Are we allowed 7 people in our house in different rooms?

[Firefliess]

DSD and her BF have come to stay this weekend. We also have DD and DSS and me and DH at home, so that makes 6 of us. DD wants her BF to stay over tomorrow night. I can't figure out whether that's allowed or not. It would mean 7 people in the house, but in no sense would we be "gathering" DD and her BF would get in late and go straight to her room. Rest of us probably we wouldn't even see him. Is that allowed? Or are people considered to be "gathering" simply by being in the same house? We're in England by the way and not in an area with any local lockdown

No. But if you erected a tent in the garden for two of them and they didn't come indoors at all or interact, then arguably they are then in their own separate bubble.

The law says “gathering of no more than 6” not “no more than 6 in the home and any grounds”. I would call your DD and BF a gathering of 2 and the rest of you, depending on what you do, a gathering of 5.

I don’t see why the government would choose the word “gathering” to use in the law if they meant “all the people in the house and grounds”. Whether the police (an then, later, the courts) would agree is a different matter. It’s certainly a risk.

No. But if you erected a tent in the garden for two of them and they didn't come indoors at all or interact, then arguably they are then in their own separate bubble

Does the tent have a toilet/shower?

I don’t see why the government would choose the word “gathering” to use in the law if they meant “all the people in the house and grounds”.

I assume because otherwise you couldn’t walk down the street.

Boombooms I think it does mean house and grounds wheb I looked st the fine print but maybe it does mean 6 in house or grounds. I need to know this !

Given that Scotland and Wales have much harsher rules and if this doesnt work over the next couple of weeks so are we (so that in effect no one outside of the people who live in the house can visit) it seems prudent at this point for the DD to not have her bf stay over this weekend!

Given that Scotland and Wales have much harsher rules and if this doesnt work over the next couple of weeks so are we (so that in effect no one outside of the people who live in the house can visit) it seems prudent at this point for the DD to not have her bf stay over this weekend!

Exactly this. Everyone needs to understand that all this playing with the rules will just have two consequences. First the govt will restrict us even further and second these restrictions will last even longer. Please don’t do it.

Are you going to bake in the tent?

I think it's interesting that so many people have said it's perfectly clear that it's 6 people only in the bounds of your house and garden and that the OP is clearly stupid and lacking in ability to count up to 6 .... but the people on the thread who are actually solicitors or looking at the law, actually think it is far from clear.

For all those screaming IT’S THE LAW while frothing at the mouth - common sense needs to be applied, or we risk turning into a society who can’t think for themselves. 7 people in a house doesn’t constitute a gathering if 2 of them aren’t coming into contact with the other 5.

Did you know if was law until 1970s that London cabs carried a bale of hay in their boot? Do you think they did it? BUT IT’S THE LAW

It’s also illegal to dress as a policeman or a member of the armed forces - even for a fancy dress party.... IT’S THE LAW

[quote avenueq]@spinningaround72 you're wrong

[/quote]
I'm not wrong. The advice is conflicting.

@Kungfupanda67

For all those screaming IT’S THE LAW while frothing at the mouth - common sense needs to be applied, or we risk turning into a society who can’t think for themselves. 7 people in a house doesn’t constitute a gathering if 2 of them aren’t coming into contact with the other 5.

Did you know if was law until 1970s that London cabs carried a bale of hay in their boot? Do you think they did it? BUT IT’S THE LAW

It’s also illegal to dress as a policeman or a member of the armed forces - even for a fancy dress party.... IT’S THE LAW

Not really sure how having bale in your boot can contribute to a pandemic but hey ho

I'm with the lawyers upthread. People are focusing on the issue of 6 or 7 people alone, whereas what they should be focussing on is the issue of "gatherings". There is no intention that OP's daughter and boyfriend should socially interact with anyone else or undertake any other form of activity with them, therefore they aren't gathering. If the legislation intended to prohibit 7 or more people being together under the same roof even if one or more of them never at any point as anything to do with the others, it would say so.

Boris if that's you because Cummings is about to be found out being in a group of 7 we do NOT believe any excuse you come up with.

@spinningaround72 it's not conflicting. You don't have to socially distance from someone you're in an established relationship with - as people on here like to say END OF

I’m quite pedantic and I am with you OP. The legislation refers to gatherings and groups so you could argue you are separate groups within the house.

I reckon it was deliberately designed this way to accommodate MPs & their chums living in huge houses with wings, so you didn’t have to count granny, cook or the nanny & could still have 6 Hooray Henrys at your dinner table or gathering in the drawing room after the shoot.

@notevenat20

I don’t see why the government would choose the word “gathering” to use in the law if they meant “all the people in the house and grounds”.

I assume because otherwise you couldn’t walk down the street.

In the same way that DD and her BF could walk down the street while 5 other people are walking down the street, so long as they weren’t doing it in a group with those 5 other people, there is nothing in the legislation that stops DD and her BF being in a house that also has 5 other people in it so long as they aren’t gathering with those 5 other people.

The legislation lays out plenty of additional considerations for different situations. If they had wanted to include everyone in a home and any grounds as being considered, for the purposes of the law, as being part of any gathering in that home they could have added it in - but they didn’t.

[quote avenueq]@spinningaround72 it's not conflicting. You don't have to socially distance from someone you're in an established relationship with - as people on here like to say END OF[/quote]
And that attitude is exactly why this pandemic isnt going away. Everybody finding excuses.

And grow up with your 'end of'. Its pathetic.

Not really sure how having bale in your boot can contribute to a pandemic but hey ho

About as much as the DDs boyfriend, which the OP might not even see or come within several metres of, but apparently, as he's breaking guidelines by being in the house, this automatically means that he will give them all covid and they will all die.

@spinningaround72 nor can having 2 extra people in the building who you are not going to speak to, see or share any facilities with. My point is, as most people who aren’t being deliberately obtuse, that common sense needs to be used because the law isn’t always the whole picture. There isn’t even a straight law on whether this is legal or not, the solicitors on the thread seem to think that this does not constitute as a gathering therefore is not illegal. So use some common sense, as the taxi drivers who weren’t carrying a bale of hay in their boot until 1976 did.

Thanks @BarbaraofSeville - glad someone understands my point!!

in the same way that DD and her BF could walk down the street while 5 other people are walking down the street, so long as they weren’t doing it in a group with those 5 other people, there is nothing in the legislation that stops DD and her BF being in a house that also has 5 other people in it so long as they aren’t gathering with those 5 other people.

In terms of the law this will only be clear once cases have gone to court. If everyone is sharing any part of the house including a bathroom and maybe even the entrance/exit I think you would be on risky territory myself.

But really you are just increasing the risk the whole country will be locked down by trying to stretch the rules. It is grossly irresponsible in my view. It’s also worth remembering that when you take a risk with covid, it’s not just your life you are playing with. If you are infected this increases the chance that someone else will be infected too.

@spinningaround72 what? First people are attacked for trying to interpret the law, now you're doing the same and you're still in the right?

I think if you need to look for loopholes then deep down you know what you are proposing is not within the rules.

And that attitude is exactly why this pandemic isnt going away. Everybody finding excuses.

No, you really cannot interpret what the law says on that basis. If the law allows this, then no amount of bleating about "excuses" or the pandemic can change that. Lots of people on here may want the law to impose a blanket ban on having more than six people under one roof, but that is not what it says. The pandemic is not a licence to throw basic legal principles into the bin.