Government consider quarantining people who arrive in UK from abroad.

[DonPeffers]

11 hours ago, Blatman said:

 

Principle trumps number of zeros. Blatant profiteering is "bad" whether it's a tenner or a thousand. But the big numbers make for a better press frenzy rather than examining the morals properly so big numbers get the headlines.

 

11 hours ago, Blatman said:

 

Only if he can't work from home. And there's the rub.

My question is how will this be policed?

Regarding the £1000 (quarantine breach) fine, that was a government decision so no press involvement in the number of zeros.

 

ONS state 30% in UK worked from home in 2019 and since covid more have been encouraged to do so if possible. Still could leave many very badly out of pocket if holidays lost and no refund. The quarantining is self-isolation, possibly with Police checks, but NZ had to deport some who breached the quarantine and as stated before £1000 fine is loose change to a very high earner.

[Blatman]

8 hours ago, DonPeffers said:

Regarding the £1000 (quarantine breach) fine, that was a government decision so no press involvement in the number of zeros.

 

 

Wan't really what I was getting at. Loose change to a high earner means what? Fixed fines are always going to be disproportionate and it's been that way for decades. 

 

8 hours ago, DonPeffers said:

Still could leave many very badly out of pocket if holidays lost and no refund.

 

Does anyone book a holiday without ABTA backing it? Or Insurance? Or uses a credit card for ANY part of the payment?

[Steve (sdh2903)]

28 minutes ago, Blatman said:

Does anyone book a holiday without ABTA backing it? Or Insurance? Or uses a credit card for ANY part of the payment?

 

Problem will be when the FCO 'dont travel' advice is lifted. This will then allow the holiday Co's to operate. So if travel is allowed in say August but Joe doesn't want to travel Joe won't get a refund as its his choice not to travel. Not by his insurance, Abta or credit card. How this would work with the nonsensical quarantine I dont know.

 

Its going to be a fine balance for the holiday companies to allow people to change their bookings if they don't want to travel or just saying tough we're operating its your choice. Though these companies can't afford to pee off too many people as they will need the repeat custom in future. 

[DonPeffers]

14 hours ago, Blatman said:

 

Wan't really what I was getting at. Loose change to a high earner means what? Fixed fines are always going to be disproportionate and it's been that way for decades. 

 

 

Does anyone book a holiday without ABTA backing it? Or Insurance? Or uses a credit card for ANY part of the payment?

If the 190 euros covid test is exorbitant do you know of an alternative cheaper reliable test that UK could introduce as might help many returning travellers?

 

A £300k per week footballer facing a £1000 quarantine breach fine pays one three hundredth of his weekly earnings;  on that basis a £600 per week worker proportionally would pay a £2 fine (loose change).

Decades of handing out fines disproportionately is IMO not a good argument for their continuation so I guess we'll have to disagree on that.

 

The ABTA/credit card/insurance angle doesn't apply as Steve has indicated.

[corsechris]

There are certainly going to be a lot of folk stuck in this quandary given how far ahead some book. I know I usually book well in advance.

 

As things are now, if I was faced with paying a holiday balance, I wouldn’t, I’d risk losing the relatively small deposit and hope there might be a slim chance of recovering it, rather than digging myself a much deeper hole, particularly with all the talk of trying too change the rules so that refunds could take much, much longer.

 

Slightly longer term, I think any thought of booking a holiday is ‘optimistic’ given the very high chance of further outbreaks leading to sudden travel restrictions and lockdowns, plus the fact the travle insurance now explicitly excludes any Covid-19 related consequences.

[Blatman]

1 hour ago, DonPeffers said:

Decades of handing out fines disproportionately is IMO not a good argument for their continuation so I guess we'll have to disagree on that.

 

We agree. The alternative of means testing every fine levied is impractical. I may fall back on another old aphorism... if you can't do the time, don't do the crime.

I appreciate a fine for breaching lockdown because people can't afford to be off work is unfortunate. My thinking is that any company which can't afford to pay for a worker to spend two weeks in quarantine should furlough that worker for the 3 week minimum then un-furlogh them. No costs to business and worker gets paid.

 

At the moment it is clear that no-one can be forced to do anything that may even have a hint of Covid-19 jeopardy and employers are being asked to make sure they are doing all they can to ensure employee safety. Holidays are another piece of that puzzle. I myself am waiting to see what happens for business travelers BUT I am able to work from home so it may not matter on the way back. The trip out may take a while though...

 

I haven't looked at how ABTA are adapting their processes to accommodate the current situation. In my mind I feel it would be unreasonable of them to apply "normal" exclusions in these abnormal times. I'm guessing they will deal with these on an individual basis* and take advantage of most peoples reluctance to escalate a complaint when it looks to be a losing battle.

From my own experience and those of my friends, holidays are being deferred for 12 months with no issues at all. No-one I know has had cause to speak to ABTA or their holiday company other than to confirm the deferment. 

 

*Companies using this line to me are tying to avoid making a sweeping announcement of a change of policy to save money. They deliberately thin the herd in the hope of scaring enough people individually as to help their bottom line rather than the consumers they are supposed to protect.

[Blatman]

And none of that answers the question as to how quarantine will be policed?

Exactly how are the authorities going to monitor if someone is breaking quarantine? Plenty of people will abide by the rules of course but there are bound to be plenty who don't. How will those in quarantine be monitored after returning to UK?

[DonPeffers]

25 minutes ago, Blatman said:

And none of that answers the question as to how quarantine will be policed?

 

https://www.thetimes.co.uk/article/cressida-dick-police-will-not-enforce-travel-quarantine-rules-z0rlllskr    Sources have suggested that police, Border Force officials and local authorities could conduct spot checks at the addresses of quarantined travellers, punishing breaches with fines of up to £1,000 or deportation although Met Chief Cressida Dick said Police will not enforce travel quarantine rules.

 

So a bit 'up in the air' then?

[Blatman]

5 hours ago, DonPeffers said:

Force officials and local authorities could conduct spot checks at the addresses of quarantined travellers, punishing breaches with fines of up to £1,000 or deportation although Met Chief Cressida Dick said Police will not enforce travel quarantine rules.

 

So a bit 'up in the air' then?

 

Sorry, I was in, I just didn't hear the bell. I sleep with earplugs in when I don't want to be disturbed.

*Shows well used earplugs to official*

Always remember, innocent until proven guilty. They have to catch a quarantine breaker outside who isn't shopping or exercising. And remember I can shop or exercise wherever I like...  

[DonPeffers]

17 hours ago, Blatman said:

 

Sorry, I was in, I just didn't hear the bell. I sleep with earplugs in when I don't want to be disturbed.

*Shows well used earplugs to official*

Always remember, innocent until proven guilty. They have to catch a quarantine breaker outside who isn't shopping or exercising. And remember I can shop or exercise wherever I like...  

My understanding is those in 14 day quarantine cannot leave their nominated address for any reason (building ablaze excepted) so no outdoor exercise and shopping to be delivered.

 

Supposedly the Act starts on 08 Jun 2020 and as Commons in recess until 02 June they'll need to get their skates on. We'll need to see how the Act is worded.

 

From 01 Jul 2020 Spain lifts their 14 day quarantine.

[Blatman]

And it will be policed how? 

I agree on the need or rationale or whatever for quarantine and I support it of course. But policing it is a whole other question.

And in the mean-time I happen to know of at least three people who drove from Holland to the UK on Friday. No restrictions, no tests, nothing, and no requirement to quarantine, although these guys are sensible so they will do so anyway. But if they didn't, who would know?

[DonPeffers]

I refer you to my previous 2 posts and await Act going through Parliament for clarification.

[Blatman]

4 minutes ago, DonPeffers said:

I refer you to my previous 2 posts and await Act going through Parliament for clarification.

 

My point with the above examples is that it'll 2 weeks too late for quite a lot of travelers. And when it is law, policing it is going to be nigh on impossible.

[DonPeffers]

I wait to see what's in the Act.

 

Seems strange UK introducing quarantine when many other countries are starting to lift theirs.

[Blatman]

5 hours ago, DonPeffers said:

I wait to see what's in the Act.

 

Seems strange UK introducing quarantine when many other countries are starting to lift theirs.

 

We were generally considered to be a week or two behind Italy. That carries through, surely?

Plus I take some comfort from our Government appearing to take a little more time and care with potential re-importation of the virus. Yes there will be the usual "conspiracy" warblings but they're idiots...