• Welcome to the LegalBeagles Consumer and Legal Forum.
    Please Register to get the most out of the forum. Registration is free and only needs a username and email address.
    REGISTER
    Please do not post your full name, reference numbers or any identifiable details on the forum.

Waterworld Stoke check bags for food & drink?

Collapse
Loading...
X
  • Filter
  • Time
  • Show
Clear All
new posts

  • Waterworld Stoke check bags for food & drink?

    Hi.

    Can't see the appropriate sub-forum to write this but would appreciate some brief words of wisdom - I visited Waterworld of Stoke with my children and was surprised to see a huge queue of people due to the security guard announcing that he had to check all bags for food or drink (I inadvertently picked this up on video as I was videoing my children) and that if anyone does have any then they are refused entry unless they take it away or throw it in the bin. When asked why, he explained that it was due to no one allowed to drink or eat their own items inside the premises.

    When I emailed them today to check the legality of this, this was the response:
    The bags are checked during peak for the health and safety of everybody on the premises. If any items are identified that are deemed unsafe, threatening or not in line with Waterworld’s admission policy, you will be asked to return them to your vehicle prior to entry. Waterworld will not allow dangerous or illegal items to be kept on the premises. The bags are not checked for just food and drinks, the reason for the checks is the health and safety.

    As we have a number of catering facilities available, we do not allow guests to bring their own food and drink into our premises, as stated in our terms and conditions. If these items are located during these bag searches, you will be asked to return these to your vehicle for safekeeping while you’re in the Aqua Park. If you do not have a vehicle, we can store these for you for your visit duration, but Waterworld and associated contractors will not be held responsible for their safekeeping, or liable for any theft or loss. Alternatively, these can be disposed of if you do not wish to keep the items.

    Under UK common law, the owner or occupier of private property has the right to set rules for how their premises are used. If a customer does not follow these rules such as ‘no outside food or drink;, the owner can ask them to leave. If the customer refuses, they could be trespassing under civil law (not a criminal offence unless they refuse to leave when asked).

    The contract law states that when you enter a business, you enter into an implied contract to follow their terms of service. Many venues display signs or have terms and conditions that state no outside food or drink, which forms part of their conditions of entry. Also under the food safety act 1990, and
    the food hygiene regulations businesses have legal responsibilities regrading food safety. Allowing outside food could create risks (e.g contamination, allergens), giving them a legal reason to prohibit it.

    However, I read this yesterday
    Private Property Rights
    • Premises such as shops, cinemas, or event venues are private property, and the owners or operators have the right to set conditions for entry. This includes the right to check bags to enforce policies such as prohibiting outside food and drink.
    • However, these conditions must be clearly communicated to customers, usually through visible signage.
    There was a poster outside that simply stated 'bag search is in operation for the safety of guests and in line with our admissions policy'. For me, this is not a clear communication of conditions?
    Tags: None

  • #2
    They do it, of course, to increase their profits so that you have to buy food and drink from them. But as you have identified they are entitled to make that a condition of entry.

    I don't know if anyone has ever argued in court that the contract requirement is an 'unfair contract term' but my non-lawyer's guess is that you would have a hard time convincing a judge of that
    ​​​​​​
    If it is stated in their admissions policy and that policy is drawn to your attention when you buy your ticket then probably that is sufficient. EDIT I had a quick look at their website and in their t&c there is a clearly labelled paragraph banning own food/drink

    Putting up a great big sign might be commercially sensible to avoid arguments at the entry gate but there's no rule of law that requires it.
    Last edited by PallasAthena; 19th February 2025, 08:54:AM.
    All opinions expressed are based on my personal experience. I am not a lawyer and do not hold any legal qualifications.

    Comment


    • #3
      Thanks for that, I appreciate it and you make some good comments.
      Just a quick one on the 'However, these conditions must be clearly communicated to customers, usually through visible signage' point, though - their sign doesn't state why, just points them towards a policy?

      Comment


      • #4
        You would have bring court claim to find out whether that was sufficient. Each case depends on how the judge views the specific facts rather than a general law.

        In practice who would bring such a claim? I suppose one way would be to turn up with food, refuse to surrender it, and be refused admission. You'd ask for your ticket money back, they would refuse, and so you would sue them in the small claims court for a refund of the ticket cost + eg, compensation for having your day ruined. But I predict few people could be bothered to bring such a claim.

        I wonder what they do if someone says they have a disability under the Equality Act requiring special food not available inside, eg a serious nut allergy, food must be prepared in a nut free environment?

        What happened to you, or is it just a hypothetical question?
        Last edited by PallasAthena; 19th February 2025, 10:13:AM.
        All opinions expressed are based on my personal experience. I am not a lawyer and do not hold any legal qualifications.

        Comment


        • #5
          But I predict few people could be bothered to bring such a claim.
          For £72, I could!!

          I wonder what they do if someone says they have a disability under the Equality Act requiring special food not available inside, eg a serious nut allergy, food must be prepared in a nut free environment?
          Yes, I was wondering this too.

          What happened to you, or is it just a hypothetical question?
          Yes, I wasn't keen on them going through my little girls' bags so they refused me entry.

          Comment


          • #6
            I wouldn't bother.

            I know from work, there are people with such severe allergies that unwrapping a walnut whip twenty feet away from them will trigger an attack needing an EpiPen and a paramedic.

            But that's an open plan office and everyone is trained. Food that can't be verified as safe cannot be opened and eaten in that room.

            In a cinema or swimming pool, an anaphylactic shock can go unnoticed and half the people around you don't know what an EpiPen is. An allergic reaction can kill.

            No sensible judge is going to countermand the food ban on health and safety grounds.

            At best I'd complain to the business that the policy is really not well advertised or explained.

            Comment


            • #7
              Was this search before or after the tickets were purchased?
              Lawyer (solicitor) - retired from practice, now supervising solicitor in a university law clinic. I do not advise by private message.

              Guides and handbooks for Litigants in Person - :

              https://legalbeagles.info/forums/for...60#post1701560

              Comment


              • #8
                I can see why they would do that with food, drink etc on Health and Safety grounds, they do it so they are covered. Food can contain all sort of bacteria, if people who visited the theme park fall ill, they can rule out contamination from external sources. They will know it's from an onsite food source, then they can track backwards through the supply chain. If it's from an external source (Joe Bloggs) it would be virtually 'impossible' to track down.

                Comment


                • #9
                  I'm not normally a betting person but I would put money on it that no official H&S or food safety agency in the UK recommends that leisure facilities should ban food being brought in because it might introduce contamination***. I'm failing to picture how, say, a family taking in their own picnic and eating it at the outdoor picnic tables (as happens in most places I go) is going to poison anyone else.

                  It's got everything to do with Waterworld maximising revenue and profit per visitor and their H&S stuff is a smokescreen to put off complainants. In my opinion (other opinions are available!)

                  If someone took them to court and they put H&S in their defence they'd have to prove it.

                  *** I haven't checked so happy to be corrected.
                  All opinions expressed are based on my personal experience. I am not a lawyer and do not hold any legal qualifications.

                  Comment


                  • #10
                    Originally posted by PallasAthena View Post
                    I'm not normally a betting person but I would put money on it that no official H&S or food safety agency in the UK recommends that leisure facilities should ban food being brought in because it might introduce contamination***. I'm failing to picture how, say, a family taking in their own picnic and eating it at the outdoor picnic tables (as happens in most places I go) is going to poison anyone else.

                    It's got everything to do with Waterworld maximising revenue and profit per visitor and their H&S stuff is a smokescreen to put off complainants. In my opinion (other opinions are available!)

                    If someone took them to court and they put H&S in their defence they'd have to prove it.

                    *** I haven't checked so happy to be corrected.
                    They could say, the food they bought at the venue caused them to fall ill, when in realty it was the food that they bought with them.

                    I know people who bring food and drink with them, wouldn't buy more food and drink.

                    Comment


                    • #11
                      Originally posted by echat11 View Post
                      They could say, the food they bought at the venue caused them to fall ill, when in realty it was the food that they bought with them.
                      Can't see how they would get away with such an obvious fraud. The food they purchased on site was contaminated but no-one else suffered food poisoning, just that family group? Waterworld will trawling the CCTV straight away to find where they were eating.
                      All opinions expressed are based on my personal experience. I am not a lawyer and do not hold any legal qualifications.

                      Comment


                      • #12
                        Originally posted by PallasAthena View Post

                        Can't see how they would get away with such an obvious fraud. The food they purchased on site was contaminated but no-one else suffered food poisoning, just that family group? Waterworld will trawling the CCTV straight away to find where they were eating.
                        All things are possible.

                        Comment


                        • #13
                          Originally posted by pc52straw View Post
                          I wouldn't bother.

                          I know from work, there are people with such severe allergies that unwrapping a walnut whip twenty feet away from them will trigger an attack needing an EpiPen and a paramedic.

                          But that's an open plan office and everyone is trained. Food that can't be verified as safe cannot be opened and eaten in that room.

                          In a cinema or swimming pool, an anaphylactic shock can go unnoticed and half the people around you don't know what an EpiPen is. An allergic reaction can kill.

                          No sensible judge is going to countermand the food ban on health and safety grounds.

                          At best I'd complain to the business that the policy is really not well advertised or explained.
                          Wow, that walnut whip thing is fascinating / scary!

                          Comment


                          • #14
                            Originally posted by atticus View Post
                            Was this search before or after the tickets were purchased?
                            Thank you. After.

                            Comment


                            • #15
                              Hi all. They agreed to refund.
                              atticus, please do tell me the difference, legally?

                              Comment

                              View our Terms and Conditions

                              LegalBeagles Group uses cookies to enhance your browsing experience and to create a secure and effective website. By using this website, you are consenting to such use.To find out more and learn how to manage cookies please read our Cookie and Privacy Policy.

                              If you would like to opt in, or out, of receiving news and marketing from LegalBeagles Group Ltd you can amend your settings at any time here.


                              If you would like to cancel your registration please Contact Us. We will delete your user details on request, however, any previously posted user content will remain on the site with your username removed and 'Guest' inserted.
                              Working...
                              X