New Pub Regulations For Playing Music And Wrestling

Currently, if a pub has more than 200 customers a special licence is required to play or host music. This is changing in the spring to “up to 500 customers between 8am and 11pm” without a special licence. Also, wrestling for an audience of up to 1000 will be allowed. All due to be introduced in the spring as new de-regulations kick in.

Of course that's great news for pubs that want to play Oasis whilst Evil Fred and Wicked Billy wrestle in the corner.

However, whilst all of this is being introduced a local council has won a case to insist that a certain pub plays music at a “barely audible level” (a level whereby an adjoining property cannot discern the lyrics, musical instruments, base beats and tunes”).

This is the same council which approved planning to convert a commercial premises into a residential house next to the very pub in question! (Which has been playing music for many years!).

So in the brave new world customers in this particular pub will struggle to discern the lyrics of any song playing but I’ll bet will hear the grunts of Fred and Billy.

Perhaps the council involved should have said when allowing the planning permission; “Approval for this new residential property will be next door to a pub that plays music (and has done so for many years). We therefore allow planning provided only that sound proofing be installed in the property prior to inhabitation, so that the music from the pub will not offend and provoke further complaints”.

Shame that this bit of common sense was not thought of. The consequence being that once again the poor landlord and his customers suffer!!


Martin Read CMBII
Managing Director of Inn-Dispensable Personal Licence Courses

Breathalysing Customers Could Fuel Alcohol Consumption

Here’s a story; in the late 19th century the worthy masters of ‘X’ town decided that the rat population was intolerable, and so they invented an incentive scheme to get rid of them. The scheme was simple; they said to the populous: “Kill a rat and bring in its tail to prove its demise, and we will pay you a farthing”. Worked brilliantly, until the law of unintended consequence kicked in and the wise guys started breeding rats because they were easier to catch! Result – the rat population grew. In other words, beware the ‘Law of unintended consequence’!

Now, I am all for the responsible retailing of alcohol (and support the 99% of operators who thus do), and all for the responsible consumption of alcohol (and the 99% of drinkers who do) but have doubts as to the introduction of breathalysing of customers to ensure they are sober – just to ENTER a licensed outlet. This is a growing initiative for night-time venues, driven by various police forces across the UK (Voluntary at present; mandatory one day?).

Here’s how one effect of unintended consequence might happen:-
Night clubs will be required to only admit ‘sober’ customers who pass a breathalyser test (they could one day be prosecuted if non-sober customers are allowed in) and so they will offer cut price drinks to stop pre-loading and thereby attract customers in at an earlier time. This will encourage Supermarkets to drive their prices even lower to protect their sales and thereby ensure pre-loading continues – thus a ‘price war’ ensues. Result; the price of alcohol gets even lower and so more will be consumed, and more consumption will bring more drunkenness. Then there could be a movement to breathalyse customers when they leave night-clubs (God forbid if this ever gets to pubs!). Then perhaps (who knows) a test for supermarkets before anyone can purchase alcohol (not sure if people will be breathalysed at home once they have consumed it, probably not, but once again who knows).

I understand (and sympathise) with the dilemma police have with drunken idiots, also the A&E departments who have to deal with them. BUT demonising alcohol is (in my view) not the answer. The answer lies more in education, peer pressure, more severe penalties for the drunken, penalties for those who sell to drunken people, social exclusion for drunks, cessation of ‘celebrities’ glorying in drunken behaviour, cessation of the redtops glorying in the celebs thus doing. Acceptance that the responsible consumption of alcohol is a positive thing, and an understanding that making alcohol more and more demonised will only enhance its attraction (remember America in the twenties).

Our current attitude to alcohol certainly requires a cultural change. But cultural change invariably comes from peer pressure. For example; 20 years ago a smoker would automatically light up in a friends house, 10 years later they would ask for permission to do so, 5 years later they would not ask, now they ask for forgiveness and go outside in the rain. By the way, it is perfectly legal to smoke in a friends house but it is not socially acceptable. THAT is cultural change!


Martin Read CMBII
Managing Director of Inn-Dispensable Personal Licence Courses

Drugs Awareness Pub Training - Online Mock Exam

Inn-Dispensable are pleased to announce the launch of our FREE online Drugs Awareness mock exam. This is a great interactive tool to test your knowledge prior to attending our one-day Drugs Awareness Course and exam at one of our many fantastic training sites across the UK.

This online test contains 15 multiple-choice questions which are randomly selected and are typical of the exam subject matter and mirrors closely the type of questions which appear within the real Drugs Awareness exam – so you can test yourself again and again to help build your knowledge.

Available on all devices, from desktops to mobiles.

Best of luck!


Martin Read CMBII
Managing Director of Inn-Dispensable Pub Training Courses

Law On 'Acting' Drunk Confuses UK Police

You couldn’t make it up!

The Licensing Act of 2003 has many fine regulations including those to ensure that alcohol is sold Responsibly. One of the regulations is aimed to stop "drunken persons" from being served alcohol. The onus falls upon the person serving the alcohol to not do so, but unfortunately there is no definition of 'drunk'. This means that bar staff have to use some common sense (*blimey*) and subjective judgment.

The giveaway signs of 'drunkenness' will likely be a customer’s unsteadiness on their feet, glazed eyes, slurred speech and boozy breath. It is the bar person selling the alcohol who will be the one that could be prosecuted, so they need to be satisfied that the person isn’t drunk. On conviction, they could face a fine of up to £1000!

Interestingly there is no offence for a person who is blind drunk to attempt to buy alcohol, it is an offence however to purchase alcohol for someone who appears to be drunk (so watch out when it is your round) and even more interestingly if the police use "actors" to pretend to be drunk, there is no offence for serving alcohol to a person who is acting as if they are drunk, so all of that time spent by actors at RADA is wasted! Not too sure if it is an offence to buy alcohol for an actor who is acting as if he/she is drunk (will have to await a first case).

A number of police forces have recently employed actors to carry out some test purchases doing just that (pretending to be drunk). No prosecution could be brought to bear because as stated; serving a person pretending to be drunk is not unlawful.

Happy days.


Martin Read CMBII
Managing Director of www.inn-dispensable.com Personal Licence Courses

Should We Scrap Personal Licences And Risk Lawlessness in UK Pubs?

Personal Licences were introduced as part of the new Licensing Act 2003 (introduced on November 24th 2005) to effectively provide a qualification by way of training and examination, thereby ensuring those who sell alcohol (and authorise others to sell alcohol) actually know the law of the land and how to ensure alcohol is sold responsibly.

Sound thinking and sound rationale, which replaced the previous system where new licencees had to appear before a magistrate's bench and be challenged on their knowledge of licensing laws - with no national standards of interrogation. So far so good. Thousands of bar staff, off-licence staff and supermarket staff, etc, have achieved the required qualification which in turn has given them a foot on the ladder of professionalism in our industry. So why now should HMG believe it is not fit for purpose? Is it because local authorities have been so depleted of resource, they cannot cope with the administration? Is that what is really behind it?

There are flaws in the Personal Licence system, for example a pub could legally get by with just one Personal Licence Holder (who might also be the Designated Premises Holder, the person in overall charge of the day-to-day running of a Licenced Premises) then have another 6 staff who sell alcohol under the authority of the Personal Licence Courses Holder (you still with me?) but those 6 staff would not have need to have a CRB check (part of the Personal Licence requirement) at all and so could be villains galore.

Maybe the answer is that ALL those selling alcohol should have a Personal Licence, not do away with them?

If our industry is serious about raising professionalism, then understanding the Licensing Law is a vital start point. There's no point in studying: customer service, cellar management, financials controls, wine dispensing, menu planning, employment law, marketing, merchandising, chalkboard skills, pricing strategies, competitor activity - and about another 30 items that a real professional licencee or bar person needs to know - if the first thing you do is to serve someone under-age, or someone who appears to be intoxicated, or serve someone outside of permitted hours, only to find yourself heavily fined or sent to Prison!

Once again we see the UK Government looking to interfere where interference is not needed!


Martin Read CMBII
Managing Director of Inn-Dispensable Personal Licence Courses