Printable View
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.
Quote:
Originally Posted by CraigE
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
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.
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.
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;))Quote:
Originally Posted by joel_nicholson
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
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.Quote:
Originally Posted by LSBob