You don't need to be an 'investor' to invest in Singletrack: 6 days left: 95% of target - Find out more
So. I am lucky enough to have access to a coastal family holiday home that is 2 miles from my permanent home.
The offers a large garden that over looks the sea, an absolutely beautiful location and outlook.
It would be very easy to travel there and stay for a few days while maintaining isolation and separation.
So do you think it would be unacceptable to stay 2 miles from my permanent home for a few days?
Why wouldn’t it?
The questions I would be asking myself are - if ill would you be using the same facilities as now? And, will other people be using it too before or after you and is there deep cleaning in place to get around the contamination possibility between family members if that is the case?
If the answers to both of these are reasonable, whilst against the letter of the law I’d say it is ok. Others will grumble but only because of conscious or subconscious jealousy.
Im seeing it as ok.
It's a shared family property, however, the closest other family member is 60 miles away and the others much further. So none of them will be using it during the lockdown.
I am in a fairly remote location and it would actually put me 2 miles closer to the nearest medical facilities than I am now.
I think that's fine. You're v lucky, enjoy it
Start packing it's going to be a luvly day.
Passes the reasonable test to me and sounds an ace option...crack on
It’s a shared family property, however, the closest other family member is 60 miles away and the others much further. So none of them will be using it during the lockdown.
I am in a fairly remote location and it would actually put me 2 miles closer to the nearest medical facilities than I am now.
In which case get yourself there whilst the weather is good and enjoy it you lucky sod!
Can't believe you even asked the question as it's close enough to walk to as part of your daily exercise!
And yes I am jealous as a friend is doing the exact same thing at Bamburgh.
And yes I am jealous as a friend us doing the exact same thing at Bamburgh.
Well this one is a little further South at Beadnell.
I'd say it's acceptable as long as you don't post any pictures when you get there to show us and absolutely under no circumstances whatsoever enjoy a single solitary moment of it.
Even more attractive without, hopefully, the hoardes of daytrippers, caravanners etc. 😉
This was a deserted Beadnell Bay this afternoon.
As long as you're not the CMO for Scotland, it would appear to be fine.
@gobuchul - you're a lucky so and so!! To be fair that could be a normal Monday morning up there if you time it right
We were really looking forward to Easter in Seahouses but alas, we'll spend it at home instead.
☹️
Calderwood was crucified by the press and hung out to dry by the government for doing just this very thing, but you should be ok.
Calderwood was crucified by the press and hung out to dry by the government for doing just this very thing, but you should be ok.
She traveled 60 miles, into another region. I have traveled 2 miles, into a village with a lower population and it's easier to isolate and keep social distance.
How is that the same?
If you were so sure about it, why ask on here in the first place then? If you ask a question, and someone gives you the answer you don't want to hear, you can't really spit the dummy tbh.
How is that the same?
It's not, he's just being a dick.
Only if you cycle or walk to it and best not to post pics or we will be on to you!
If you were so sure about it, why ask on here in the first place then? If you ask a question, and someone gives you the answer you don’t want to hear, you can’t really spit the dummy tbh.
I wasn't really unsure about it, from the POV of behaving irresponsible. I don't believe it is.
However, I was more interested in what people perceptions are in the current crisis.
Fair dos.
Brads not being a dick, it's his opinion footflaps. Do you say that about everyone who's opinion differs from yours?.
Non essential travel is against the spirit of the measures, is this essential, or is it just nice?.
We're in the same position except it's 9 miles, two minutes walk onto the beach from the property.
It's certainly crossed my mind.
Whilst walking in the park this morning two locals greeted each other by shaking hands, at least I'd be farther away from that pair of tools.
The pitchforks should be out in force.
In response to the BBC News's findings, Tourism Minister Nigel Huddleston said: "Our advice is clear.
"Essential travel does not include holidays, leisure travel and visits to second homes - and people must remain in their primary residence.
Burn him.
“Essential travel does not include holidays, leisure travel and visits to second homes – and people must remain in their primary residence.
Burn him.
I can't think of anyone who has a "2nd home" 2 miles from their primary residence. I must be in a very unusual situation.
It's such a rare situation to have a 2nd Home within walking distance of the main home, obviously it has not been considered in the guidelines, but I would say it is well within the spirit of the lockdown, and what it is trying to achieve.
+1, I guess people are responding differently to the stress of the lockdown 😂If you were so sure about it, why ask on here in the first place then? If you ask a question, and someone gives you the answer you don’t want to hear, you can’t really spit the dummy tbh.
If it were me I would just pack up & go. I wouldn't even tell anybody. Actually, I'd probably move in there for the duration 😃
we're looking forward to mates rates for off-peak season rentals
😉
At 2 miles from your main home, you'll be using (or not) pretty much the same local facilities. Crack on I say
I think the guidance is pretty unambiguous.
I'm usually in the 'burn him' camp but I'd say crack on. But cut the grass and give the house a good airing / clean.
Essential maintenance for a home 2 miles away - that seems fine to me.
Our caravan is 70 miles away, so a big no-no. Bloody hope the site owners give the lawns a quick strim once in a while - £4k ground rent just paid.
Sod that. I’d be moving in full time from the sounds of it
Crack on and do what you see fit, but the specific advice for people with two homes, even if in the same town (eg couples not always living together) is for individuals to stay in one home, not move between them. The small village you are looking to go and stay in may be entirely virus free so far, and you could be the people who take it there.
Going on “holiday” 2 miles away, unacceptable?
Having been explicitly told not to, the answer to your question must be yes.
Depends - if you’re a member of royalty whose symptomatic for Coronavirus, then crack on. If you’re the CMO for Scotland, then you’ll get hounded out of your job...
Why would you even need to ask .?
You'll be fine buddy using same shops and medical infrastructure... enjoy! The issue with holiday homes/lodges/caravan parks is the massive influx of people who can overwhelm the local drs chemists hospitals etc... I live on the coast of North Wales 10k resident population with 45k hotel/caravan beds potentially available.... some van owners think its because they're English they're not welcome 🙄
FFS
You’ll be fine buddy using same shops and medical infrastructure… enjoy!
Which part of "essential travel only" do you not understand?
Tell you what, roads are empty at the moment, so its obviously ok to ignore speed limits on your way to the holiday home you've been told not to use. You'll get there quicker, so f..k everybody else!
By the way, I'm going to the park/beach 1 mile from home tomorrow with household, going to have BBQ, not going to use any shops, but will use same medical infrastructure if BBQ explodes. Unacceptable?
JUST READ THE ADVICE OR IT WILL GET WORSE
Enjoy the BBQ, make sure you thoroughly cook the chicken. You don't want to get ill
I wasn’t really unsure about it, from the POV of behaving irresponsible. I don’t believe it is.
However, I was more interested in what people perceptions are in the current crisis.
So how far away would you start to be unsure about disregarding the current all but essential travel ban?
Crack on and do what you see fit, but the specific advice for people with two homes, even if in the same town (eg couples not always living together) is for individuals to stay in one home, not move between them. The small village you are looking to go and stay in may be entirely virus free so far, and you could be the people who take it there.
I'd say this. If you going to do it, do it for weeks. A few days probably puts it into non-essential to me.
Plod stopping you and your family packed nto a car with all the stuff you need for a little holiday (in their eyes) may not be so lenient but chances of being caught in a 2 mile trip is probably minimal. The curtain twitchers in the next property however....
On principle I'd probably not.
The more minor bending of the rules that goes on, the more it becomes normalised and the bigger the transgressions get.
I have a realtively young family member with two young children being ventilated in ICU with this bastard disease so I ask you nicely and politely to knuckle down and follow the rules and try and minimise the possibility that you or others will help spread it.
Sorry to hear garage dweller. Fingers crossed for them.
Why would you even need to ask .?
Humble brag that you own two properties and one is a "holiday home"?
I can’t think of anyone who has a “2nd home” 2 miles from their primary residence. I must be in a very unusual situation.
My parents bought a second home about 100m from their first. You can see one from the garden of the other...
My dad still pops between the two at the moment either to mow the lawn or to read some of his books. Don’t think I’d describe it as him going on holiday though.
I'd say acceptable so long as you stay there for the duration of the lockdown.
The more minor bending of the rules that goes on, the more it becomes normalised and the bigger the transgressions get.
Very well put, and best wishes to your family member buddy.
so I ask you nicely and politely to knuckle down and follow the rules and try and minimise the possibility that you or others will help spread it.
Thats as well put as you are going to get. My dad lives in an isolated village with a lot of second homes in it and their biggest worry is people coming out for a 'break' and taking it with them
The more minor bending of the rules that goes on, the more it becomes normalised and the bigger the transgressions get.
This.
I think people in this situation should all stay home. We know what we're supposed to do. If we all start making our own judgement calls then we don't have a lockdown and people are going to die.
family packed nto a car with all the stuff you need
This too. You need some brass neck to arrive at your destination in that style.
Postscript: I was just asking myself what I'd do in the OP's position and I suddenly realised I *am* in the OP's position. I have a boat 3km away. It would be a glorious place to spend time away from anyone. I can even cycle to it because everything I need for a couple of overnights is already on board. I've thought about it a lot. I haven't slept on it, and I won't be. Nor should anyone else.
This thread is exactly what the term ‘humblebrag’ was designed for! 😬
If its 2 miles from you're current home just go for your 'one a day' exercise walk to the beach.
Rules is rules, you're just bending them to suit your own purposes.
I heard someone on the radio asking a question about which house was their main house because they work in London but travel to Yorkshire every weekend, and would now be working from home so could just as easily stay in Yorks. The answer given by the government person was they should be at the address where they are registered with a GP. There seemed to be some logic about that.
Obviously you can argue it doesn't matter which address you are registered at if you are walking distance away - right up until the point where you actually need a Dr and can't walk...
Thats as well put as you are going to get. My dad lives in an isolated village with a lot of second homes in it and their biggest worry is people coming out for a ‘break’ and taking it with them
The logic falls over there if the incomes only go to their house and no where else and don’t fail to social distance. Even if next door was a viper’s nest of virus you are not going to get it from them unless you elect to associate with them in some inappropriate way.
It’s a huge conundrum of inconsistencies that is melting the minds of rule followers (esp those in the fortunate position to be able to rule follow in relative comfort - people still doing their usual 100km bike rides, builders still continuing non essential work and going into peoples houses to do it. But someone traveling 2miles in the same gp’s constituency yet chastised because they put their head on a pillow.
It’s good that we have a big number of rules driven people doing the right thing because the rules say do. It makes things much easier. But the bigger picture was that we were aiming to reduce social contact by 75% to slow down the infection rate. Not 75% each; that is irrelevant. But 75% as a nation. There is a level of sophistication in thought in that that is lost on most people. We need enough of us to be do gooders to bring down the average of that nation to make up for the idiots getting it wrong and those we need to continue to be in social contact for the country to keep on functioning.
It's the movement of people that help to spread the virus, which is why the advice is to minimise movement.
We aren't doing great at that, the reason is presumably because so many people feel they have valid exceptions to this advice, like the OP.
I'm sure that some of those that have gone out unnecessarily thought it would be fine because they didn't have it. Or so they thought at the time.
It’s the movement of people that help to spread the virus, which is why the advice is to minimise movement.
This is incorrect. It is the interaction of people which is helping to spread the virus. Huge difference.
We are being asked to minimize journeys to reduce the manpower needed to keep the road and transport systems going. It also stops us getting it wrong and traveling to a small number of honeypot locations where we are more likely to balls up our social distancing.
We are also being asked to stay in our normal place of living because that is where medical assistance has been provisioned to assist us not in far flung lands. In the OP’s rather unusual situation there is incredibly minimal impact despite melting the minds on those that excel in following rules because.
<It’s the movement of people that help to spread the virus, which is why the advice is to minimise movement.
This is incorrect. It is the interaction of people which is helping to spread the virus. Huge difference.>
Maybe we can agree you need movement and interaction? Interaction in a isolated place won't spread it to new places. Movement without interaction won't spread it.
Some interesting comments on my OP.
Just to clarify, the medical infrastructure that supports me will not change, whichever property I am at.
The local infrastructure that supports all the surrounding villages, is in the village where my permanent residence is. The residents of the smaller villages will all have to travel here for the supermarket, butchers, bakers, chemist and GP.
Realistically it probably provides this for an area of 5 miles.
Should the residents of my village object to travel into here from the surrounding area?
Where I am now, I have neighbours and we all share back garden boundaries. The other place isolated by about 30m. Far less contact with other people.
Well said Convert.
It's difficult not to get frustrated with people being pedantic and sanctimonious with regard to the rules, but I'm trying to remember that if someone is being a dick then it's most-likely born from their anxiety.
But was this thread a subtle troll?
But was this thread a subtle troll?
It was a little bit.
It's a real situation but I was curious about how people would view it.
IMHO I don't think it increases the risk of spreading the virus, probably reduces it if anything.
Also, the area where I walk, is perfect for avoiding contact, you can literally see for miles and avoid anyone else walking there. It also washed down in salt water twice a day.
We are being asked to minimize journeys
Wrong, we are being told not to make non essential journeys
It's quite plain if you understand English.
Some interesting comments on my OP.
Just to clarify, the medical infrastructure that supports me will not change, whichever property I am at.
The local infrastructure that supports all the surrounding villages, is in the village where my permanent residence is. The residents of the smaller villages will all have to travel here for the supermarket, butchers, bakers, chemist and GP.
Realistically it probably provides this for an area of 5 miles.
Should the residents of my village object to travel into here from the surrounding area?
Where I am now, I have neighbours and we all share back garden boundaries. The other place isolated by about 30m. Far less contact with other people.
See above
It’s good that we have a big number of rules driven people doing the right thing because the rules say do. It makes things much easier. But the bigger picture was that we were aiming to reduce social contact by 75% to slow down the infection rate. Not 75% each; that is irrelevant. But 75% as a nation. There is a level of sophistication in thought in that that is lost on most people. We need enough of us to be do gooders to bring down the average of that nation to make up for the idiots getting it wrong and those we need to continue to be in social contact for the country to keep on functioning.
This.
The more minor bending of the rules that goes on, the more it becomes normalised and the bigger the transgressions get.
And this.
Time for my 2 pennies...
i agree with what convert said, there needs to be physical interaction for the virus to spread. (So don’t tough anything/anybody outside the home!)
I also agree with bushy, without movement it won’t spread far.
Anecdote coming!
I’m still working, I go to my van in the morning and touch nothing but the door handle. I then drive to site (atm one of 2, with no other staff on site unless breakdown/fault repair) gloves on when opening the padlock and gate, gloves in the bin. I clean my door handle and wash my hands. I’m still travelling (approx 20mile round trip for each site) but there is no physical interaction with anything else between home and work. If OP took similar precautions I can’t see why he couldn’t go to his other house (although I’d suggest staying there!).
Stgeorge is right, we are being told to not travel however I think this is to have a simple message that makes it easy for people who...perhaps would not think their actions through completely (trying to be nice)
I just had weeks holiday before returning to the ward. I wanted to ride up into the hills or woods for an overnight camp, or go for a night or two on a remote loch in the canoe. I could have done both things safely and with bugger all chance of going near anybody.
Instead I sat at home bored, because it seems to me that everybody has an excuse why they should be allowed to travel, and every one of them justifies bending the rules because 'its safe' or 'neccesary' or the rules 'aren't logical.
We live in a varied country, but we can't have a wide variety of rules, so whether they fit my case or not i'll follow them. I want to be part of the solution, not the problem.
Tomorrow I have to sit in a car with 3 other people for a patient transfer to a hospital 150 miles away, I could do without that.
I have a super yacht only 8 miles away. Well actually I have two but it would be a problem getting to the one in San Marino. Anyway I'm worried that the V8 in the Aston would draw attention to myself as it's quite loud, especially as the roads are so empty and it would be rude not to make good progress. So should I go to the superyacht or furlough the butler and the cook?
My parents bought a second home about 100m from their first. You can see one from the garden of the other…
The epitome of having too much money.
The epitome of having too much money.
Or running a holiday cottage as a retirement income stream a convenient distance away to do the changeovers....
I'm with @gobuchul on this one. I know the area pretty well and can see that spending time in his family's holiday home is very low risk. He can walk there easily. Or ride his bike there with very little effort. If the family are all well and continue to be well, do not interact with others etc. I wouldn't object, I am very jealous though.
If they do get ill then it's the same GP surgery so they're not overwhelming the local healthcare system. It's very different to some one from Manchester deciding to spend the weekend at their caravan in N Wales.
As I also live in a semi rural area it's easy to see how this approach would annoy people in a town or city. Let's face it the Govt don't care about the NE, they are focused on controlling the spread in the major metropolitan areas.
If you weigh up the consequences, then on balance it's not that different to staying at home in this particularly unusual case but will be good for the family's mental and physical well-being.
Instead I sat at home bored, because it seems to me that everybody has an excuse why they should be allowed to travel, and every one of them justifies bending the rules because ‘its safe’ or ‘neccesary’ or the rules ‘aren’t logical.
A result of mixed messaging and everyone being an armchair lawyer 🙂
My 2c’s if your asking whether it’s right or wrong you probably know the answer.
The epitome of having too much money.
Not really. Parents downsized when we (3 kids) left home, put a load of furniture in to storage and thought they could cope with a much smaller house (a two bed terrace). On reflection it wasn’t big enough and had the choice of upsizing again which meant looking for a bigger house nearby or thinking of alternatives. They love the first house location so when the second one came on the market (another two bed terrace) they bought that, took furniture out of storage and split the time between the two. Also on a personal level they were finding it difficult being in each other’s pockets after retirement (my dad can be a touch difficult) so this gave them their own spaces each. Sure no one would blink if they’d upsized to a 4 bed detached.
They have 2 homes because they dont want to spend 100% of their time together?
They dont need two homes so close together, too much money and a cause of house price increases due to shortages created by examples like this.