Co-OP and the tale of age verification

space_rider wrote: »

I`m 46 and I`ve been ID towards end of last year! My 20 year old daughter wasn`t allowed to buy alcohol as she had her 17 year old sister with her who obviously didn`t have ID to prove she was over 21 as she wasn`t. They left Tesco and went back in with my 9 year old daughter and she got served the alcohol without being asked for ID for my 9 year old!

That would be because it is unlikely that the alcohol was for the 9 year old whereas it might have been for the 17 year old. It is not a matter of IDing everyone if they have a younger person with them but looking at them and thinking could it be for them, if so then ID them. If there is a full weeks shopping there and a couple of drinks then I would expect staff to ID the whole group if it looked like a family but if it was a case of beer and some other alcoholic drinks with a group of teenagers I would expect the staff to ask ID for all the group,.

I do think this case is a bit extreme, after all you can't get drunk on a ready meal!

I find it an irritation as opposed to anything else when I am ID'd. At 24, I was ID'd when buying a bottle of Bailey's in Tesco as a present for my Gran. I didn't have any ID on me but explained that I was 24 and I was told I was not allowed to buy it. My mum doesn't drive and its up to me to take her for her shopping so she was in Tesco too so I gave the Bailey's to her to put through with her shopping. The same SA marched up to us and said my mum couldn't buy it as she was buying it for me. My mum said that she was in fact buying it for her mum (my Gran) and the woman said no, she was buying it for me. Obviously, she couldn't prove this was the fact but she wouldn't let her buy it. The fact that I was shopping with my mother was also "proof" to her that I was under 18. I was annoyed and humiliated - I was pointing at my car going "that's my car! I drive it, I own it. My mother can't drive and struggles with her shopping due to slipped disc's and knee problems so I have to bring her. I could understand if I was 19 or 20 but I'm 24." - yes I know it was pointless and I could have been making the whole thing up but it was bloody frustrating and I was taking my Mum to see my Gran straight after so I didn't want to drive round the whole town wasting petrol trying to get a bottle of Baileys without ID. So we pretty much got thrown out of Tesco.

Then, not long after, a SA in the same Tesco told my what lovely kids I had when she saw my cousins children. Yes, I know at 24 I was old enough to have kids but they were 14 and 10 (and both due birthdays) and they both look around two years older than they are. I just smiled and said, "They aren't mine, I was only 9 when he was born."

So what is it, do I look 17 or 30/35 (and that's supposing I had oldest 2nd Cousin at 16 -21)?

Oh and BTW, the first time I got ID'd was aged 19! I was never asked for ID when I was underage sneaking into clubs, buying alcohol/cigarettes (for friends of course ) or going to 18 films (aged 12 :eek:).

Originally Posted by UK2010
The sale of all products containing alcohol will be restricted by all main retailers. The even includes as I've said chocolates. The staff won't want to get into trouble. This sort of thing is also checked by mystery shoppers. The staff are going to want to protect themselves and their jobs.

Going back to this complete load of tosh you made up. If you were mystery shopped and refused to sell a cooking sauce that contained NO alcohol to a 30+ year old you would fail your MS test miserably.

peachyprice wrote: »

Going back to this complete load of tosh you made up. If you were mystery shopped and refused to sell a cooking sauce that contained NO alcohol to a 30+ year old you would fail your MS test miserably.

You wouldn't if there was a till prompt. But you would if you decided to refuse the sale just because the cooking sauce said wine in the name.

UK2010 wrote: »

And like I said you know exactly what I mean, alcohol that you consume!!!!!! Or have I got to point out the blinding obvious to you!

UK2010 wrote: »

Where?

Or is this where people quote me, add a few things I haven't said, try to put something I have said into a ridiculous context (see adouglasmhor's posts) then try claiming I'm wrong by the things they've added and twisted?

I have quoted you my 1st message in this thread, containing your very quote here as well as highlighted your contradictory confusions in BOLD to make it a little clearer for you.

MoneySaving Super Fan



Join Date: Oct 2004
Location: Manchester
Post Count: 5,771
Thanked 8,551 Times in 3,823 Posts

Quote:
Originally Posted by UK2010
Doesn't make any difference. Products containing alcohol whether cooked or not will have prompts at the till to check ID.

The point is if you get checked for ID (even if infrequently) surely it's easier to know of the possibility rather than having to throw your toys out of your pram everytime you get asked for ID!

I think your missing the point, its Wine that has been pre-cooked into a sauce thus containing NO ALCOHOL, that is common sense, no different to a NON alcoholic drink, or a Hot chocolate powder with baileys flavouring,

I do not go shopping with my passport when buying a shandy or a steak n ale pie, I would not expect to, because of "common sense". It would be like demanding I.D. for buying candy or chocolate shaped cigarettes.

The possibility of someone being stupid enough NOT to know the difference when using their discretion, even if the till incorrectly pings I.D. Would have to be so remote,
it would be far easier for me, rather than throw my toys out of the pram for being so stupidly asked, to instead, throw my shopping out of the trolley and shop elsewhere - rather than take the risk of losing my passport when buying such obvious non alcoholic products, just in case someone does not know the difference between a bottle of Vodka and a bottle of sauce.

Its no wonder they did not know the difference between a relevant photographic and LEGAL I.D.or some laminated cardboard cut out with fancy font and a picture wedged in it.

NOTHING ADDED, NOTHING TAKEN AWAY!

Now whether or not you have edited your original post, I neither know, nor indeed care. However EVERYONE knows exactly what you said, as much as you stumble and deny it, or accuse people of adding text's to your quote's.

Unfortunately, people are not so desperate they feel the need to "smudge" your post's, indeed, they don't need to, its not as if they have anything they need to hide, I know I certainly have not,

That you seem so confused you cannot even remember your own posts, I think is quite worrying, but feel free to read your post INCLUDED in my original post, and claim that it is somehow "someone else" who wrote it.

Personally, I think it takes a real man to say "fair enough, I made a mistake", rather than try so unsuccessfully to convince everyone you know what your talking about.

Either that or just melt into oblivion and chalk it down to a lesson learned.