A Grand-ish Day Out

Off up to town with ias and the garklet yesterday to see the Holbein exhibition at Tate Britain before it finishes, but not our most successful day out. Slept poorly the night before, and had a headache for most of the day that left me feeling grouchy and tearful by turns. Finally got out of the house after noon, thanks to a combination of arguments about pannetone (don't ask) and last minute feeds.

Got to the Tate at 3pm, only to find that they were selling tickets for entrance at 5pm by that point, so decided to book online and come back on Sunday. Saw some other bits of the permanent exhibition, including Too Much Turner in the Clore. Introduced the garklet to his first Mondrian, which he found fascinating (we'd already found that he likes Bridget Riley, and the Deluxe mode in jwz's xscreensaver). Walked from Pimlico to Villiers Street to meet hsw, which was lovely. The garklet seems to be building up a fanclub.

And now the not-so-great bit. Went to the Melton Mowbray for the London Circle, to see the Usual Suspects and also to point at London fandom and tell the garklet that one day all of this would be his, so he'd better start thinking of a title for his fanzine.

...and we got thrown out because their license doesn't allow children in the pub. I didn't see a sign on the outside of the pub prohibiting under-18s, and the 2003 Licensing Act makes no provision for barring children from pubs. It does have a number of other sensible provisions concerning children and alcohol, none of which apply to the garklet since, at exactly four weeks old, he never buys his own drinks let alone those for others, and sticks to milk anyhow. The duty manager in the pub (not the licensee) wasn't able to show me the specific conditions of their license that prohibited children from entering the pub.

Therefore, I shall this morning be phoning Trading Standards at the City of London and asking them if the premises license for the Melton Mowbray stipulates no children. If it doesn't, I'll be formally lodging a complaint with Fuller's, and if it does, I'll be complaining to Trading Standards because the Melton Mowbray weren't able to show me the license copy or summary that they should have had on prominent display.

A Grand-ish Day Out

Off up to town with ias and the garklet yesterday to see the Holbein exhibition at Tate Britain before it finishes, but not our most successful day out. Slept poorly the night before, and had a headache for most of the day that left me feeling grouchy and tearful by turns. Finally got out of the house after noon, thanks to a combination of arguments about pannetone (don't ask) and last minute feeds.

Got to the Tate at 3pm, only to find that they were selling tickets for entrance at 5pm by that point, so decided to book online and come back on Sunday. Saw some other bits of the permanent exhibition, including Too Much Turner in the Clore. Introduced the garklet to his first Mondrian, which he found fascinating (we'd already found that he likes Bridget Riley, and the Deluxe mode in jwz's xscreensaver). Walked from Pimlico to Villiers Street to meet hsw, which was lovely. The garklet seems to be building up a fanclub.

And now the not-so-great bit. Went to the Melton Mowbray for the London Circle, to see the Usual Suspects and also to point at London fandom and tell the garklet that one day all of this would be his, so he'd better start thinking of a title for his fanzine.

...and we got thrown out because their license doesn't allow children in the pub. I didn't see a sign on the outside of the pub prohibiting under-18s, and the 2003 Licensing Act makes no provision for barring children from pubs. It does have a number of other sensible provisions concerning children and alcohol, none of which apply to the garklet since, at exactly four weeks old, he never buys his own drinks let alone those for others, and sticks to milk anyhow. The duty manager in the pub (not the licensee) wasn't able to show me the specific conditions of their license that prohibited children from entering the pub.

Therefore, I shall this morning be phoning Trading Standards at the City of London and asking them if the premises license for the Melton Mowbray stipulates no children. If it doesn't, I'll be formally lodging a complaint with Fuller's, and if it does, I'll be complaining to Trading Standards because the Melton Mowbray weren't able to show me the license copy or summary that they should have had on prominent display.

Children and the Melton Mowbray

I've now phoned Trading Standards at the City of London, and they can find no record of a condition on the license for the Melton Mowbray that would prohibit children. This would seem to contradict the duty manager's assertion that no children were allowed as a condition of their license. They also seemed interested that the Melton Mowbray were unable to show me the license copy or summary that they're required to have prominently displayed.

The next step will be to phone Fuller's head office and ask them to explain themselves.

Children and the Melton Mowbray

I've now phoned Trading Standards at the City of London, and they can find no record of a condition on the license for the Melton Mowbray that would prohibit children. This would seem to contradict the duty manager's assertion that no children were allowed as a condition of their license. They also seemed interested that the Melton Mowbray were unable to show me the license copy or summary that they're required to have prominently displayed.

The next step will be to phone Fuller's head office and ask them to explain themselves.

Children and the Melton Mowbray Redux

I've now spoken to both the Operations Manager for Fuller's (Gary Anderson) and to the manager of the Melton Mowbray (Jo Farquhar). The story is that the ban on children is not a condition of the license, as I was told by the duty manager, but is at the discretion of, well, it isn't entirely clear who. Anderson seemed to think that policy on admission of children was the ultimate decision of individual licensees, with due input from Head Office, whereas Farquhar wasn't sure who the decision rested with. The policy is Central London-wide, which suggests that it's corporate policy.

The reason given for the policy was that City pubs weren't appropriate for children, and several times it was suggested that we should visit their other pubs in the suburbs, despite my explaining that we'd gone to the Mowbray from Southampton specifically to meet friends who had booked the downstairs bar for a function. There are City pubs which accept children (such as those in the JPW estate, as thegreatgonzo pointed out in my previous post), which puts the lie to such a broad statement. Anderson gave the smoky atmosphere as one way in which the pub was an inappropriate environment, to which I could only agree and point out that I deemed this an acceptable risk because the group who had booked the downstairs bar are predominantly non-smokers (I certainly couldn't see nor smell anyone smoking - was this actually the case?). I decided not to ask whether this policy decision would be revisited when the inevitable smoking ban comes in, because both Anderson and Farquhar had made it clear that the policy was inviolate and would not be changing.

I also raised the issue of inadequate signage and information to both managers. They both said flatly that there was no possibility of putting signage outside the pub to indicate that children were unwelcome. I discussed the Fuller's website with Anderson; in its pub listing, it notes certain pubs as 'child-friendly', but there is no explicit statement that non-child-friendly pubs have a de facto ban on children. In short, that which is not permitted is implicitly prohibited. Anderson confirmed that the website was to be updated (was it ever thus?), which isn't much consolation.

Both insisted that they had a commitment to ongoing staff training, and would make sure that staff did not give customers (or potential customers) incorrect information regarding the license and policy of the establishment.

So, not particularly satisfactory. It would have been unlikely that we would be visiting the Melton Mowbray en famille in the future, unless other circumstances meant that we were in London in the early evening on the right day, but it's now out of the question. We're not going to be boycotting Fuller's, despite my gut feelings, because our local is now a Fuller's pub (having been a Gale's pub until the takeover), but I can't say that I'm pleased with the outcome.

Children and the Melton Mowbray Redux

I've now spoken to both the Operations Manager for Fuller's (Gary Anderson) and to the manager of the Melton Mowbray (Jo Farquhar). The story is that the ban on children is not a condition of the license, as I was told by the duty manager, but is at the discretion of, well, it isn't entirely clear who. Anderson seemed to think that policy on admission of children was the ultimate decision of individual licensees, with due input from Head Office, whereas Farquhar wasn't sure who the decision rested with. The policy is Central London-wide, which suggests that it's corporate policy.

The reason given for the policy was that City pubs weren't appropriate for children, and several times it was suggested that we should visit their other pubs in the suburbs, despite my explaining that we'd gone to the Mowbray from Southampton specifically to meet friends who had booked the downstairs bar for a function. There are City pubs which accept children (such as those in the JPW estate, as thegreatgonzo pointed out in my previous post), which puts the lie to such a broad statement. Anderson gave the smoky atmosphere as one way in which the pub was an inappropriate environment, to which I could only agree and point out that I deemed this an acceptable risk because the group who had booked the downstairs bar are predominantly non-smokers (I certainly couldn't see nor smell anyone smoking - was this actually the case?). I decided not to ask whether this policy decision would be revisited when the inevitable smoking ban comes in, because both Anderson and Farquhar had made it clear that the policy was inviolate and would not be changing.

I also raised the issue of inadequate signage and information to both managers. They both said flatly that there was no possibility of putting signage outside the pub to indicate that children were unwelcome. I discussed the Fuller's website with Anderson; in its pub listing, it notes certain pubs as 'child-friendly', but there is no explicit statement that non-child-friendly pubs have a de facto ban on children. In short, that which is not permitted is implicitly prohibited. Anderson confirmed that the website was to be updated (was it ever thus?), which isn't much consolation.

Both insisted that they had a commitment to ongoing staff training, and would make sure that staff did not give customers (or potential customers) incorrect information regarding the license and policy of the establishment.

So, not particularly satisfactory. It would have been unlikely that we would be visiting the Melton Mowbray en famille in the future, unless other circumstances meant that we were in London in the early evening on the right day, but it's now out of the question. We're not going to be boycotting Fuller's, despite my gut feelings, because our local is now a Fuller's pub (having been a Gale's pub until the takeover), but I can't say that I'm pleased with the outcome.