Pub chef refusing to cook for allergies

[Allergyissue87]

Very odd experience yesterday, my son has a nut allergy and we eat out once or twice a month. Generally we get shown an allergy folder or directed to an app to check and given a quick warning about cross contamination and all fine. I know the level of his allergy and am happy to take a small risk of cross contamination etc, otherwise he could never have a meal out.
Yesterday we went to a chain pub, have been before with no issues, asked if we had any allergies, told the woman at the till yes a nut allergy, we've checked the allergen info and happy with risk of cross of contamination etc. All fine, ordered, paid and sat down with our drinks.
Then about 20 minutes later a chef came to the table to tell us he can't cook for us as there is an allergy and our order shouldnt have been taken. I was really confused, wondered if it was a new chef etc, I explained I'd checked the allergy info on their website, it doesn't contain any allergens and I'm aware of the small possibility of cross contamination but not an issue for his level of allergy, and he's eaten it before and all fine. But no, he was adamant he cannot serve food due to this allergy, he was apparently the kitchen manager and would not risk making a child ill, couldn't explain further than that and went back to the kitchen.
I went back up to the bar and asked for the manager, a young assistant manager gave me a full refund and apologised but still couldn't give me a real explanation.

I'll most likely complain through their online form as we wasted about an hour by the time we had got our refund and left, with 2 hungry children, and my son who now doesn't want to eat anything not homemade as 'the man said I'll get ill'.
Am I being unreasonable to expect to be served?

To clarify if my son ate a nut, or something containing nuts he would be unwell and need an epipen, but has been fine with previous incidents of his food touching nut-containing food etc and there wasn't actually anything containing nuts on the pub menu.

Good on the chef.

He could be agency and upon arrival been shocked at the state of the kitchen

As a chef i agree with the chef.
1 there maybe agency chef who isnt covered to serve those with allergies.
2 the place may have bought in ingredients not from nominated suppliers so not officially on the allergen list.
3 child with nut allergy no one wants to take that risk.
Better safe than sorry and Natashas law has quiet rightly made everyone aware of the risks.
If my child had a nut allergy they would not be eating out.

Or a special catering menu for an event being prepared in the same kitchen. Or a colleague bringing peanut butter sandwiches for lunch and accidentally dropping them into the soup. Or, despite prepackaged stuff coming in labeled as "nut-free", someone already have had a bad reaction to it. I don't think the chef did it just for giggles and to lose the OP's custom.

He was right to deline to serve food to you. There is always some chance it would make the child ill. Parents are notriously unforgiving in these situations.

Looking at it from his point of view, you could have been setting up a compensation scam for all he knew; its just not worth the riskif you run a buisness or have a reputation to uphold.

I remember a chef application for a prestigious 5* hotel. Friend turned up, interviewed well. Went to inspect the kitchen found green stinking chicken portions in the fridge. Rodent droppings in the dry storage area. He walked away refusing the job.

Ah the obligatory sad faces in the media

They were in the restaurant, had ordered and paid after prior discussion with the restaurant having eaten there before. They had traveled to get there and been left sitting and waiting. They are then left at a service time with two kids and having to find somewhere else to eat.

I didn't say it was life changing - its piss poor service and hospitality from a restaurant. There is no excuse for seating them and taking their money, leaving them 20 minutes - even if there had been a dramatic change in policy that morning. If a restaurant pulled that stunt on me I'd be complaining to their head office as well and would not give them my custom again.

Actually you're putting words in OP's mouth.

When I say I accept the risk on my young daughter's behalf, I mean that I have considered her history of reactions (once, not anaphylaxis, to a dessert full of peanut butter), history of eating may contains without a reaction and the mitigations we take of having her medications (epipens, inhaler and antihistamine) with us at all times as well as informing the kitchen they need to be extra aware when wiping down surfaces and cleaning utensils. I accept that there is a small risk that that day could be the one she has a severe reaction to a trace amount but that the chance is sufficiently small for the risk to be worth taking in order for her to have a normal life.

We all do the same risk calculation every time we put our children in a car.

I'll most likely complain through their online form as we wasted about an hour by the time we had got our refund and left, with 2 hungry children, and my son who now doesn't want to eat anything not homemade as 'the man said I'll get ill'

Mmm. You won't get compensation for this op so I really wouldn't waste time in overplaying your hand.

And if your child had a milk or egg allergy? It's worrying to see someone who is a chef and should have a working knowledge of allergens saying "nut allergy" rather than just "allergy".

And as someone who clearly loves food and understands its social importance given you've made it your career - would you really be ok with your child never once eating out in their life? Bringing a lunchbox to every wedding? Never popping out for an impromptu pizza?

I think the chef was right. If he can't guarantee no contamination the the safest thing is to give a refund. He could end up being prosecuted.

Really good points for the chefs side, thanks everyone, there definitely needs to be a better system to protect them if anything does go wrong. I'm going to email the chain tomorrow, more to clarify than to complain, if it isn't safe then that's fine, it is what it is, and the service part of being served then refused is separate really just a minor inconvenience.

In my case the allergy isn't too severe, it would only be a real issue if he ate actual nuts, or a large amount of something containing it, but obviously the chef didn't know that beforehand. The only reason I mentioned it is because they ask at the till, every customer, before ordering and looks like they click a button to say yes or no on the till. I wouldn't want to lie to them, or I suppose if any ingredients had changed etc or anything relevant to allergies that's their chance to highlight it

I’m with the chef here. There was a case recently a young woman died from an allergy that wasn’t severe before. She was too casual about it like you are with your son.

I've many years experience of working in the food industry, as well as Allergen Management. I do find your attitude towards your son's allergy rather laid back.

If your son requires an epipen, then it's a serious allergy. I have a food allergy myself and consider it to be non-serious as I do not require an epipen. If your son needs an epipen, then it's a life-threatening allergy. To eat out twice per month with this allergy is very brave. My niece has multiple serious food allergies, and even with me being highly qualified in allergens, her mum won't let me cater for her when they come to our house. And I understand that, as I'd probably be the same, if it were my child.

If my child had a life-threatening nut allergy, knowing what I know from my own working experience within the food industry, there's no way I'd trust someone else with my child's life.

Besides, eating out is over-rated (in my opinion), home cooked food is so much nicer, and safer (provided you are competent in the kitchen!).

Would you really not complain to a restaurant which took your order and your money, then eventually announced that it couldn't serve you and faffed around before refunding your money, and then you had to go out and find somewhere else to eat with a hungry small child?

It's not the end of the world, nobody's going to die, but it would be sodding annoying and it's entirely due to poor management. I'd definitely send them a grumpy email saying that they should pick a position and stick to it.

You would never eat out ? Ever ? How is that remotely practical. A decent kitchen/chef should know what is in the food and be able to at least provide some basic food without nuts...eg chicken breast / vegetables /chips. Peanuts are easy to avoid.

I think it’s you who needs to understand risk assessment.

Risk = likelihood x severity (or consequence).

Sometimes we do things that we judge to have a low likelihood of having a catastrophic consequence. If we did not, we would never do anything at all.

When my adult DSS (relatively mild tree nut allergy) eats something that might be contaminated with traces of nuts he does so in the full knowledge that if it does contain more than a minute trace he will most likely feel sick and his mouth will tingle, and he’ll need his chlorphenamine. He also knows it might cause a more severe reaction, and he might need his epipen, or he may be hospitalised, or he could, in the worst possible scenario, die. He therefore doesn’t eat anything that “may contain” if he’s somewhere far away from medical help, for example on a plane, because his risk assessment changes.

He also knows that when he rides his pushbike in the dark, despite wearing high vis and having good lights, and following the Highway Code, some dangerous driver might collide with him. But he accepts this risk.

I am 52 and allergic to all tree nuts, peanuts and fish. I have only been refused service once and that was at a wedding where the caterers initially refused to cater for me. I ended up signing a waiver form saying I would not hold them responsible if I had a reaction and they then backed down and agreed to cater for me. Since then I very rarely mention my allergy when eating out as I tend to stick to dishes that I have had before and I accept the risk. In the last month, I have eaten Indian, Thai, pub chain, high end restaurant in London, takeaway pizza. Most of the time I don’t even think about my allergies. Most restaurants are good at showing allergen information now on their main menus and I will eat pretty much anything as long as it doesn’t have nuts or fish in it. I ignore the may contain traces labelling on shop bought products because otherwise I wouldn’t eat anything. I think it is going to become more and more common for restaurants to refuse service to allergy sufferers and the only option will be for non disclosure and for the allergy sufferer to accept the risk.

Who said anything about compensation?

A bit small minded and mean.

Clearly you don’t work in hospitality.

Is something (god forbid) terrible happened he only has your word that you were happy to take the risk.

@Wheresthefibre

"So not a third.and we are including people who know someone with an allergy in these figures as well?"

Not sure what you mean by this. If you read the link it states "as many as 20% of the population experience some reactions to foods which make them believe they do have a food hypersensitivity (The Association of UK Dietitians (BDA), 2015)"

So estimated 20% directly affected by food allergies in the UK and growing; as reported by various sources. 1/3 of people for allergies overall, which is relevant for the refusal of other services. European figures relevant for tourism.

My point is simply that a significant number of people suffer from allergies and food allergies particularly. If all businesses refuse service to those individuals (and subsequently anyone they dine with, which makes the true figure much higher) then where does it leave us? That's the only point I was making. The difference between 20-30% of population is irrelevant. It's still a significant portion. Even if it were the more modest estimates of 10%, that's still an awful lot of people.

Peanuts are legumes not nuts.

Most of my family with food allergies are allergic to peanuts from epipen level downwards

The two people I known - who are related - with the worst allergies are allergic to sesame and egg that have put them in hospital.

They do have a lot of tree nut allergies in that family but not legumes, but none have ended up in hospital.

They like me and my family members eat out.

The chef didn't take the booking or discuss the order, and made his stance clear once he found out.
I do think the restaurant could handle this sort of situation better to start with but that doesn't mean the chef did anything wrong here.