PDA

View Full Version : "It is bureaucracy gone mad".



Chugnut
20th September 2007, 07:42
Don't forget your ID. :spank:

Morons (http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/england/merseyside/7003325.stm)

King Cnvt
20th September 2007, 08:15
If everyone had a National ID card this wouldn't happen. AND there'd no more terrorism, war, famine, etc.

Sysman
20th September 2007, 08:18
Don't forget your ID. :spank:

Morons (http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/england/merseyside/7003325.stm)

It sounds as though he was being a stroppy old git.

PRC1964
20th September 2007, 08:22
If everyone had a National ID card this wouldn't happen. AND there'd no more terrorism, war, famine, etc.

Just think how great it would be if they could implant the id card into our brains.

Anyone thinking of not voting for New Liebour could be identified and re-educated before they had a chance to commit the crime.

DBA_bloke
20th September 2007, 08:23
It sounds as though he was being a stroppy old git.

Stroppy? No bleedin' wonder!! He looks like Old Father Time, by all accounts, and he's asked if he's over 21? FFS!!! And, if his account is accurate, the staff were utter tit-heads.

daviejones
20th September 2007, 08:25
If, when asked if he was over 21, he had said "no, I am 20", they would have laughed!!!!!

BoredBloke
20th September 2007, 08:29
"It sounds as though he was being a stroppy old git."

No I think he was right. Why should a pensioner have to prove that he is over 21 - surely there is a point where common sense comes into play? It's not like the local pikeys are going to start going out dressed as pensioners in order to get served. Why didn't the manager just take him to one side and serve him? Sounds more like the manager was just being some kind of jobsworth.

I was behind a woman who was asked for ID. She responded with 'I'm 28'. The woman on the till, and also on her own little power trip basically told her to prove it or she wouldn't serve her. It just struck me that the woman on the till was an @rse and that she was just out to make life difficult for the shopper.

wendigo100
20th September 2007, 08:33
I tell her to count the rings on my nob.

DBA_bloke
20th September 2007, 08:34
If, when asked if he was over 21, he had said "no, I am 20", they would have laughed!!!!!

That seems unlikely. They seem to have been a bunch of humour-free, twatty bumholes.

daviejones
20th September 2007, 08:39
That seems unlikely. They seem to have been a bunch of humour-free, twatty bumholes.

That was almost poetic...:banana:

Chugnut
20th September 2007, 09:04
I was behind a woman who was asked for ID. She responded with 'I'm 28'.

You *could* get a very young looking 28 year old though. Was she? This bloke was 71!!!


I tell her to count the rings on my nob.

Outstanding wendigo100! :laugh:laugh:laugh

sasguru
20th September 2007, 09:09
I tell her to count the rings on my nob.

Haven't fixed your syphilis problem then?

BoredBloke
20th September 2007, 09:13
"You *could* get a very young looking 28 year old though. Was she?"

No - A bit of a heffer really - obviously older than 18 though

NickFitz
20th September 2007, 09:21
A bit of a heffer really

:spel heifer

(Unless you meant Simon Heffer (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Simon_Heffer)...)

Mailman
20th September 2007, 09:26
I tell her to count the rings on my nob.

If that were true, the counter boy you asked to do that would most likely get done for being a pedo! :D

Mailman

BoredBloke
20th September 2007, 09:31
I wonder what would have been the reaction if the old guy had asked for proof that the person serving him alcohol was over 18?

Old Greg
20th September 2007, 09:42
Mrs OG and I got asked for ID in Sainsbury's the other day. We were delighted.

DBA_bloke
20th September 2007, 09:47
I wonder what would have been the reaction if the old guy had asked for proof that the person serving him alcohol was over 18?

Security would be called, then the old man battered to a standstill by a security bod, followed by discovery that security personnel are Polish immigrants, followed by a lengthy hearing at the European Court of Human Rights, followed by discovery that Madeleine McC is in one of the freezers, followed by accusing fingers being pointed at local Social Workers for ignoring the situation for so long, followed by the building of a mosque where the booze aisle once was, followed by foot & mouth being discovered in a tin of Steak & Onion, followed by the local MP falling for one of the Cheeky Girls, followed by a huge queue forming outside the local C+G, etc, I suppose. Hard to be 100% accurate, though.

Joe Black
20th September 2007, 19:26
"It sounds as though he was being a stroppy old git."

No I think he was right. Why should a pensioner have to prove that he is over 21 - surely there is a point where common sense comes into play?As someone now based in Belgium, to me it seems quite normal. :(

The phrase 'sans papiers' doesn't allow common sense to intrude...

Board Game Geek
21st September 2007, 00:42
Suppose the guy "wasn't" 71 as he looked ?

Suppose he was a 17 year old police cadet, disguised as an old man, as part of a sting operation ?

Suppose he was 16, but with that genetic disease that makes you age prematurely ? (I forget the name....lol "marriage" sprung to mind there)

Suppose he was a 9 year old time traveller from the future, who overshot the past too much and ended up looking 71...

The fella was being awkward for the sake of sheer bl00dy-mindedness.

(or perhaps his ID said "Lord Lucan" and he didn't want to be rumbled)

Seriously...all he had to do was confirm his age. It's not the job of the person asking him to make an on the spot decision themselves.

daviejones
21st September 2007, 06:51
Seriously...all he had to do was confirm his age. It's not the job of the person asking him to make an on the spot decision themselves.

At 71? Why would he need to confirm his age at 71? I don't know of any 71 year olds that look under 21.....

Board Game Geek
21st September 2007, 07:30
At 71? Why would he need to confirm his age at 71?

The age is irrelevant.

What is relevant is that the person at the till is bound by company policy to ask the customer, irrespective of the apparent age of the customer.

DBA_bloke
21st September 2007, 07:31
The age is irrelevant.

What is relevant is that the person at the till is bound by company policy to ask the customer, irrespective of the apparent age of the customer.

What a big fecking pity that this wasn't explained to him up front, then. I'd be just as pooed-off, and I'm a slip of a lad of 38!

Chugnut
21st September 2007, 07:58
The age is irrelevant.

What is relevant is that the person at the till is bound by company policy to ask the customer, irrespective of the apparent age of the customer.

Please tell me you're kidding.

Of course, the company policy could *change* to include a common sense clause so no ID is required when people are clearly older than 18.

End of.

Sysman
21st September 2007, 08:16
Of course, the company policy could *change* to include a common sense clause so no ID is required when people are clearly older than 18.

It sounds like the infuriating telephone support helldesks who go through a fixed script, no matter what the circumstances.

Sysman
21st September 2007, 08:17
We are speaking of Morrisons here... following the takeover of Safeway, all the staff who could get out got out.... not a happy ship.
Oh, I didn't realise that had happened.

Spartacus
21st September 2007, 08:27
Seems like a sensible policy to me along the lines of that operated by many states in the US. Anyone buying alcohol has to be able to prove their age, no matter what. No proof of age = no entry / no sale.

That way no one can moan or feel victimised. I've always thought the same system applied here would make sense.

BoredBloke
21st September 2007, 08:46
"Of course, the company policy could *change* to include a common sense clause so no ID is required when people are clearly older than 18."

Exactly. What is the point of getting somebody to prove something which is clearly the case. Does the checkout person have some inability to recognise the bleedin obvious? That thing barks - is it a dog?

I can understand the requirement being in place if the person in question was borderline. But this guy is an old age pensioner and the fact that the checkout person asked the question at all says more about him and the company he works for.

When I go to Tescos and buy beer, when it goes through the till a bleep sounds. The checkout person then glances up and cancels the warning. Why? Because Tescos are not bothered about selling to under age kids or because it is obvious that I'm way older than 18 - unfortunately.

_V_
21st September 2007, 08:52
If you challenge someone on their age for buying alcohol, by law they must produce it or the sale cannot proceed. You cannot withdraw the challenge.

The person who carries the rap now for serving under-age drinkers is the checkout person and not the store. This can mean a large fine and a criminal record.

Often the checkout person is too busy, tired or fed up to look at the customer and some might mistakenly ask the person before looking properly.

Lets see how clever you would be after sitting for 8 hours on a checkout at min wage.

pisces
21st September 2007, 08:52
I'm gonna stop shagging grannies in case I get done for being a peado.

DBA_bloke
21st September 2007, 08:56
Lets see how clever you would be after sitting for 8 hours on a checkout at min wage.

Piss on 'em.

BoredBloke
21st September 2007, 09:29
"Often the checkout person is too busy, tired or fed up to look at the customer and some might mistakenly ask the person before looking properly

Lets see how clever you would be after sitting for 8 hours on a checkout at min wage."

I know I'd be clever enough to distiguish between a pensioner and a teenager.

MrRobin
21st September 2007, 09:39
"Often the checkout person is too busy, tired or fed up to look at the customer and some might mistakenly ask the person before looking properly

Lets see how clever you would be after sitting for 8 hours on a checkout at min wage."

I know I'd be clever enough to distiguish between a pensioner and a teenager.

TonyEnglish, do you have a phobia of the quote button?

BoredBloke
21st September 2007, 09:43
"TonyEnglish, do you have a phobia of the quote button? "

Yes I do!

Xenophon
21st September 2007, 09:43
TonyEnglish, do you have a phobia of the quote button?

:happy

Come on, Tony. Make us all happy and make a post using the quote feature!

:throw:

Xenophon
21st September 2007, 09:44
"TonyEnglish, do you have a phobia of the quote button? "

Yes I do!

:rollin:

daviejones
21st September 2007, 09:46
Often the checkout person is too busy, tired or fed up to look at the customer and some might mistakenly ask the person before looking properly.

Lets see how clever you would be after sitting for 8 hours on a checkout at min wage.

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....

BoredBloke
21st September 2007, 09:48
"Come on, Tony. Make us all happy and make a post using the quote feature"

No!

DimPrawn
21st September 2007, 09:48
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".

Xenophon
21st September 2007, 09:51
"Come on, Tony. Make us all happy and make a post using the quote feature"

No!

:laugh

BoredBloke
21st September 2007, 09:51
"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.

DimPrawn
21st September 2007, 10:02
"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.

Chugnut
21st September 2007, 10:06
*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.

r0bly0ns
21st September 2007, 10:50
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.....

Mailman
21st September 2007, 10:50
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! :rollin:

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

Mailman

r0bly0ns
21st September 2007, 10:52
*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.

Chugnut
21st September 2007, 11:11
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.

r0bly0ns
21st September 2007, 11:47
Absolutely.:bang:

xoggoth
21st September 2007, 14:02
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.

Board Game Geek
21st September 2007, 14:12
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.

lukemg
21st September 2007, 14:59
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 !

Board Game Geek
22nd September 2007, 04:36
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 ?