...........God I HATE this company!

Yesterday, my eldest went to Tossco Loughborough for some John Smiths.
He is 26. He had id.

The lad he was WITH, however, did NOT have id. He is 19.

Tossco refused to serve my lad as they said it was their policy.

Surely, this is implicit slander: they are implying that my lad will give the beer to an underage kid?

He asked to see the manager, who stood firm: even if my lad went in later WITHOUT the younger lad, they would still refuse to serve him.

How **** is that?

Tossco, in my opinion, have got it coming....I wish it would happen soon!

 

The same happened to me when I had my 22 year old son with me, but this time it was Morrisons.
Never been back there since.

I was 59 at the time !

 

Not sure how I feel about this situation, I can't help agreeing with Tescos policy here. If your sons friend is under 21 with no ID, how is Tesco to know he's not underage and your son isn't going to supply him with alcohol?

The under 21 rule isn't a new thing.

It's a case of damned if you do, damned if you don't for Tesco here.

 

So you cant buy beer if your out shopping with your kids ?

 

I've heard of this before. So basically don't go shopping with your son or daughter if you're planning on buying alcohol, bloody crazy!

Nik

 

Taking your kids with you for the weekly shop isn't really the same as two lads buying a crate of beers is it?

 

But if I pop in for some beers and my nephew who is 15 is with me will they serve me ? I`m over 25 and would have ID.

 

I think that particular store need to review their policies tbh, as long as the person has id and is paying for the booze then its right to sell alcohol to them. i think the checkout staff there need to do their 'think 25' refreshers again

 

I've had this quite recently at Morrisons in Scunthorpe, Jeff.

Went with Nat and Isaac (Nat is 26 but baby faced and Isaac is 20 months for those that don't know) to get some beer for myself for the football amongst other tit bits.

I don't need ID lets just say that but the lady on the till refused to serve me because Nat looks under 21 or 25 (whichever it bloody was).

I can understand it in one way as she could have had Isaac at 15 or 16 (anyone that lives in Scunthorpe as I and Jeff unfortunately do will know it's almost a badge of honour to have kids under 16), and thus be underage but it's bloody unlikely.

Anywho, ushered them into the car after buying the other products and went back in alone. Bought the beer from the self service this time and made a point (after paying) of catching the eye of said woman cashier and waving before leaving. Little victories and all that

PITA but you kinda understand in a way why they do it, especially round here. I'd like to think Loughborough is of a better standard

 

This issue was a discussion at work today and someone said that it was a new initiative to try and stop/cut underage drinking. Sounds like a load of bo**cks to me TBH.

 

John smiths is lousy, unaccompanied or not

 

if you attempt to buy alcohol with a valid i.d to prove you are legally able to by it then how can it be refused. the youngster wasnt buying it.
where is the ground for refusing? is there legislation that says it can refuse sale at there discretion?

 

I understand that it could be inconvenient, but that's about as bad as it could get for people with younger people with them. With how freely I have seen some shops sell alcohol, any initiative by shops to make it harder for youths to get their hands on booze should be applauded.

 

but clearly a youth wasnt tryng to buy alcohol?

 

Just go elsewhere

 

Please explain to me how it was clear to the cashier that the person whom they had no way of checking their age was not going to consume the alcohol?

 

I had an altercation there a few years ago.

It was on Christmas eve and I called in to get get a bottle of whiskey for me old mans Christmas present.

The place was packed with ques to the end of the isles, I was stood there for an hour. I got to the till and the old bat serving took the bottle of whiskey and put it to one side and said "no", then went to try and serve the person behind me. Didn't even ask to look at my ID.

At the time I actually had my passport and photo card driving licence on me, I pointed to the 21 or under sign which said driving licence was valid proof of age but she just ignored me.

I was livid at this point and the security guard came over and tried to get me to leave. He actually did take a look at my ID but said there was nothing he could do and it was up-to the cashier.

I said what was the point in the member of staff getting the bottle off the shelf for me in the first place and allowing me to stand with it for an hour if they had no intention of serving me.

The old lady in the queue behind me offered to get it for me but the cashier then said she would refuse to serve her also.

By this time the manager came out, I explained to him what had gone on and showed him my ID, which he was happy with. He sent the old bat upstairs for a break and took over her till to serve me.

He apologized for it and gave me some vouchers which covered the value of the whiskey so I ended up getting it for free. The experience still left me quite pissed off though & I haven't been back since.

I do look quite young and do get IDd quite allot, it doesn't tend to bother me its why I carry my Driving licence. But the way that woman went about it was a total disgrace.

 

im just asking is that the law or regulation applied to the cashier. the purchaser had i.d to prove the purchase was a legal transaction - not really to make assumptions.

as said before if a purchaser has youngsters with them are they not allowed to buy any poduct with an age limit?

 

As you can legally buy achohol at 18 I'd assume it's a policy rather than law.I guess it's a judgment call on the cashiers side, on when to distinguish between youngsters with their parents, and youths getting their older mate to get some hooch for the park.

As with all judgment calls, sometimes the wrong decision is made as highlighted by SDW above, but still in my opinion if it goes someway to getting cheap cans out of kids hand then it's worth it.

 

how can anyone prove that there purchase isnt intended for those below the legal limit for purchasing?
its not possible, so if the purchaser has recognised i.d to buy, then there is no reason to refuse? or are till staff trained to make assumptions?

 

i get the sentiment, but its hardly an effective wayof controlling alcohol supply to under age people. if its the companies policy then buyer beware, if its just a whim from a teller then it holds no credance, nor benefit.

 

If the person selling the alcohol, does sell the alcohol to a minor, they are open to an on the spot fine of £80. This is the reason most of them are extra cautious.

It's worth bearing in mind that the councils and police licencing teams will send in minors with plains clothed officers to perform test purchases.

Challenge 25 was introduced as the chance of mistaking a 16 year old for a 25 year old is less than mistaking a 16 year old for an 18 year old.

The licencing laws made it an offence to purchase alcohol on behalf of a minor, which is punishable by the way of a fine. Supplying alcohol to someone over 18, who has the intention of passing it on to a minor is treated in the same manner.

I suspect a lot of people just like to moan, as they do not expect to have to carry ID in the UK, but other cultures are more used to it. I remember being at JFK waiting to fly back to the UK, where they ID everyone at the bar, no matter how old they are. Even the pensioners were asked to produce ID, which they all did without complaining.

 

You can't prove it either way, which is why I said a judgement call needs to be made. I'm unsure of the exact policy that Tesco hold with this situation, might be interesting to find out.

Just turning this around, if you were the cashier, would you be happy selling a bottle of vodka to an 21 year old guy that was accompanied by what looked like a 14/15 girl?

 

And risk it being a set-up? I bet cashiers don't earn enough to have to fork out £80 for every minor who wants alcohol.

 

This is the reason, and in extreme cases the supermarket's licence to sell alcohol could be revoked. Obviously they don't want that and play cautious. Now that you know that, simply ask the youngster to wait outside whilst you pay. Simples....

 

i understand your point.
but from what i recall the policy is, expect to be challenged for id if suspected of being under 25. if then you provide recognised i.d to prove your age then that is all that can be expected f the seller. the sale goes ahead with the accepted methods stated. regardless of wh accompanies the buyer.
unless ofcourse the compay adopts a policy that says otherwise. even if was a cashier ive taken all reasoable steps to prevent a minor from purchasing alchol. ive not broken any laws, ive adhered to them. any person at any time could buy alcohol for a minor, its not for the seller to try and make assumptions as to where the alcohol is consumed. unless like i say its a policy of the company and theyve undertaken training deemed suffecient by the company to make the guess.

treating the problem of underage drinking is a whole other matter imo

 

It's not policy, it's the licencing law.

A 60 year old could buy a crate of lager, take it home with the intention of consuming it alone. If his 16 year old grandson turns up, takes a can and is then caught drinking it, the law sees the 60 year old as having supplied it to the minor. Technicaly he would have to say that it was stolen by the minor to avoid being liable.

 

id agree there, someone has supplied a minor with alcohol. no debate. he has broken the law by doing so. the seller has not supplied alcohol to a minor. its impossible for a sellerto determine who ends up with it.
now if as has been said the seller has to consider this at the time of purchase then, again that is the law. i didnt know that, and wouldnt agree to be the correct action. but thats not for me to decide, if infact the seller has to assess all parties present at the time of purchase then so be it. but having regulaton so open to an indiviuals perception seems unlikely to result in fair appilcation.

 

If the 16 year old grandson turns up and has a drink so what. This isn't illegal. If their 5 year old turns up and has a drink this is not illegal either.

I dont understand the Tesco policy. So what if the adult is buying with the intent of sharing it at home with an under 18 year old? That is the decision of the adult. Who are Tescos to say what you can and can't do when the law has already given that discretion to the adult?

 

Rightly or wrongly, I would be 'happy', although I would use my head based on how they were behaving. What is to say that the pair haven't gone out for the day Christmas shopping, sisters perhaps? They've gone into Tesco to buy said vodka as a present for their Mam, for example. The one buying has ID, why should it be a big issue? Why should it be down to the cashier to assume there is a reason not to serve the WOMAN paying? However, applying common sense and covering one's back, it would perhaps be a very different story if they both turned up under the influence already and acting stupid.

This is a fair point.

Leading on from this, where does it end? DVDs, games so on....... They are all age restricted and regardless of what people think is worse or not so bad, there is either a blanket 'law' or their isn't. In my opinion it should not be up to a shop worker to think of every possible eventuality while processing a sale, if the person making the purchase has proof of age, the cashier shouldn't need to fear prosecution.

Like I say, there will be occasions when a judgement call will be needed, as it seems to stand, but for the most part, this should not be a problem.