose to pre-book seats together if they wish. Otherwise it's first come first served.

Why do solo train users take a table for four?

This thread reveals that there are lots of possible reasons, none of them objectionable.

And also that people are very variable in what seat type they prefer.

So there's no point in self-sacrificingly taking your non-preferred option – there'll be bound to be someone who would have preferred it to the 'superior' option that you abjured.

I once knew a mother and daughter who for years both endured the inferior half of every single toasted teacake, because it didn't occur to either that the other was making the same thoughtful choice.

In short, sit where you like. Be polite and helpful. That is all.

PS the bottom half is superior, obviously.

These tables were originally designed for groups, not to be « premium seats

So weird that I've been on trains for pretty much my whole life and never knew the tables were designed only for groups. You'd think British Rail would put a sign up on their trains to stop those pesky solo passengers making such faux pas.

How many groups of four travel together anyway? Surely they're very much in the minority, so there's no point leaving four seats empty in case one turns up.

They obviously attended the same school of thought that people on buses and trains attended,who think it's fine to take up the seat next to them with their bag, even when someone who is obviously disabled (i.e. on crutches). They then make a fuss about having to move their bag.

Are tables designed for groups? I’ve never assumed that was the case.

Why do solo train users take a table for 4?

They don't.

They sit in one of the four seats at a table because they are the best seats.

They don't know who else is going to join the train, or when.

If you want to seat four people at a table, book it or get on the train earlier.

And your post title said something different.

Families of four are v common