Help end medical misogyny. Sign our petition.

Help end medical misogyny.
Sign our petition.

Sign the petition

Please or to access all these features

The doghouse

If you're worried about your pet's health, please speak to a vet or qualified professional.

Anyone snuck three dogs into center parcs

413 replies

FlipFlopZebra · 10/07/2026 19:38

Has anyone snuck an extra dog into center parcs? Really want to book one lodge for myself, husband, daughter and parents but we have three dogs between us.

Two of the dogs are same breed so could pass as one, but I’m working out how to you get past the entrance? Do they record number of dogs in each car?

I would hide the smallest one but she’s noisy 😆 so it would be our largest one who would need hiding as she’d keep quiet.

It’s two labradors and Jack Russell. Just seems expensive to pay for a whole extra lodge just to accommodate a dog!

OP posts:
Pinkchickenwine · Yesterday 20:00

KittyCorncrake · Yesterday 15:19

It doesn’t matter -it’s their rules, their land, their terms and conditions.
Don’t sign up to their Ts and Cs if you want something outside that.
Leave one of the dogs elsewhere, or go elsewhere, or get another lodge.
Easy.
Unless you are a CF who thinks ‘do what thou wilt shall be the whole of the law’ (or for the less educated -‘I’ll just do what I want and everyone else can just FTFO.’)

She’s not harming anyone though!

MyObservations · Yesterday 20:33

Pinkchickenwine · Yesterday 20:00

She’s not harming anyone though!

Oh yes she is. She's not paying the fees required for the visit. It's like saying there's no victims in insurance fraud or benefit fraud. It sounds as though you think travelling on a train without a ticket is just fine because it's not harming anyone!🙄

Pinkchickenwine · Yesterday 20:50

MyObservations · Yesterday 20:33

Oh yes she is. She's not paying the fees required for the visit. It's like saying there's no victims in insurance fraud or benefit fraud. It sounds as though you think travelling on a train without a ticket is just fine because it's not harming anyone!🙄

okies if you think it’s the same, up
to you!

A JRT in a lodge suitable for dogs is a non issue!

Anyway must dash, you’ve given me an idea about claiming PIP, but I’ll jump on a train to Birmingham without a ticket to fill the forms in there!

fromgothtoboss · Yesterday 20:51

MyObservations · Yesterday 20:33

Oh yes she is. She's not paying the fees required for the visit. It's like saying there's no victims in insurance fraud or benefit fraud. It sounds as though you think travelling on a train without a ticket is just fine because it's not harming anyone!🙄

So even if it was guaranteed you wouldn’t get caught with one small additonal dog you would pay for a whole extra lodge, just on the principle of not ‘breaking rules’?

MyObservations · Yesterday 20:58

@fromgothtoboss No, I just wouldn't go. Not that I'm a great fan of CP anyway and seeing the comments on here puts me off even more. But, imho, it's all about integrity which, it seems to me, is pretty absent in this post.

SandyHappy · Yesterday 21:06

MyObservations · Yesterday 20:33

Oh yes she is. She's not paying the fees required for the visit. It's like saying there's no victims in insurance fraud or benefit fraud. It sounds as though you think travelling on a train without a ticket is just fine because it's not harming anyone!🙄

She IS paying the fees for dogs staying in the accommodation though, so your comparison are nonsensical. Having one extra dog in the accommodation would not cause any amount of extra work, or defraud anyone of anything.. she's paying to take dogs to the property.. she is taking dogs to the property.

I've done this at places like haven as they will allow 3 dogs if you pay extra, so after the first time of paying, for years I just took the three and pay for the two.. they don't allow any more time for cleaning for 3 rather than 2 and they don't pass the extra cleaning fee on to the actual cleaners so I'm not lining their pockets any more for he sake of it, it's just corporate greed.

Private rentals/cottages I would always ask, and choose somewhere else if they said no to three, but most that take two, take 3 on request, I've never had a problem with it.

MyObservations · Yesterday 21:09

SandyHappy · Yesterday 21:06

She IS paying the fees for dogs staying in the accommodation though, so your comparison are nonsensical. Having one extra dog in the accommodation would not cause any amount of extra work, or defraud anyone of anything.. she's paying to take dogs to the property.. she is taking dogs to the property.

I've done this at places like haven as they will allow 3 dogs if you pay extra, so after the first time of paying, for years I just took the three and pay for the two.. they don't allow any more time for cleaning for 3 rather than 2 and they don't pass the extra cleaning fee on to the actual cleaners so I'm not lining their pockets any more for he sake of it, it's just corporate greed.

Private rentals/cottages I would always ask, and choose somewhere else if they said no to three, but most that take two, take 3 on request, I've never had a problem with it.

What complete rubbish. So., let's take the train analogy. Mum takes three teenage children on the train but only pays for two of them. That's okay is it?

SandyHappy · Yesterday 21:14

MyObservations · Yesterday 21:09

What complete rubbish. So., let's take the train analogy. Mum takes three teenage children on the train but only pays for two of them. That's okay is it?

No it's not, because she would be taking a seat from someone else .. it's not comparable to OPs situation at all.

Op is paying for a cabin, and paying for dogs to stay there, she isn't defrauding anyone like in your analogy.

Frequency · Yesterday 21:17

MyObservations · Yesterday 21:09

What complete rubbish. So., let's take the train analogy. Mum takes three teenage children on the train but only pays for two of them. That's okay is it?

Not the same at all. The teen would be taking a seat that could be bought by another passenger.

OP is not taking up any extra resources that CP could sell to someone else. She is paying for one lodge and using one lodge. If she paid for two lodges and used 1, CP would lose out because they could have sold the empty lodge to another family who would then spend money while there.

Literally no one loses anything by OP not paying for a lodge she neither wants nor needs.

sittingonabeach · Yesterday 21:20

So if OP did something similar at a hotel that has under occupancy (as many hotels do at the moment). Be it an extra dog or an extra child sneaked in rather than following the hotel’s booking conditions and booking an extra room. They are defrauding the hotel as they are missing out on a room booking.

Frequency · Yesterday 21:26

sittingonabeach · Yesterday 21:20

So if OP did something similar at a hotel that has under occupancy (as many hotels do at the moment). Be it an extra dog or an extra child sneaked in rather than following the hotel’s booking conditions and booking an extra room. They are defrauding the hotel as they are missing out on a room booking.

But it is not a hotel. It is Center Parks, which is almost always fully booked, so how is this relevant?

OP is using one lodge and paying for the lodge, leaving CP free to book the other lodge to actual people who will purchase goods and services while they are there, as opposed to it being occupied by a single, unemployed JRT with no money to spend on goods and services.

sittingonabeach · Yesterday 22:10

@Frequency so is that where your nuance comes into play?
Some people only do the ‘free’ swimming at CP and self cater, so not everyone pays for anything else

BiteSizedLife · Yesterday 22:19

CenterParcs are barely dog tolerant , nowhere near dog friendly: I'd never visit with my dog (or without her) ever again.

Take a look at Bainland Lodges - now they "get it" .

New posts on this thread. Refresh page
Swipe left for the next trending thread