How Effective is Test Purchasing?

By Michael Kheng FBII – Kurnia Licensing Consultants – October 2006

www.kurnia.co.uk

Since the introduction of the Licensing Act 2003 last year more and more test purchase operations are being carried out by police, trading standards and licensing authorities, to see if premises are selling alcohol to under 18’s, but just how effective are these operations?

The majority of premises licensed to sell alcohol do so in a responsible manner but there are a large number that still do not. Even those that do operate in a professional manner and do everything possible that they are able to do they still may have that one member of staff who fails to adhere to company policy or to their training.

In most areas fixed penalty notices of £80 are being issued to the staff member who is caught, and in some cases the owners, managers and even other staff members have paid the penalty on behalf of the person caught out. In one instance the customers have even collected the money for the fine! So does this really stop the problem?

The question that has to be asked with penalty notices being served is does this really solve the problem. A fixed penalty notice has to be issued, normally, when the offence occurs. If the person who serves a person under 18 is one of the first to be visited then the message soon spreads around the area that a test purchasing operation is being carried out and therefore most of the remaining premises being visited will be on their guard. People speed in their cars on the road but when there is a temporary police hand gun speed trap you can often see cars flashing their lights to warn oncoming vehicles. As with test purchasing it may solve the problem short term but is the long term issue really being addressed?

The other area of concern is that mainly test purchase operations are carried out in the early evening when the premises are quiet. Two adults either purchase nothing or two small soft drinks followed by to youths requesting to purchase alcohol should alert most people that something is happening.

Maybe the way forward is that test purchasing is carried out and then the problem premises visited after the operation has finished and spoke to about the problems. If police officers are in the premises at the time the test purchase was made then surely they are qualified enough to write down an accurate description of the person who made the sale. If on a second test purchase the same people sell alcohol to a person under 18 then issue a fixed penalty or charge them with the offence.

Some Premises Licences are being reviewed at the first sign of a positive test purchase. Is this fair? Why should the holder of a Premises Licence, which in some cases can be a holding limited company who rent or lease the premises, be targeted and possibly prosecuted when it was a member of staff of the tenant at the premises who committed the crime. Surely the person caught serving should be prosecuted under the Licensing Act 2003. If a person was to be summoned to court and face a higher financial penalty as well as receiving a criminal conviction then a stronger message would be sent out.

Also if the results of any operations were made public in a name and shame press release in the local press then premises may look more responsibly at their policies.

It is very well at reviews premises having conditions regarding policies added but these polices may only really work if backed up by the correct training. If members are staff realise that they could receive a fine of up to £2,000 and also receive a criminal conviction then hopefully everyone would think twice.

Operators should also take a firmer stance and dismiss members of staff who serve under 18’s as it could amount to gross misconduct because the Premises Licence could be reviewed and ultimately be suspended or revoked which could close the business.

If the authorities understood that a DPS, manager, or Premises Licence holder cannot stand over every member of staff all the time and there may be the odd employee out there who will make the sale then surly partnership working would identify those people and they could be trained to understand their responsibilities or dismissed. If the problem still continues then address the DPS, manager or Premises Licence holder.

If the DPS, manager or Premises Licence holder could carry out their own test purchase checks then they could test their staff. The Licensing Act 2003 is very clear that the only people who are under 18 and are able to carry out test purchases are those who are working with the police or trading standards whilst carrying out a test purchasing operation. It is an offence for a DPS, manager, Premises Licence holder or any one else to ask a person under 18 to attempt to purchase alcohol. We are able to send in secret shoppers to test how well our staff serves a customer but are unable to make test purchases in this very important area.

Should the authorities not also be trying to tackle the problem from the other side?

The statistics say that more and more under 18s are consuming alcohol. The reasons for increases year on year need to be addressed. It may not be that they are all purchasing alcohol for their consumption but others are purchasing it for them. Society needs to be educated on this matter. Recently when one of our function rooms was hired for a party a 15 year old was refused service because the person serving was not shown any ID to verify the persons age. Two minutes later the persons parent purchased some drinks and within the round was one for their sibling. The bar person observed the parent passing the drink to their sibling and then informed the duty manager who immediately spoke to the parent to advise them that it was illegal for a person under 18 to consume alcohol on the premises. The manager also informed the organiser to inform the guests of the law and house policy and, as our terms and conditions state, if persons under 18 purchased, attempted to purchase or consumed alcohol then we would close the bar and end the function. Are the authorities aware that parents are happy to buy alcohol for a person aged 15?

I know of premises who have received a written informal warning (if something written on an official police letterhead can be classed as informal?) because they had an under 18 on their premises who had alcohol on their breath although the under 18 had not been caught drinking alcohol on the premises. Surly if action was taken against the under 18 and fines started to be issued to under 18s then the people who are at the route of the problem would hopefully start to think. Again I am not suggesting that premises should start turning a blind eye and use the excuse they did not know what was happening. I believe that the premises should in the first instance be made aware of the situation so they can be more vigilant in future and if problems persist then take further action.

On the same matter one premises I am aware of who received such a visit and follow up letter did so after the police in full uniform and stab vests walked into the premises. Any semi intelligent under 18 would immediately move any alcohol they have been consuming away to one side and find a soft dink to put in front of them. If officers are able to visit premises in plain clothes under cover on test purchase operations then they should be able to visit premises to check if anyone is consuming alcohol dressed in a similar fashion.

The question of under 18’s on test purchasing lying about their age has been the subject of much debate. In the early days I thought that test purchases should be truthful about their age. In real life though, anyone under 18 trying to purchases alcohol will not, unless they are stupid, admit to being under 18. More and more premises now operate a Challenge 21 policy. If test purchases are permitted to lie about their age then Challenge 21 should prevent the sale of alcohol as they will not have the correct ID. If a person serving alcohol questions someone’s age they must have suspected the person to be under 18 so why stop at just asking their age? The message has to get across that asking a person’s age is not enough, proof of age such as a photo drivers licence, passport or PASS card should be requested.

Operators need to train their staff and continually train their staff in order to protect themselves but also the authorities need to look at how they carry out and what they do with the results of test purchasing. They should take what appears to be the easy route, which appears to be happening at present. If headway is to be made then the heavy penalties that the Licensing Act 2003 permits should start to be enforced both to those who serve and those who attempt to purchase or consume alcohol under age.

What should happen to a Personal Licence holder or a DPS is another matter entirely. One should ask that if such a person is caught out in a test purchase operation then should they have their Personal Licence revoked or removed as the DPS?