Full story here:

http://www.dailymail.co.uk/pages/live/ar...in_page_id=1770

Now, I'm not sure how the supermarket worker made that mistake. The lady in question is in reasonable nick, but no way does she look under 18.

Does anyone else think she's over-reacting though? That would never happen to me, but if it did I would be rather chuffed, and happily go elsewhere to buy my wine. Wouldn't dream of complaining to the manager. Perhaps she was after a free bottle?

It's the law here in the United States. If you can't produce ID, you can't buy alcohol. Period. I can't tell you how many times I hear kids saying things like, "But I come in here all the time!" Kids make all KINDS of claims to try to buy beer. The checkout girl was right to stick to policy. I wouldn't want to pay a 5,000-pound fine!

And was this woman driving? What was she doing without ID?

Most places clearly state, 'Under thirty? We may ask you for your ID'
so if I ever get asked, ha ha, as I'm twenty years older than that, I offer them a vacation to Hawaii as thanks.
Just kidding.

I've been carded at about 34 or so in the Midwest for a bottle of wine. I told the supermarket cashier she'd made my day as I had two small kids in tow.

Hmmmm... This was just plain silly. I'm not a drinker myself... but I think I'd be angry, especially when the lady's daughter attempted to purchase the wine, and DID provide her I.D. (And I assume that the daughter was also the driver, btw...) When the clerk refused to sell the alcohol to the daughter, it then became a matter of her passing judgement on whether or not the mother should have access to alcohol at all! I would think that the law only required that I.D. be provided for the sales of alcohol, and that "possession of alcohol" would involve a completely different law, which the clerk would no longer be in charge of enforcing. And obviously, neither the mother nor the daughter were breaking any laws regarding possession of alcohol...

But the lady's reaction was appropriate, just go somewhere else to purchase her wine. No point in getting too riled up about it...

In some jurisdictions, it's law that everyone needs to provide ID. It became that way because too many clerks said 'well, I thought they were older than 30' or whatever the age was where they didn't need to ask when the clerk sold alcohol to a minor without asking for ID.

I didn't read the article, but from the comments, I think it may be a case of there are some places where there are laws that you cannot purchase alcohol for someone else (such as a person who was not allowed to purchase alcohol).

Sounds like a clerk who had the 'fear of God' put into them and thought maybe it was the police trying to trip them up.

In the UK, any store has the right to refuse to serve ANYONE with alcohol, if they have reason to believe that it is for consumption by a person under 18.

Many years ago I was doing xmas shopping with my (then) 14 year old daughter in tow, - at the checkout, I joked to my daughter "Don't you go drinking too much of that vodka" - the checkout operator refused to serve the vodka, and called the manager. I then had the embarassing task of convincing the manager that my comment to my daughter was a JOKE!

Same thing here - they won't sell it to you if you happen to have any child that isn't your own with you. Heaven forbid you babysit your sister's kids and need to do some shopping.

Sort of along the same lines as the original story: I am 47 years old and I was trying to purchase the last of a particular alcohol bottle the store had in stock and had forgotten my ID. I was shopping with a friend, who's 77 years old, and she offered to purchase the bottle for me. The store clerk refused to sell it to her either and said that the bottle had to be placed under the counter until it could be re-stocked on the shelf. I had to go back home, only about 7 miles away, get my ID and go back to the store. I told the clerk to get that bottle back on the shelf as I was coming right back. Thankfully she did, but it was a hassle that I could have done without. Neither my friend nor I look as if we're under the legal drinking age.

Quote:

---

And was this woman driving? What was she doing without ID?

---

ferfer, here in the UK we don't need to carry any form of ID with us, even when driving. Our laws allow us five days to produce our documents to a Police station of our choice. The only ones that regularly carry any form of id, apart from 'officials' are the 18 to 25 year olds, and then it's purely voluntary. Also, there is no law about a minimum age for the consumption of alcohol, only the buying of it. If it is in your own home you can legally allow a 5 year old to drink. In restaurants, and pubs that sell food, a 14 year old can drink as long as they are eating as well. As soon as the meal finishes, that entitlement stops.

When I hear a story like this I start to wonder if information is missing, unless of course, the girl at the till was just being ridiculous. Could be the latter had witnessed the customer abusing alcohol in the past, acting a little drunk and disorderly or just making a LOT of purchases, and she could not in good conscience be party to her alcoholism. She used the I.D. by the book approach as an excuse not to serve her. A bit high handed but I can see it. Just a theory.

Where I live, the Texas Alcohlic Beverage Commission actually sets up sting operations to catch store clerks,bartenders,etc. selling alcohol to or for minors. If caught they will be arrested. Im 35 years old, and it is nearly impossible to purchase alcohol without an ID. A little extreme maybe, but those are the facts. Stories like this are a dime a dozen for me.

I prefer it this way. It has been a hassle for me in the past, being accused of using a fake ID when I was showing my REAL ID, being accused of buying alcohol for some totally unrelated teenagers in line behind me, etc. But we have a LOT of alcohol-related teenage car accidents here, and we are a college town with LOTS of underage undergrads, and I'd just rather be safe than sorry.

Loth, that's a problem we don't have here. The legal age for buying alcohol in the UK is 18, not 21. We also have sting operations in this country run by Trading Standards, and they do catch some retailers and publicans, but not that many. The case in point was a shop assistant being a little over zealous in applying the rules. Most stores that sell alcohol have notices saying that if you look too young you will be asked to prove your age.Yaar, it doesn't matter if a shop assistant thinks you are an alcoholic, as long as you are not drunk at the time of purchase, there are no reasonable grounds to refuse.

Actually RMG - ANY retailer in UK has the right to refuse service to ANYONE, at any time, on ANY item.

It's HIS store, and if he doesn't want to serve you - that's his right.

I agree, and believe, there is more to the story. Another theory -- it's possible the store clerk has sold alcohol to minors in the past (unknowingly maybe) and has been told by her boss "if you don't ask for ID again, you're going to be fired!" Maybe it was the management that put her in that position for any reason at all.

Working in part in the alcohol industry here in Texas, I can tell you this -- drinking by minors (under 21) is allowed, if the parent or legal guardian gives it to him/her. I have had a TABC (Texas Alcoholic Beverage Commission) license within the past year, and to get it, one has to take a class and a test. I believe the intent in giving alcohol to minors by a parent allows them to serve to their children in their own home if they desire. It does not allow them to give it to anyone else, at a party, etc.

Having said that, would I sell it to a parent who I believe is going to give it to a drunk person under 21? You bet I would not -- I'm liable!

Bottom line is, maybe that person selling the alcohol had more reason than just pestering the woman for her ID. Could it have been taking the rules to the extreme? That's possible too. I say the newspapers that choose not to include all the facts should get their act in gear and do what we pay them to do -- report all the news in a fair and accurate manner.

That's exactly right Jar, you would be liable. You would also be liable if you sold alcohol to a 41 or 54 yr old who was intoxicated, another violation of TABC law. I understand that these laws are meant to protect people, but these TABC agents go too far sometimes. It's just more revenue for the state in my opinion, but that's whole different thread.

As far as the article is concerned, until we develop the "Minority report" style retina scan device, dont go anywhere w/o your ID...period.

I don't see what the big deal is with this at all. So what, they didn't sell to her. I am 32 er, I mean 28, and often carded for cigarettes. I lost my I.D. for awhile and until I got it replaced, it was a bit of a hassle, but I didn't get angry with cashiers. I would certainly go back to the store! It was my fault, not theirs that I couldn't show I.D.

Quote:

---

Actually RMG - ANY retailer in UK has the right to refuse service to ANYONE, at any time, on ANY item.

---

That's very true delboy, but a major retailer such as Waitrose wouldn't normally refuse without good reason. And a spokesman for the store did admit that the assistant had been a little over zealous.

The deal roofoo, is that in the UK we don't need to carry ID for any reason, let alone to go shopping.There is a scheme where young people can carry a card if they wish, but as I said previously, it is voluntary.

Another thought on this (and not too sure if it applies globally, but...).
I used to manage, for a short while, all-night stores that sold LOTS of beer and cigarettes (bread, Twinkies and milk, too ). One of my clerks was busted by one of these "sting" operations one night - sending out underaged people (by the city) to see if they could purchase alcohol. In that case, I later saw the 'customer' in question and, I'm not kidding, he looked like a just slightly younger version of Willie Nelson . He was, technically, just a few weeks away from being of legal age, too. All that aside, though, my store did break the law, so we took it on the chin and paid the fine and checked IDs on everyone who wasn't a dead ringer for George Burns and/or Quentin Crisp for weeks. And some of the staff even checked the Georges and Quentins.

That particular event aside, though, on evenings when these Liquor Agency folks would go store-to-store hoping to arrest folks, IF one store got cited there would be (as a courtesy among other workers in other stores in the area) a phone call alert from location to location. As a blanket warning, really - NOT because there was a majority of places selling alcohol illegally or anything. Just that "they're out tonight, check IDs on everybody!" And that would be exactly what happened. Everybody who bought alcohol (I had one guy who even checked his own brother's on one such occasion - which wasn't as weird as you might think, since the agency dudes would sit out there in their cars with binoculars scoping out transactions ~ and they didn't know whose brother was who). If any sale looked questionable (to them), they'd send in Willie Nelson! So it became a city-wide alert to really, really be strict in ID checking in the event that a problem had occurred somewhere. It may sound like ID procedures were ONLY strict or followed on occasions like an arrest/citation at a 'local' store ~ which was not the case, not by a mile. But, clearly and realistically, we didn't check EVERYBODY'S (except on nights like the one I mention here). So, maybe, this grandma in the article happened into her shop, in this instance, on some such similar occasion? Impossible to know, really. Our old store-to-store "heads up!" calls weren't something many folks knew about. Other than the store personnel...

I tell ya, for a young person working part-time in stores such as these (which, in my experience, constitutes a large portion of them), those fines for these infractions were especially daunting. So they stuck together and had each others backs, across-the-board.

I hope the assistant was sacked or at least hauled over the coals. It looks more personal than anything else, as the others from the UK have already said, there was absolutely no reason to ask her for ID as she was patently well over eighteen.

I doubt she could be Sue.

I work in a call centre for a bank and we have to be extra careful over ID'ing customers. We have minimum ID requirements but even if the customer can answer the questions, we are still at liberty not to discuss things. This mainly happens when the account is in a female name, but there is what sounds like a male caller on the 'phone, or vice versa. Sometimes the age of the voice on the 'phone just doesn't match the age on the screen, or there are various other little things which rouse one's suspicions. Same with signatures when we're checking written work. If I'm not 100% happy with the signature, I don't do the work.

We can't get reprimanded for being too cautious, but we can get reprimanded for not being thorough enough if we do end up making mistakes with ID.

Edited to add: some sort of personal grudge would seem to explain things, both the refusal to sell the alcohol and the woman's over-reaction in getting quite so wound up about it.

That is certainly one possibility, another is I am wondering if perhaps the assistant had just sold alcohol to a person who did look young and didn't ask for ID, then was reprimanded for not asking (that person) for ID when selling alcohol so was being stupid and 'obeying' the instruction to ask for ID. That also seems to be a possible scenario.