• Visitors can check out the Forum FAQ by clicking this link. You have to register before you can post: click the REGISTER link above to proceed. To start viewing messages, select the forum that you want to visit from the selection below. View our Forum Privacy Policy.
  • Want to receive the latest contracting news and advice straight to your inbox? Sign up to the ContractorUK newsletter here. Every sign up will also be entered into a draw to WIN £100 Amazon vouchers!
Collapse

You are not logged in or you do not have permission to access this page. This could be due to one of several reasons:

  • You are not logged in. If you are already registered, fill in the form below to log in, or follow the "Sign Up" link to register a new account.
  • You may not have sufficient privileges to access this page. Are you trying to edit someone else's post, access administrative features or some other privileged system?
  • If you are trying to post, the administrator may have disabled your account, or it may be awaiting activation.

Previously on ""It is bureaucracy gone mad"."

Collapse

  • Board Game Geek
    replied
    LOL - Brilliant piece of 'Mr Logic' dialogue, thanks BGG. Oddly, I actually believe you would say that !

    LOL!

    Believe what you like.

    Would I, for example, bend over (ooer) backwards to please a person and try to assist them ?

    Would I harbour a grudge for 14 years against a person ?

    Would I say any more ?

    Leave a comment:


  • lukemg
    replied
    Originally posted by Board Game Geek View Post
    If it would have been me serving, and the old guy got bolshy on me, saying "FFS Serve me and scr3w your policy", I'd have said "That demand implicates me in an intended act of coercion to willfully break the law and I refuse to be an accomplice" then called security to have Citizen Smith carted away.
    LOL - Brilliant piece of 'Mr Logic' dialogue, thanks BGG. Oddly, I actually believe you would say that !

    Leave a comment:


  • Board Game Geek
    replied
    I think some people are still missing the point.

    The edict being that, without fail, the checkout person is to ask each person if they are of legal age to purchase the items in question.

    If they do not, they face prosecution and/or a fine.

    Therefore, it doesn't matter WHO is coming down the checkout, from Arthur Stubbs, 71 from Acacia Gardens in Frinton or Her Royal Highness or the Good Lord Almighty Himself.

    No exceptions, no special priviledges, no dispensations.

    He correctly applied store policy.

    It was the old guy who decided not to comply, and thus cause a scene.

    Whether the policy makes commonsense or not is a moot point. At the time of the transgression, the policy was effective.

    If it would have been me serving, and the old guy got bolshy on me, saying "FFS Serve me and scr3w your policy", I'd have said "That demand implicates me in an intended act of coercion to willfully break the law and I refuse to be an accomplice" then called security to have Citizen Smith carted away.

    Leave a comment:


  • xoggoth
    replied
    Not quite as old as him but I have this problem all the time because I look so youthful. What with that and having to bat off the all the women in the checkout who want to take me home because I am so handsome and athletic, going to the supermarket is a chore.

    Leave a comment:


  • r0bly0ns
    replied
    Absolutely.

    Leave a comment:


  • Chugnut
    replied
    Originally posted by r0bly0ns View Post
    It was nothing to do with any 'law' being broken, it was a store policy.
    Whatever, it's Friday.

    I still agree with the old man; it's moronic beyond belief to ask for confirmation of age or to produce ID when dealing with a coffin dodger.

    Leave a comment:


  • r0bly0ns
    replied
    Originally posted by Chugnut View Post
    *Anyone* who can't see that a guy of 71 is clearly over the legal age to buy alchohol is a turd. No argument.

    The law is obviously stupid for not having a common sense clause, but if I was the manager I would have served the guy. And anyone who says "but that's breaking the law" I bet you did the last time you drove your car.
    It was nothing to do with any 'law' being broken, it was a store policy.

    Leave a comment:


  • Mailman
    replied
    Originally posted by DimPrawn View Post
    I believe it is the law. Once challenged, the person must produce ID prooving they are 18+, or by the law, the sale cannot proceed. The manager was following the law.

    Even if the person is 200 yrs old, once challenged, they must produce ID, the store or the staff could be prosecuted if they say "on 2nd thoughts, it's okay".
    I believe the law was being applied to that Gurka geeza when they turned him down, after a lifetime of service to the crown, when he asked if he could move here to live out his final years in comfort and peace.

    The law was also applied to the intepreters in Basra when they were all told to jump in line and wait their turn to have their applications for asylum approved.

    And it was also the law when some numpty told some saffa geezer that he couldnt stay in England because he had spent more than 3 months of his 4 year stay out of the country...never mind the fact the fukka had just spent the last year fighting for Queen and Country in eye-rak!

    Yes...its just the law!

    The fact is, the law does not stop people from applying common sense!

    Mailman

    Leave a comment:


  • r0bly0ns
    replied
    Originally posted by DimPrawn View Post
    I believe it is the law. Once challenged, the person must produce ID prooving they are 18+, or by the law, the sale cannot proceed. The manager was following the law.

    Even if the person is 200 yrs old, once challenged, they must produce ID, the store or the staff could be prosecuted if they say "on 2nd thoughts, it's okay".

    They did not ask him to prove his age with ID.
    They asked him to confirm he was over 18 with a simple "Yes" or "No", which he refused to do.

    Morrisons have admitted that he was clearly over 18, so they didn't ask him for ID, but a new policy meant that they still asked him to confirm it.


    Sounds fricken crazy to me.....

    Leave a comment:


  • Chugnut
    replied
    *Anyone* who can't see that a guy of 71 is clearly over the legal age to buy alchohol is a turd. No argument.

    The law is obviously stupid for not having a common sense clause, but if I was the manager I would have served the guy. And anyone who says "but that's breaking the law" I bet you did the last time you drove your car.

    Leave a comment:


  • DimPrawn
    replied
    Originally posted by TonyEnglish View Post
    "I believe it is the law. Once challenged, the person must produce ID prooving they are 18+, or by the law, the sale cannot proceed. The manager was following the law."

    Well the law is an ass then.
    Won't argue about that. Most of these laws have been written or amended by New Labour. So no real surprise they have no common sense or benefit to the majority.

    Leave a comment:


  • BoredBloke
    replied
    "I believe it is the law. Once challenged, the person must produce ID prooving they are 18+, or by the law, the sale cannot proceed. The manager was following the law."

    Well the law is an ass then.

    Leave a comment:


  • Xenophon
    replied
    Originally posted by TonyEnglish View Post
    "Come on, Tony. Make us all happy and make a post using the quote feature"

    No!

    Leave a comment:


  • DimPrawn
    replied
    Originally posted by daviejones View Post
    So when the manager came along and put the bottles back on the shelf, was he right in doing so? Did he do that without looking? No, it was following rules and not applying and sense or judgement to it....
    I believe it is the law. Once challenged, the person must produce ID prooving they are 18+, or by the law, the sale cannot proceed. The manager was following the law.

    Even if the person is 200 yrs old, once challenged, they must produce ID, the store or the staff could be prosecuted if they say "on 2nd thoughts, it's okay".

    Leave a comment:


  • BoredBloke
    replied
    "Come on, Tony. Make us all happy and make a post using the quote feature"

    No!

    Leave a comment:

Working...
X