Active discussions

Meet the Other Phone. Only the apps you allow.

Meet the Other Phone.
Only the apps you allow.

Buy now

Please or to access all these features

Talk
AIBU?

Share your dilemmas and get honest opinions from other Mumsnetters.

See all MNHQ comments on this thread

Original poster

To think checkout lady was being OTT about alcohol and child?

445 replies

Potkettlexx · 20/02/2020 15:02

In supermarket yesterday with DD 7. DD struggles at school so I let her help with shopping to get her used to the concept.

Bought some bread and small gift pack bottle baileys £5 for in-laws bday.

Got DD to scan the gift box and the bread and press the correct buttons etc... (dd Aldo has some sensory and coordination difficulties so again it helps this doing practical things)

DD wanted to pay with my card so I told her what buttons to press and gave her the card to tap on card reader. Dd didn’t really understand so I just gently took it from her and tapped my card myself.

Before I took over, dd was trying and the woman supervising the self service tills piled up ‘ohh you’ll have to be the one that pats with the card’ or something to that affect.

I was thinking.... for real?!

I get that they need to be very careful when selling alcohol....

I get that a 15 year old can look 18....

I get that an 18 year old could be potentially buying it for younger friends....

I get that they could be disciplined if they were willingly selling alcohol to under 18’s....

But for goodness sake, surely common sense would say she really didn’t need to say that under the circumstances.

After all, the reason the sale of alcohol is forbidden to under 18’s is incase they drink it and quite right.

That’s not the same as the this situation. It was clearly evident I was the one ‘buying it’ and giving my consent. Does she honestly think I was planning on giving it to my 7 year old?! 🙄

OP posts:
SDTGisAnEvilWolefGenius · 20/02/2020 17:12

Clearly the checkout operator was not being OTT, @Potkettlexx - your issue is with the law and with the store’s policies. Personally, I’d rather the shops were a bit over zealous than the alternative, where kids could buy alcohol and cigarettes without being challenged.

Also, as a previous poster has said, letting your dd tap your card might violate your bank’s terms and conditions for the card.

Regarding the contradiction where shops can refuse to sell alcohol if someone who looks under 25 doesn’t have their ID with them, but a parent could go to the shop on their own, buy alcohol and let their little child drink some of it - yes, that makes no sense whatsoever, but I assume it’s because the laws on licensing and the selling of alcohol are entirely separate to the laws on child welfare, and maybe Parliament needs to consider a minimum age for children to have alcohol at home.

I certainly don’t think that the more laisser-fairy welfare laws should be used as justification for allowing underage kids to buy alcohol.

SDTGisAnEvilWolefGenius · 20/02/2020 17:13

Ohhh bugger - I didn’t proof read - laisser-faire not fairy. DYAC!

Candyfloss99 · 20/02/2020 17:13

Oh my goodness, who cares. You got your alcohol. What's the drama?

SDTGisAnEvilWolefGenius · 20/02/2020 17:13

Italic fail.

I give up now. Blush

SD1978 · 20/02/2020 17:14

Would you have allowed her to tap for a pack of cigarettes or assumed the checkout operator would allow her to. Or objected when they said no? Same concept. It's illegal and they could be fined as a company for allowing it.

woodchuck99 · 20/02/2020 17:14

It also doesn't matter if you know how old Someone is. Regardless of going to school with them or not. If they look under 25 the cashier has to Id them. It's the law.

Rubbish.It might be company policy to ID everyone who looks like they might be under 25 but it's not the law! If someone was in the same class as you at school and you therefore knew there were well over 18 you wouldn't be breaking the law if you didn't ID them!

Unsureconfused46 · 20/02/2020 17:14

Accept YABU, OP.
We know that the alcohol obviously wasn't for your dd. The shop assistant most definitely knew this too. However, she has to follow the strict guidelines and she is doing her job. I do not understand why you have taken issue with this to be honest. It's great that your dd was helping but you as the adult tap the card, job done. No fuss.

sunglasses123 · 20/02/2020 17:14

Woodchuck - have you ever worked in Retail or done any Restricted Online Sales training?

FlamingoAndJohn · 20/02/2020 17:15

ITS BLUDY RIDICULOUS when the person is known to be 18 or older!!!

But she hasn’t seen their ID. ‘But I know her’ wouldn’t stand up in court if she were to get fined.

Russellbrandshair · 20/02/2020 17:15

You’re wrong

PointlessAddict · 20/02/2020 17:16

So you’re goddaughter won’t serve people alcohol even though she knows they are over 18??? That’s absolutely ridiculous as well. I’m not supposed she’s getting moaned at.

Why is it ridiculous?

I don’t see how she’d get fined if they were over 18 as she’d not be breaking the law, but if her employer operate the challenge 25 policy she could lose her job if she doesn’t comply. I’d think young people these days are quite hot on having ID on them as they expect to be IDd.

Unsureconfused46 · 20/02/2020 17:16

@candyfloss99
Exactly!
There's no issue as far as I'm concerned. It's not like the assistant wouldn't allow the adult to have the alcohol. She has it!

woodchuck99 · 20/02/2020 17:16

Woodchuck my 2 of my dps ex colleagues have been prosecuted for this very reason.

What exactly were they prosecuted for?

woodchuck99 · 20/02/2020 17:17

Woodchuck - have you ever worked in Retail

Yes I worked in retail for many years.

SoupDragon · 20/02/2020 17:19

ITS BLUDY RIDICULOUS when the person is known to be 18 or older!!!

Bloody. And no it isn't ridiculous. You seem to be unable to grasp the very simple consent of having to show ID

As others have said, whether someone appears to look 25 is SUBJECTIVE!!!

And? These friends look under 25 and thus need to show ID. It's really very simple.

BookWitch · 20/02/2020 17:19

@Potkettlexx

yes it is silly, but it is however the LAW!

I'll ask again, is it ok for you that a retail worker on (probably on zero hours/min wage) to risk a huge fine or lose their job because they HAVE to ask, even if they know the answer? I KNOW it's silly, but it's the law, they will lose their job if they don't do it, how is that difficult to understand?

What other laws would you break to keep your dd happy?

woodchuck99 · 20/02/2020 17:20

But she hasn’t seen their ID. ‘But I know her’ wouldn’t stand up in court if she were to get fined.

She wouldn't be in court would she if she actually did know her and knew she was over 18. I appreciate that she might lose her job if their policy was ID everyone but she wouldn't be prosecuted.

ToeStubber · 20/02/2020 17:21

You’re not unreasonable to be a bit miffed with what happened but the law is the law and those who work in that line have to uphold it. They can get in serious trouble and lose their job. Better to be over cautious than not at all.

sunglasses123 · 20/02/2020 17:21

Woodchuck is ONE of those people who having had no experience of retail thinks they know what really goes on.

My son and his colleagues are very strict on ID. They are required to do 6 monthly online training courses to confirm their understanding.

Are you saying this is all a waste of time because actually it doesnt matter?

CynthiaRothrock · 20/02/2020 17:21

Woodchuck if a person looks under 25 they have to be asked for ID. End off. If licencing come in and ask for cctv footage (which they can and do, do-they do random spot checks as well as send in people that look well under 25 and some that just look about 25) you can be fined for not asking someone they deem to look under age. Just because you know them, doesn't legally prove they are of age. Only Id verification proves they are of age.
Both myself and dp are licence holders. Saying I went to school with him/her wouldn't stand up in court.

Oldhaggard · 20/02/2020 17:21

The think 25 thing is the ludicrous part of the policy. Law says 18 but you have to look 25. which is an incredibly subjective thing anyway

Challenge schemes are a mandatory condition of holding an alcohol licence. In order to get one and keep one you have to show you have a challenge scheme in place and also that you're using it. Licencing teams, the police and trading standards check, regularly, and you only usually find out you've been checked if you fail one.
I totally agree that it's very subjective, everyone has different perception, however the premises can have a license sanctioned, or removed and the license holder fined for not following mandatory conditions - without a law actually being broken. The mandatory conditions are there to ensure alcohol is sold responsibly, so while someone buying alcohol at 21 isn't breaking the law, not asking them for ID when you're running challenge 25 is breaking a condition of the license.

As for the OP, another YABU. Selling alcohol to a minor is illegal, and the person selling is the one that gets all the concequences, regardless of the situation. You don't have to face any of the concequences of the transaction, so you don't see the big deal. The cashiers face the concequences so they see the big deal.
Have we really reached a place in society where someone not breaking the law is seen as poor customer service?

LeGrandBleu · 20/02/2020 17:22

IT is the law. In the same way, other rules could be twisted.

I drive my DD to squad swimming at 4.30 am . There is a traffic light near my house and every morning it is red. Not a single car in view. I still stop and wait for green.

There isn't the need for a traffic light at 4.30 as there is no traffic, but a system is put in place to prevent accident. I could drive through but if police was present, they would fine me. In the same way, there isn't the need to intervene to prevent a 7 year old buying alcohol but the system is in place to prevent underage drinking.

Laws and rules apply on a general context. You can't adapt and interpret case by cas.e

MashedPotatoBrainz · 20/02/2020 17:23

For all the checkout lady knew you could've been a trading standards officer and this was a sting to see if the shop were abiding by the law. They use 14 year olds to catch retailers selling fags to teenagers.

rainbow1982 · 20/02/2020 17:23

Omg potkettle some of these replies to you are hilarious, suggesting your being 'unreasonable' or 'expecting her to break the law' 🙄🙄god above people need to get a grip.

I agree she was being a jobs worth and could've just ignored it, if your daughter was alone buying the baileys then fair enough!! 😜🙄

scarbados · 20/02/2020 17:23

@woodchuck99
I appreciate that she might lose her job if their policy was ID everyone but she wouldn't be prosecuted.

So that makes it okay to expect her to go against company policy, does it?

Swipe left for the next trending thread