Parents everywhere will know the struggle of trying to find enough space for their child's pram when out and about.
So you can understand why one family hoped to snag a picnic bench when visiting a tea room recently with their toddler and sleeping baby.
The family wanted to sit at one of the larger tables with enough space for them all and the pram holding their snoozing infant.
READ MORE - The Chase viewers 'gutted' as lawyer gets sent home after aiming for £40k
However, when the parents asked the couple already sitting at a table to move, a nasty row erupted, with the family feeling entitled to the bench because they would struggle to fit around the other tables.
Taking to Mumsnet to ask for advice following the awkward encounter, one of the couple shared their side of the story to ask whether others thought they were being unreasonable by not giving the table up.
She explained: "So my wife and I (same sex couple) are on holiday, we went for a walk this morning and ended up at a tea room where we stopped for cream tea and scones.
"The tea room was next to a river/stream and the courtyard had one side of picnic tables with umbrellas in the sun over looking the river (good tables) and then another side of the courtyard in the shade were small metal two seater tables (crap tables).
"We walked in with our dogs and nabbed the last picnic table. Behind our table was a 2m empty gap where the entrance wall/archway was (this is important). My wife went into order."
But shortly after the pair chose the table, the family approached the woman.
She continued: "A lady with a toddler and a sleeping baby in a buggy came into the courtyard had a look around, there were no picnic tables left so she went back through the archway in the direction of the tea room.
"About 10 seconds later she came back in and asked if I could move tables so she could sit with her toddler and baby, her husband was inside ordering. I said my wife is inside ordering it's not just me here. She asked how many of us were there?
"I said it's me, my wife and my dogs are under the table (asleep). She asked again there are four of us and only two of you, it would be really helpful because the baby is asleep and I can put the buggy behind us in the gap and watch her.
"I said I'm really sorry but no this is a really nice spot that's why we chose it. It was gorgeous, the sun was shining, perfect shade under the umbrella and the river was flowing."
As neither party backed down, the woman became increasingly "embarrassed and felt like a crank."
Meanwhile, another couple sitting nearby to the drama offered to give up their table and take the "two seater", but the mum replied that she needed the first couple's table, so her buggy would be out of the way and she could sit next to the baby as she slept.
But once again the woman refused to budge - according to the narrator, the woman then left, and her wife returned - "chuffed" that her partner had stood her ground.
Defending her decision, the woman explained: "I was fuming that I was put in that position. Two childless women are pretty much invisible in society's eyes and it really annoyed me.
"We are childless because of infertility and it stings to be thought of as unworthy of that experience because a mum and baby walked in and thought they had more of a right to that picnic table than us. Although I'm sure it's not that deep."
To make matters worse, she claims she later spotted the woman seated at a picnic table near the carpark as they left.
"The baby was still asleep and buggy was right next to their table out of the way," she wrote. "So she actually got what she wanted anyway. If that's what is was, or if it was the entire sunshine/river view she wanted."
The woman then asked parents to share their thoughts, keen to know if she had been unreasonable, but many were quick to take her side.
One person wrote: "That woman was incredibly rude and entitled. She wouldn’t have asked a man to move."
A second agreed: "You did the right thing. She embarrassed herself by carrying on trying to guilt you into moving. Don't worry about it!"
Another added: "She sounds pushy and should have accepted your answer straightaway."
"You weren't unreasonable at all, first come first served. No one is more entitled than anyone else to a nice spot in the sunshine with a view, however many spurious reasons they might try and spin to get what they want. You were well within your rights and after the first request was met with a no she should have left you alone," wrote another.
But some commenters suggested they would have moved, if they had been placed in the scenario.
"It’s not the end of the world but I probably would have moved to be courteous," read one reply.
Another said: "I would have moved if there was just two of us sat on a four table."
Do you agree? Let us know in the comments below.
READ NEXT –
Inside the 8-bedroom 1800s Edinburgh house on the market for £1.5 million
Lidl announces new giant Edinburgh store opening this month
New monkeypox symptom identified in study as 'clear sign' of virus
Aldi, M&S and Co-op ban disposable barbecues in Scottish stores
Edinburgh Fringe 'LA tourist' sketch leaves locals in 'stitches'
