Refused Sourz in Asda

[Quickandeasy]

I don’t regard myself as an unintelligent person but am struggling to understand the logic. I was in Asda earlier with my son and his gf (both 18) and noticed the Sourz on offer so put it in my basket.

I was then told that I couldn’t buy this as I was with two people who may be underage. Gf had her ID but my son had left his at home so therefore couldn’t prove he was 18. I was told as we were all together the possibility is I would share it with minors.

Surely based on this logic if a family with children (of any age under 18) wanted to buy alcohol they would be refused as they are with children who they could share it with?

Does this actually happen to others, in which case are you supposed to leave your children outside the shop or get them to hide in an aisle if you want to buy alcohol?

I'm a lone parent so I've always had to take DS shopping with me. I've never been refused alcohol when he was younger, it's only when he was older that it became an issue. I shop at Asda.

Does that happen though? I've never been refused alcohol when DS was a toddler.

People on this thread have mentioned it, IRC.

Thems the rule and I can't get exercised about it.

If baby-face DD doesn't have her ID she makes a speedy exit before we go to the checkout.

DC1 (18) accompanied by DC2 (17) was refused a tub of brandy butter, because DC2 didn't have ID. They sensibly walked to the next supermarket along, DC2 waited outside whilst DC1 made his purchase.

I was refused a while ago buying a tin of spray paint because the cashier said "I believe you that you're 32, but without ID how do I know you're not actually 24? You have to be over 25 before we don't have to ID you. But I can't be certain you're not over 25"

When I asked if he definitely believed I was over 15, he said "yes obviously...but I can't be certain you're over 25".

Both of us left that interaction very confused.

We had this happen in Morrisons once (DH buying I didn't have my ID on me - this was a few years ago now) DH kicked up a stink as it was ridiculous and asked to talk to the manager who put the drinks through and basically told the till person not to be so silly.

Utterly ridiculous!! I remember having to get my husband my buy wine and hiding outside because I lived in London and didn’t have a driving license and didn’t fancy carrying my passport around. They would often refuse sale to him based on me not having ID… I was 29!

They shouldn't of done that
Once asked for id they have to follow through. If caught doing that by test purchasers they wouldn't be happy

This is bollocks (for the UK) but does sound like the US approach.

Why aren't we doing something about this shit? Like making sure check out staff are better trained and don't insult us? This is Mumsnet, surely we can feed back to the Supermarkets that their staff are very confused?

It's just so bloody rude to assume that I'm some liar who gives alcohol to young people! I find it very offensive.

I'd never heard of this happening before. It's compliance through fear and it's not fair to the staff or customers. It's also ridiculous.

Off to check my homemade gins and ginger beer. Cheers!

@Aitchoo homemade ginger bear? Not gonna lie, that sounds bloody amazing.

He's a shit manager then. It doesn't matter what the manager believed till person asked for ID that's the end of it.
Your DH also doesn't come out of this well. Causing a huge fuss when this poor cashier on minimum wage is trying to do their job and would be prosecuted if they got it wrong.
Maybe just carry ID.

The problem is that you can do all the training in the world but when you make a minimum wage employee personally liable for underage purchases where the potential consequence is losing your job, an unlimited fine and/or prison sentence then there are always going to situations where the staff member makes a judgement call based on their assessment which seems overzealous to other people because they can't afford to make a mistake.

I wish we had a national ID card or a blanket ID policy for any age restricted item (like drinking in the US where they pretty much card everyone, every time and you actually have to physically scan their drivers license into the till to register the age verification) so that the subjectivity of age assessment is taken away from the NMW employee and the responsibility is put on the customer. That way it is a simple rule for everyone - No ID=No sale whether you're 18 or 118.

I work in a supermarket, I have had it drummed into me repeatedly that you must challenge 25 and if you fail a test purchase then there can be massive consequences. Everyone makes their own assessment for challenge 25 based on their own experience - I have cousins in their mid 20s so my assessment is "Does this customer look older or younger than <24yo cousin>?" and then ID accordingly - but there is also so much nuance about those judgements, as well as taking into account the context.

In the OP she was shopping with two teens and buying what is a traditionally teen drink in Sourz amongst a small number of items in a basket ... If someone comes to my till and I see either of the teens so much as touch the bottle (or they go through self scan together and I don't see who has actually scanned the bottle) then I am going to ID everyone in the group as I can't guarantee who is buying the alcohol and I'm not risking my job for a bottle of sourz. If the OP was buying a big shop and there is a bottle or two of wine then I am much less likely to ID everyone as I have plausible deniability - I have no reason to believe the wine is being bought for a teen (unless they indicated otherwise).

It's the same with things like lottery/scratch cards - if someone comes up with a small kid and says something like "What numbers shall we choose for the lottery?" or "Which card should we get?" then I am not going to ID the kids as I have a reasonable belief that the parent is just asking their child to 'help' in order to keep them engaged (in the same way you ask them to help with the rest of the shopping by using the scanner/weighing the fruit and veg etc) and can therefore justify the purchase. However if someone walks up with an older teen and says "What cards should we get?" or "What numbers do you want for the lottery?" then I don't have the same plausible deniability - I have been shown evidence that the purchase may be for the teen and therefore I have to ID both people as if that was a test purchase I would fail if I don't and a failure could lose me my job, and I'm not risking that for the sake of a couple of £1 scratch cards.

It is batshit. I'd have gone elsewhere (I know 2 graffiti artists. One in his 50s. The other is nearly 70)

That’s how it is in the supermarket where I work so I will be sticking to their rules.
Oh and also, @HunterHearstHelmsley this isn’t aimed at you but not all supermarket staff are on minimum wage and it makes you sound extremely patronising when you comment as such