"secondary purchase" [ie. rant my lungs out]

[B92 8NW]

Today I got kicked out of a "popular, large national liquor store with an Irish name, estb 1878", on the grounds that they believed I was making a "secondary purchase". Deciding to forgo ploughing the Disco through the façade in low range, I rang the store manager to make his ears bleed.

I requested to know the precise sections/provisions of the liquor licensing act that stipulate what the hell a "secondary purchase" is and why it applied specifically to me in this situation. Once he explained this I outlined the bloody insolence of his employee's actions, and questioned what logic there would be in me buying a single wine product of $119.00 for minors.

Naturally, as expected he apologised relentlessly, assured me that it was not a reflection on me as a person and that it was an inconvenient legal requirement yada yada ya.

To top it off, as I had not purchased any items my parking card was not validated and I was required to pay to be released from their car park...

I want to know if it is possible to somehow register a business name and apply for an ABN with the principal activity of your business being interacting with other people? That way, I can stipulate my requirements to others and decline to do so if they do not meet the terms of my contract... eg. "I am sorry Officer but any further discussions about your allegations that I have broken the law fall under my standard charges for legal discussion, that is $2.95 per minute and on commencement of discussion any exchange between us cannot be used as evidence against me... etc. Surely this can be dodged somehow

Their loss, their competition is now $119 richer.

[Cameron_Def]

So did ya get the $10 from the kid for at least trying to get him the grog ?

Un-Australian....


Today I got kicked out of a "popular, large national liquor store with an Irish name, estb 1878", on the grounds that they believed I was making a "secondary purchase". Deciding to forgo ploughing the Disco through the façade in low range, I rang the store manager to make his ears bleed.

I requested to know the precise sections/provisions of the liquor licensing act that stipulate what the hell a "secondary purchase" is and why it applied specifically to me in this situation. Once he explained this I outlined the bloody insolence of his employee's actions, and questioned what logic there would be in me buying a single wine product of $119.00 for minors.

Naturally, as expected he apologised relentlessly, assured me that it was not a reflection on me as a person and that it was an inconvenient legal requirement yada yada ya.

To top it off, as I had not purchased any items my parking card was not validated and I was required to pay to be released from their car park...

[abaddonxi]

Send 'em a bill for your time. Then in two weeks send them a reminder. If you're really keen, after three months start sending threatening letters, get a lawyer mate to help.

Works best with big companies.

Or call their toll free line and talk for a long, long time.

Cheers
Simon

[Barra1]

You have to allow us a few minutes to stop laughing Joel.:D:D:D:D:D

Do I recall a post recently where you mentioned you had been "kicked off" another forum:wasntme:

Now this............there is a thread developing here Joel.

You need a beer mate.:D:D

[Hymie]

You need a beer mate.:D:D[/QUOTE]

I'd buy him one, but I'd probably get done for a "secondary purchase":angel:

[mudmouse]

If you own a business you don't have to sell anyone anything..or let them stay in your shop. It's their loss and as you've said, they're $119 dollars poorer.

You could try the bit about charging 'people' for your time but if you try it on the cops, then you're not offering them anything - you're required by law to provide certain information...

I see your point mate, just don't darken their door again - i think they're owned by Woolies are't they??

[MrsMcRover]

Perhaps this should be moved and filed under "another oxygen thief" :D

What a joke!

[B92 8NW]

I'd buy him one, but I'd probably get done for a "secondary purchase":angel:

Nah mate, its all good I am over 18, only just but still over.:D

A thread developing? Kicked off = story of my life:cool:

Matt - owned by Woolies indeed!

[mudmouse]

:twisted:

Woolies........Ba$tards:twisted::twisted:

Ah well mate, tomorrows a new day...

[George130]

It's not an easy job. You can be done for selling to someone who is intoxicated or selling to someone you suspect is buying for a minor. I would have to agree that minors don't buy $119 bottles.
Worst I even did was ask a 30yo woman for id once. Her friends cracked up laughing but she was over the moon.
I did have one customer on Christmas eve I ended up have to get one of my staff to serve. I was ready to hit the guy. Asked one of my staff to serve him before I had him removed, Just couldn't do that to someone at Christmas. The guy did behave after that though.
I'm very glad I no longer work in bottle shops. I even used to have security escort me out at the end of the night. Guard had 4 different cars so people didn't know which was his due to revenge attacks.

[barryj]

It's a free country as far as I am aware. Just shop somewhere else if the service is crook with that shop.

I can see where the guy is coming from, I suppose it is school holidays down there. The Queensland Police confiscated $2,000 of booze from one car that went to Stradbroke Island this week. The young P plate driver said it was for their use while on Holidays. $2,000 worth seems a bit too much to me.

Anyway, plenty of other shops around.

[Utemad]

Myself and two friends got asked for ID at the same establishment earlier this year.
Only one of us was buying something but we were all asked for ID.
I'm 27 and the other two are 26 :D

The girl serving was the one that looked underage:D

[cookiesa]

George beat me to it.

Just a quick reflection here based on your posts, you are only just over 18 and buying $119 worth of a single wine product. By law they are not allowed to sell alcohol to someone who they suspect may be supplying alcohol to minors. (There are also heavy fines and possible loss of licence at stake)

They did the right thing by following the law, not supplying you and you are abusing them.

Perhaps you would like to post what it was you were buying and for what purpose, not that you have to, unless of course you live in the Territory where you would also need to give photo id and the location where that quantity of alcohol would be consumed.

Had they supplied it to you, and you or your mates (assuming you were having a "party") got drunk and wrapped your car around a tree killing yourselve's or as is becomming more common someone else everyone would be up in arms as to why that quantity of alcohol was supplied to a young male (legalities aside)

Having been on the other side it is a thankless job for which everyone always complains.

Perhaps Woolies should actually be congratulated on making sure their staff are following the law when many another outlet would not have, and also the fact the Manager, despite your abuse backed that up.

Now you may have bought it for a present etc etc but as said before perhaps there is a pattern forming......

[ATH]

Bloke in the UK shopping at Morrissons was asked for his ID when he got to the checkout with some grog. His age was a sprightly 71!!!!!

Management said that under the law they are obliged to ask everyone their age if buying drink no matter how old and ugly. I made that last bit up but that's what they have to do to protect their licences.

I accuse them of discrimination when they don't ask me for ID., but do the teenagers. Damn cheeky of them.

Alan H.

[MrsMcRover]

While underage i have to admitt i have never been asked for my ID. The moment i actully get an ID. Im asked everytime , without fail. So now i take it as a compliment lol :D

[cookiesa]

Hmmmm probably gender specific!

[Barra1]

Now you may have bought it for a present etc etc but as said before perhaps there is a pattern forming......


Whoa, Whoa....back-up please...I know I suggested that but in a totally different context than how it appears in your post.

My comments were totally tongue-in-cheek. I was actually splitting my sides laughing. If there is trouble hanging around I reckon Joel will find it - and I'm allowed to laugh at that because at his age I did a damn good job of also finding it.

I'm not debating the rights and wrongs of the situation - just laughing at Joel copping it again......and telling us about it.:eek::eek::eek:

[B92 8NW]

George beat me to it.

Just a quick reflection here based on your posts, you are only just over 18 and buying $119 worth of a single wine product. By law they are not allowed to sell alcohol to someone who they suspect may be supplying alcohol to minors. (There are also heavy fines and possible loss of licence at stake)

They did the right thing by following the law, not supplying you and you are abusing them.

Perhaps you would like to post what it was you were buying and for what purpose, not that you have to, unless of course you live in the Territory where you would also need to give photo id and the location where that quantity of alcohol would be consumed.

Had they supplied it to you, and you or your mates (assuming you were having a "party") got drunk and wrapped your car around a tree killing yourselve's or as is becomming more common someone else everyone would be up in arms as to why that quantity of alcohol was supplied to a young male (legalities aside)

Having been on the other side it is a thankless job for which everyone always complains.

Perhaps Woolies should actually be congratulated on making sure their staff are following the law when many another outlet would not have, and also the fact the Manager, despite your abuse backed that up.

Now you may have bought it for a present etc etc but as said before perhaps there is a pattern forming......

I can assure you there is no pattern forming.

I am very happy to tell what I was buying, despite your presumption that I am an alcoholic drunk driving youth. I was buying 1x 0.750mL Veuve Cliquot Ponsardin for my best friends father, who today was not only celebrating his birthday but lucky him was also attending his sisters funeral, and having surgery on his heart after implications from a pacemaker installation some months ago. This man is a dear friend of mine, like an uncle and loves his cellar. All I tried to do was cheer him up a bit on such an unfortunate birthday.

The store owner did not follow the law, he made an inappropriate value judgement about me, just as you have done so, and I have the support of my family who has practised law for 35 years that I was not in the wrong.

I was within my rights to take issue with the manager.

Ha, what a cruel and thankless world we live in. Why bother living a moral and right life if there is always going to be a minority of the older generation believing that they are intrinsically superior?

over and out

[blitz]

hey Joel
Chin up that was one funny thread, unfortunately not funny for you though.

And as far as us old farts feeling intrinsically superior well what else have we got to look forward to, younguns have well youth on our side we have umm moral superiosity.

Blythe

[cookiesa]

actually as I said it may have been a purchase for a present which by your post it was. Unfortunate, perhaps a civil word with the staff/management may have prevented this getting this far. You make no mention of explaining the situation to them only...

"Deciding to forgo ploughing the Disco through the façade in low range, I rang the store manager to make his ears bleed.

I requested to know the precise sections/provisions of the liquor licensing act that stipulate what the hell a "secondary purchase" is and why it applied specifically to me in this situation. Once he explained this I outlined the bloody insolence of his employee's actions, and questioned what logic there would be in me buying a single wine product of $119.00 for minors."

As for your family mine also practice law...

The retailer is correct they aren't required to prove you were only that it would be a reasonable assumption that you may and in fact can be charged should they have been "reasonably" expected to have drawn the conclusion they did and had not acted on it.

Anyway that's my rant over with. Oh and by the way at 30 I hardly consider myself Old nor

"Why bother living a moral and right life if there is always going to be a minority of the older generation believing that they are intrinsically superior?"

Hmm protesting against others making value judgements whilst doing the same.

Lets get back on track

[CraigE]

Have to say I did think it funny, but Joel is over 18 and does have the legal right to buy and consume alcohol. Value of the alcohol is of no concern, you can pay thousands for 1 bottle of wine. The seller must suspect supplying to minors and most be able to substantiate it. It was a poor call by the seller. The question could be asked and if Joel said no I am not supplying minors his word should be taken at face value.

[JohnE]

Have to say I did think it funny, but Joel is over 18 and does have the legal right to buy and consume alcohol. Value of the alcohol is of no concern, you can pay thousands for 1 bottle of wine. The seller must suspect supplying to minors and most be able to substantiate it. It was a poor call by the seller. The question could be asked and if Joel said no I am not supplying minors his word should be taken at face value.


Well said,
old enough to vote old enough to purchase legal off the shelf products,old enough to get shot overseas in uniform!!!
if he has a bit of fluff on his face well back it up with an id check.

Running off on the usual tangets, most rants take on, it is interesting some of you quote your own experiences, in the retailing game, with a smatering of legal.
At the end of the day , in my opinion, it should have been a case of ' he who asserts must prove' with that organisation.


John

[DiscoStew]

I know kids have more money these days but it is not reasonable to believe someone would buy one expensive bottle of fine wine for under-age drinking when they could buy a couple of cartons of imported beer for the same price. The server must have made their judgement on Joel personally, not the situation.

It can be hard to remain calm in the face of stupidity but perhaps politely asking the idiot serving you to fetch the manager for a second opinion would have produced a less stresssful outcome for you and a learning outcome for the sales assistant. People get defensive when you start attacking them no matter how logical your argument is.

[cookiesa]

Now lets go back and read from the begining of the thread. Joel did not say at the begining he was trying to purchase 1 item he said 1 type of, so several comments were made based on the information he gave.

only later did he give his full side of the story.

In the situation of an 18ish year old male buying 1 item of value I would not have stopped the supply personally as it is reasonable to believe that the item was being purchased as a present. (Again you may have asked for ID depending on if you suspect he may be underage)

And just a couple of points about the legal requirements of supplying alcohol;

You are not permitted to sell alcohol to someone you suspect MAY be supplying a minor.

We don't know that perhaps 10 mins before Joel walked in to the store an underage person didn't try to buy the same item, possibly also with the good intent of a present. (reasonable suspicion that Joel had been asked to get it for the minor)Two customers asking for the same, reasonably expensive item in the same day? (Or perhaps they only sell 1 every now and again but several people from the area had purchased this item in a short timeframe. Perhas a few relatives the same idea as a present for this uncle?)

It does not have to be substantiated, only reasonable suspicion (again depending on what else had happened that day there may have been reasonable suspicion)

It may have been an over cautious staff member, perhaps they had only just started, Perhaps Joel walked in with an attitude, we don't know.

We don't know what else the store had been dealing with at that time.

Again as Discostew has said perhaps a quiet respectable word with (a) the sales person or (b) the manager may have resolved the issue on the day.

Those on the other side of the counter are between a rock and a hard place, damned if they follow the law and damned if they don't. We are real quick to jump up and down without even considering the other person. How often have you stood in a line and listened to the sales staff getting abused for something that isn't their fault or really isn't that big a deal anyway.

And a point about the value, the supply to minors is not always for the minors consumption, passion pop is worth very little for onselling, an expensive bottle could be sold for much more than the retail value as it obviously is more likely to attract attention. And if being consumed by minors then the "status" of giving some of an expensive wine to your mates could be the reason behind it, value alone does not rule out that it will be supplied to a minor. Some would consider $50 bottle of scotch expensive or a bottle of Jacks etc, all targets by underage drinkers.

[Bytemrk]

I can assure you there is no pattern forming.

I am very happy to tell what I was buying, despite your presumption that I am an alcoholic drunk driving youth. I was buying 1x 0.750mL Veuve Cliquot Ponsardin for my best friends father, who today was not only celebrating his birthday but lucky him was also attending his sisters funeral, and having surgery on his heart after implications from a pacemaker installation some months ago. This man is a dear friend of mine, like an uncle and loves his cellar. All I tried to do was cheer him up a bit on such an unfortunate birthday.

The store owner did not follow the law, he made an inappropriate value judgement about me, just as you have done so, and I have the support of my family who has practised law for 35 years that I was not in the wrong.

I was within my rights to take issue with the manager.

Ha, what a cruel and thankless world we live in. Why bother living a moral and right life if there is always going to be a minority of the older generation believing that they are intrinsically superior?

over and out

Joel, no matter what others say... I agree that you were hard done by...and frankly I'd be writing a polite but firm letter of complaint to their head office..since the store manager wasn't particularly helpful. ( Depending how you approached the conversation... that might have been your fault;))

I have worked in several bottleshops ...and yes at times it can be hard to judge.. that is why the law stipulates "MAY be supplying".

If you were purchasing $119 of vodka cruisers and VB... i'd be saying tough.. get over it.

But to seriously think a young guy is going to buy 1 expensive bottle of wine to supply his underage mates....:eek::eek: get real...

The staff that refused service need some major on the job training in common sense..


You do seem to attract more than your fair share of silly events... maybe your just more honest and share what the rest of us hide!

After seeing your taste in wine.. I've pm's the date of my birthday to you..:p:p

Mark

[LSBob]

Well, in the Territory now if you buy $100 or more of alcohol you must give details to the bottleshop, you name, address, where it is to be drunk. You may be buying just 2 good bottles of wine for dinner but it is still required. However if a Troop Carrier with 15 passengers on board and each buys $95 worth of beer or other alcohol no such details are required until the $100 mark is reached. (Assuming that the buyers are of course not obviously drunk and over 18). Even if you are buying the alcohol at a discount, the full price is used to calculate if it is $100 or more, not the price you pay. The aim is to reduce alcohol abuse by the aborigines.

[barryj]

Well, in the Territory now if you buy $100 or more of alcohol you must give details to the bottleshop, you name, address, where it is to be drunk. You may be buying just 2 good bottles of wine for dinner but it is still required. However if a Troop Carrier with 15 passengers on board and each buys $95 worth of beer or other alcohol no such details are required until the $100 mark is reached. (Assuming that the buyers are of course not obviously drunk and over 18). Even if you are buying the alcohol at a discount, the full price is used to calculate if it is $100 or more, not the price you pay. The aim is to reduce alcohol abuse by the aborigines.

:rolleyes: I can see that working.