Jump to content

Recommended Posts

Just found out from our Nanny that adults are now no longer allowed upstairs at soft play due to Health and Safety reasons! Thus he can't let the little ones go upstairs any more as it's not really safe for two 20 month olds to roam up there on their own. Does anyone know anything about this? Seems ridiculous and surely less safe for the kids.

Yes, I got a thorough telling off for being up there with my kids a couple of months ago. Apparently "it causes too much wear and tear on the frame". Ho hum. Means I no longer go there as neither of my children are capable of managing it by themselves, and they get too bored being downstairs.


From what I saw the day I was there (school holidays) it means that older kids get the chance to run riot, blocking off parts of the upstairs section so that the little ones can't get through.


Happily the soft play at Beckenham Spa still allow adults to take part, and it's much cleaner/nicer/more fun than Peckham!

Pickle Wrote:

-------------------------------------------------------

> Happily the soft play at Beckenham Spa still allow

> adults to take part, and it's much

> cleaner/nicer/more fun than Peckham!


True, but it's also much more expensive than PP.

I got told off years ago for being 'upstairs' at PP - back when my 5 year old was around 2, so I think it has always been the rule, maybe it just always doesn't get enforced so much.


I agree it is annoying, I've been to other soft play's up in Derbyshire where my Mum and Sister live and they also allow adults to go up to the higher levels with the children.


Molly

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!

Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.

Sign In Now
  • Latest Discussions

    • Depends on what the Barista says doesnt it? There was no physical confrontation with the driver, OP thinks she is being targetted when she isnt. These guys work min wage under strict schedules so give them a break unless they damage your stuff
    • CPR Dave, attendance records are available on Southwark's website. Maggie Browning has attended 100% of meetings. Jon Hartley has attended 65%.
    • I do hope NOT, wouldn't trust Farage as far as I could throw him, Starmer & co.  He's backed by GB News which focus's predominantly on immigration while the BBC focus predominantly on the Israel - Gazza conflict.   
    • Everyone gets the point that Corbynites try to make with the "total number of votes cast" statistic, it's just a specious one.  In 2017, Corbyn's Labour got fewer votes than May's Tories (both the percentage of votes and aggregate number of votes). In 2019, Corbyn's Labour fewer votes than Johnson's Tories (both the percentage of votes and aggregate number of votes); and he managed to drop 2.7 million votes or 6.9% of vote share between the two elections. I repeat, he got trounced by Boris F***ing Johnson and the Tories after the Brexit omnishambles. It is not true that a "fairer" electoral system would have seen Labour beat the Tories: Labour simply got fewer votes than the Tories. Corbyn lost twice. There is no metric by which he won the general election. His failure to win was a disaster for the UK, and let Johnson and Truss and Sunak into office. Corbynites have to let go of this delusion that Corbyn but really won somehow if you squint in a certain way. It is completely irrelevant that Labour under Corbyn got more votes than Labour under Starmer. It is like saying Hull City was more successful in its 2014 FA Cup Final than Chelsea was in its 2018 FA Cup Final, because Hull scored 2 goals when Chelsea only scored 1. But guess what - Chelsea won its game and Hull City lost. Corbyn's fans turned out to vote for him - but an even larger group of people who found him repellant were motivated enough to show up and vote Tory.
Home
Events
Sign In

Sign In



Or sign in with one of these services

Search
×
    Search In
×
×
  • Create New...