FabSwingers.com forum: Eaterie won't serve allergic people

By *ssex_tom OP Man
over a year ago

Chelmsford

Reports from Hove, which is a seaside town near Brighton, that an eaterie refused to serve a person with allergens because their small kitchen could not guarantee that a vegan dish was egg free, sesame free, pistachio free or cashew free. Reports that the family were not happy. The eaterie is called oeuf which translates into egg in French.

Now Tom is no fan of the French but did this cafe do the right thing or the wrong thing. This literally is all over the Hove news...

Reply privately

Reply in forum

Reply +quote

By *ranny-CrumpetWoman
over a year ago

The Town by The Cross

For me, they did the right thing.

I cba explaining. I'm tired.

Reply privately

Reply in forum

Reply +quote

By *ucka39Man
over a year ago

Newcastle

The right to refuse due to the safety so did RIGHT

Reply privately

Reply in forum

Reply +quote

By (user no longer on site)
over a year ago

Yes they did. Otherwise they could be faced with corporate manslaughter charges (if person died)

Reply privately

Reply in forum

Reply +quote

By *icolerobbieCouple
over a year ago

walsall

"Reports from Hove, which is a seaside town near Brighton, that an eaterie refused to serve a person with allergens because their small kitchen could not guarantee that a vegan dish was egg free, sesame free, pistachio free or cashew free. Reports that the family were not happy. The eaterie is called oeuf which translates into egg in French.

Now Tom is no fan of the French but did this cafe do the right thing or the wrong thing. This literally is all over the Hove news..."

Well Tom, if the eateries cannot meet the customers needs or expectations then yes.

The alternative would be to risk the customers health. That would be all over the news!

Reply privately

Reply in forum

Reply +quote

By (user no longer on site)
over a year ago

Plus management have the right to refuse service, and do not need to justify it.

Reply privately

Reply in forum

Reply +quote

By *ornyone30Man
over a year ago

ABERDEEN

Why take the risk? If they cant do it safely, why risk someones life along with destroying your business and facing jail? Definitely did the right thing, im surprised more dont do it.

Reply privately

Reply in forum

Reply +quote

By (user no longer on site)
over a year ago

Personally I think they did the right thing but I am curious how this fits in legally with disability/discrimination ? Hopefully it’s covered under “as far as reasonably practical” ?

Reply privately

Reply in forum

Reply +quote

By *ortyairCouple
over a year ago

Wallasey

Absolutely right, family should be grateful they took this approach x

Reply privately

Reply in forum

Reply +quote

By *orny PTMan
over a year ago

Peterborough

Yes. Pret haven't learnt their lesson.

If I had an allergy that was fatal, then I would not touch Pret with a barge pole.

(As someone who can't have oats, without getting severe diarrhoea in the hour, I know how important clear labelling is)

I'm not one for cancelling firms or people, but it's been six years since this...

"Natasha Ednan-Laperouse died in a hospital in Nice after collapsing on a BA flight: A girl with a severe sesame allergy died after eating an airport Pret a Manger baguette, which did not list the ingredients. Natasha Ednan-Laperouse, 15, collapsed during a flight from Heathrow to Nice on 17 July 2016."

Her family must feel like it's Ground hog day, all over again.

This is proof that their checks are sub par and are a public health risk.

RIP to both victims.

Reply privately

Reply in forum

Reply +quote

By (user no longer on site)
over a year ago

Now Tom is no fan of the French but did this cafe do the right thing or the wrong thing. This literally is all over the Hove news..."

Slow news day?

Reply privately

Reply in forum

Reply +quote

By *orny PTMan
over a year ago

Peterborough

Now Tom is no fan of the French but did this cafe do the right thing or the wrong thing. This literally is all over the Hove news...

Well Tom, if the eateries cannot meet the customers needs or expectations then yes.

The alternative would be to risk the customers health. That would be all over the news!"

Hungry or dead? It was a good call. Go hungry, go on to live another day.

Reply privately

Reply in forum

Reply +quote

By *icecouple561Couple
Forum Mod
over a year ago

East Sussex

they did the right thing. Lots of reasons but someone not dying from anaphylactic shock is top

Reply privately

Reply in forum

Reply +quote

By (user no longer on site)
over a year ago

I remember seeing a woman who worked on this morning and had a reaction after eating something on holiday. She’s been left severely disabled.

Can totally understand places doing this

Reply privately

Reply in forum

Reply +quote

By (user no longer on site)
over a year ago

If you can't guarantee a food safety standard due to allergies, you are morally and legally responsible to withdraw service.

It's like if someone asked me to not be a fucking delight.

I just can't, I'm too perfect.

I'd have a responsibility to say, non.

Reply privately

Reply in forum

Reply +quote

By *ssex_tom OP Man
over a year ago

Chelmsford

"they did the right thing. Lots of reasons but someone not dying from anaphylactic shock is top"

Agreed. Tom is assuming that Hastings is in the vicinity of Hove in that it's somewhere on the South coast where people go to retire

Reply privately

Reply in forum

Reply +quote

By *icecouple561Couple
Forum Mod
over a year ago

East Sussex

"they did the right thing. Lots of reasons but someone not dying from anaphylactic shock is top

Agreed. Tom is assuming that Hastings is in the vicinity of Hove in that it's somewhere on the South coast where people go to retire "

there's about an hour and fifteen minutes drive between us Tom. Yes its full of people waiting to die but we all try to avoid anaphylactic shock, we leave that to tourists who don't understand how it works down here.

Reply privately

Reply in forum

Reply +quote

By (user no longer on site)
over a year ago

Now Tom is no fan of the French but did this cafe do the right thing or the wrong thing. This literally is all over the Hove news..."

I think they did the right thing

I have allergies and intolerances and would 100% prefer if more restaurants would be more open and honest like this instead of making mistakes and accidently letting things touch my food that I could react to

Reply privately

Reply in forum

Reply +quote

By (user no longer on site)
over a year ago

"Personally I think they did the right thing but I am curious how this fits in legally with disability/discrimination ? Hopefully it’s covered under “as far as reasonably practical” ?"

It might be covered under Natashas Law

Reply privately

Reply in forum

Reply +quote

By *ealitybitesMan
over a year ago

Belfast

I have a dairy intolerance and recently ordered the only item in a small restaurant listed on the menu board as not containing dairy.

A member of staff then came to the table and told me it wasn't available and offered an alternative.

I told them I couldn't have that as it came in a brioche bun and they kindly offered to put put in a standard bun.

When it arrived it was covered in cheese which wasn't in the menu description.

Longer story short, the rest of my group had all finished their meal and were ready to leave by the time I got my food and when I complained through their website I was assured that staff were fully trained and given a couple of coffee vouchers.

My intolerance won't kill me but I would much rather be told they couldn't provide something than offered an unsuitable alternative by obviously untrained staff.

Reply privately

Reply in forum

Reply +quote

By *uke olovingmanMan
over a year ago

Gravesend

I think they did the right thing...no one got hurt ..so all is good

Reply privately

Reply in forum

Reply +quote

By (user no longer on site)
over a year ago

I can understand and think it's completely reasonable if you are feeding somebody who has severe allergies and you do not feel confident that you are able to do so safely I think it is best for all parties to refuse service with an explanation.

Reply privately

Reply in forum

Reply +quote

By (user no longer on site)
over a year ago

"Plus management have the right to refuse service, and do not need to justify it."

There is a caviet to that though.

You cannot refuse to serve somebody based on protected characteristics.

Reply privately

Reply in forum

Reply +quote

By (user no longer on site)
over a year ago

"Personally I think they did the right thing but I am curious how this fits in legally with disability/discrimination ? Hopefully it’s covered under “as far as reasonably practical” ?"

It wouldn't come into the legislation. They are not being discriminated against because it would be impossible for every business to be able to cater for every single allergy it's just not practical. Reasonable adjustments need to be made and expecting a business to cater for every allergy isn't it reasonable.

Reply privately

Reply in forum

Reply +quote

By *annaBeStrongMan
over a year ago

wokingham

Potentially kill someone and ruin my business

Say no we can’t serve you

Pretty black and white to me

Reply privately

Reply in forum

Reply +quote

By (user no longer on site)
over a year ago

"Personally I think they did the right thing but I am curious how this fits in legally with disability/discrimination ? Hopefully it’s covered under “as far as reasonably practical” ?

It might be covered under Natashas Law"

Natasha's law requires a business to label all ingredients on prepackaged foods. It does not mean that a business has to provide something suitable.

Reply privately

Reply in forum

Reply +quote

By (user no longer on site)
over a year ago

I think they did the right thing. They were open and honest about their facilities and guarantees when it came to food safety and let them know.

The family can be unhappy but it's not going to magic the restaurant a bigger kitchen, is it?

Reply privately

Reply in forum

Reply +quote

By *ittle_brat_evie!!Woman
over a year ago

evesham

Now Tom is no fan of the French but did this cafe do the right thing or the wrong thing. This literally is all over the Hove news..."

Evie would hope that the restaurant could guarantee a vegan dish was free from egg

Reply privately

Reply in forum

Reply +quote

By (user no longer on site)
over a year ago

Course they did the right thing.

But in todays world the do gooders will say otherwise

Reply privately

Reply in forum

Reply +quote

By (user no longer on site)
over a year ago

Saying that they can not guarantee that it will not be contaminated with egg is the right thing.

Some people will moan about anything.

Reply privately

Reply in forum

Reply +quote

By *ackformore100Man
over a year ago

Tin town

Now Tom is no fan of the French but did this cafe do the right thing or the wrong thing. This literally is all over the Hove news..."

I think they'd have been much better of having them sign a waiver having been already warned and just letting them have their allergic reaction. Life's too short for entitled twats like that.

"I have severe allergies to many things but I demand you sate my hunger patron... And make it snappy"

Reply privately

Reply in forum

Reply +quote

By (user no longer on site)
over a year ago

"Personally I think they did the right thing but I am curious how this fits in legally with disability/discrimination ? Hopefully it’s covered under “as far as reasonably practical” ?

That was what I was thinking, it all depends on business size I guess. Is it reasonable to expect a major, multi-national brand to be able to label up and provide alternatives ? Possibly. Is it reasonable to expect a small , local cafe to do the same ? I don’t think so

Reply privately

Reply in forum

Reply +quote

By (user no longer on site)
over a year ago

Now Tom is no fan of the French but did this cafe do the right thing or the wrong thing. This literally is all over the Hove news...

I think they'd have been much better of having them sign a waiver having been already warned and just letting them have their allergic reaction. Life's too short for entitled twats like that.

"I have severe allergies to many things but I demand you sate my hunger patron... And make it snappy"

I get the waiver thing but I personally wouldn't cope very well if my food killed someone even if they accepted to take the risk.

Reply privately

Reply in forum

Reply +quote

By *atfuckerbristolMan
over a year ago

Wells

I think they did the responsible and correct thing.

As for reasonable adjustments, it strikes me that within the confines of a small kitchen serving a range of dishes, there was no realistic adjustment to be made.

I hope this doesn’t turn into some sort of legal case for the restaurant concerned. That would be such an unfair outcome for people trying to do the right thing.

Reply privately

Reply in forum

Reply +quote

By (user no longer on site)
over a year ago

"Personally I think they did the right thing but I am curious how this fits in legally with disability/discrimination ? Hopefully it’s covered under “as far as reasonably practical” ?

To be honest I don't even think it's reasonable for multinational brands to have to provide to cover all eventuality in relation to food allergies.

We have family members who have severe food allergies and they are quite complex. When we were catering for our wedding it took lots of planning to make sure the food being allergies was safe.

Reply privately

Reply in forum

Reply +quote

By (user no longer on site)
over a year ago

"Personally I think they did the right thing but I am curious how this fits in legally with disability/discrimination ? Hopefully it’s covered under “as far as reasonably practical” ?

I will say in relation to the labelling yes that is reasonable and in fact law on prepackaged food. It is reasonable to expect to be given a full list of ingredients for each dish however it is also reasonable for a business to say they cannot guarantee contamination.

Reply privately

Reply in forum

Reply +quote

By *ackformore100Man
over a year ago

Tin town

Now Tom is no fan of the French but did this cafe do the right thing or the wrong thing. This literally is all over the Hove news...

I think they'd have been much better of having them sign a waiver having been already warned and just letting them have their allergic reaction. Life's too short for entitled twats like that.

"I have severe allergies to many things but I demand you sate my hunger patron... And make it snappy"

I get the waiver thing but I personally wouldn't cope very well if my food killed someone even if they accepted to take the risk. "

Yeah tongue in my cheek there. Of course they did the right thing. It's a shame, but if folks have serious enough allergies then they need to consider feeding themselves more rather than pass the problem along to someone else.

Reply privately

Reply in forum

Reply +quote

By (user no longer on site)
over a year ago

Now Tom is no fan of the French but did this cafe do the right thing or the wrong thing. This literally is all over the Hove news...

I think they'd have been much better of having them sign a waiver having been already warned and just letting them have their allergic reaction. Life's too short for entitled twats like that.

"I have severe allergies to many things but I demand you sate my hunger patron... And make it snappy"

I get the waiver thing but I personally wouldn't cope very well if my food killed someone even if they accepted to take the risk.

I do agree although I feel if a business can cater for certain allergies then that would certainly be very helpful.

My family members who have severe allergies will always double check packaging and ask for a list of ingredients on non prepackaged food. They are fortunate that their allergies are not contaminative though.

Reply privately

Reply in forum

Reply +quote

By *iamondCougarWoman
over a year ago

Norfuck! / Lincolnshire

They did the right thing!

The family concerned should be praising them for being honest and protecting their safety and food issues

Rejection (even in the case of food) is sometimes a bitter pull to swallow

Reply privately

Reply in forum

Reply +quote

By *ackformore100Man
over a year ago

Tin town

Now Tom is no fan of the French but did this cafe do the right thing or the wrong thing. This literally is all over the Hove news...

I think they'd have been much better of having them sign a waiver having been already warned and just letting them have their allergic reaction. Life's too short for entitled twats like that.

"I have severe allergies to many things but I demand you sate my hunger patron... And make it snappy"

I get the waiver thing but I personally wouldn't cope very well if my food killed someone even if they accepted to take the risk.

I do agree although I feel if a business can cater for certain allergies then that would certainly be very helpful.

Interesting. Must be a right pain in the derriere. I'm still not convinced, that if I had allergies that could seriously harm me, I would trust a 3rd parties food labelling.. It feels a little like Russian roulette to me.

I mean all cars have air bags but I wouldn't want to assume they are all going to work... So I avoid driving into things as much as possible.

Reply privately

Reply in forum

Reply +quote

By (user no longer on site)
over a year ago

Now Tom is no fan of the French but did this cafe do the right thing or the wrong thing. This literally is all over the Hove news..."

They did the right thing. They explained they can’t guarantee. The kitchen is small. Can’t accommodate their needs. Better to refuse to serve than risk killing someone surely.

Reply privately

Reply in forum

Reply +quote

By *ohn KanakaMan
over a year ago

Not all that North of North London

" I'm still not convinced, that if I had allergies that could seriously harm me, I would trust a 3rd parties food labelling.. It feels a little like Russian roulette to me.

My partner is gluten intolerant, obviously that winter kill anyone it's just unpleasant but she's had reactions to food that is supposedly gluten free. It must be a huge worry for those who, as you say, could literally die as a result of eating the wrong thing

Reply privately

Reply in forum

Reply +quote

By *om and JennieCouple
over a year ago

Chams or Socials

As someone with unusual fruit allergies I’d rather be turned away. It’s not often food is served that I would react to but once it was strangely served in a salad. I can’t even walk by these fruits in a supermarket without my mouth watering & lips starting to itch.

Reply privately

Reply in forum

Reply +quote

By *ackformore100Man
over a year ago

Tin town

" I'm still not convinced, that if I had allergies that could seriously harm me, I would trust a 3rd parties food labelling.. It feels a little like Russian roulette to me.

Well indeed... And then there'd be an enquiry and they'd go.. ooops one of our food labellers made a mistake.

Reply privately

Reply in forum

Reply +quote

By *orny PTMan
over a year ago

Peterborough

"Course they did the right thing.

But in todays world the do gooders will say otherwise"

Do gooders = oxymoron.

Reply privately

Reply in forum

Reply +quote

By *dwalu2Couple
over a year ago

Bristol

"Course they did the right thing.

But in todays world the do gooders will say otherwise

Do gooders = oxymoron."

Yes - people who use the term ‘do gooders’ never mean it as intended.

But then, people who use the term ‘do gooders’ are rarely responsible for anything good.

Reply privately

Reply in forum

Reply +quote

By *ormorantMan
over a year ago

Lincolnshire

Hungry or dead…. Not to tricky a choice..

Reply privately

Reply in forum

Reply +quote

By (user no longer on site)
over a year ago

One of our friends has an EpiPen. She's quite laid back about it and thankfully we haven't had to stab her yet but it adds a bit of an edge to meals together

Reply privately

Reply in forum

Reply +quote

By (user no longer on site)
over a year ago

Now Tom is no fan of the French but did this cafe do the right thing or the wrong thing. This literally is all over the Hove news..."

The family were unhappy that restaurant declined to serve them food that might kill them?

Fuckwits. That's a special kind of dumb entitlement right there.

Maybe the restaurant should apologise profusely for not killing them and by way of compensation offer a table for 4 and a choice of anything from the menu, all on the house.

Winston

Reply privately

Reply in forum

Reply +quote

By *ohn KanakaMan
over a year ago

Not all that North of North London

Now Tom is no fan of the French but did this cafe do the right thing or the wrong thing. This literally is all over the Hove news...

The family were unhappy that restaurant declined to serve them food that might kill them?

Fuckwits. That's a special kind of dumb entitlement right there.

Maybe the restaurant should apologise profusely for not killing them and by way of compensation offer a table for 4 and a choice of anything from the menu, all on the house.

Winston "

It was vegan food, no one would have died, the restaurant were just trying to avoid cross contamination

Reply privately

Reply in forum

Reply +quote

By *andyfloss2000Woman
over a year ago

ashford

Their choice! When I was a school cook I decided I would never feed one child he was severely allergic to nuts! Would not want that responsibility! There was a few others that had intolerance which I told parents it's up to u I can't ?? guarantee that it won't b contaminated as was small kitchen x

Reply privately

Reply in forum

Reply +quote

By *orny PTMan
over a year ago

Peterborough

Now Tom is no fan of the French but did this cafe do the right thing or the wrong thing. This literally is all over the Hove news...Nuts are vegan

The family were unhappy that restaurant declined to serve them food that might kill them?

Fuckwits. That's a special kind of dumb entitlement right there.

Maybe the restaurant should apologise profusely for not killing them and by way of compensation offer a table for 4 and a choice of anything from the menu, all on the house.

Winston

It was vegan food, no one would have died, the restaurant were just trying to avoid cross contamination "

Reply privately

Reply in forum

Reply +quote

By *orny PTMan
over a year ago

Peterborough

Not all vegan food is safe. The veganistas seem to forget this.

Mushrooms, soy, nuts and even oranges can cause problems. Oats issn't getting off scot free either.

Reply privately

Reply in forum

Reply +quote

By (user no longer on site)
over a year ago

Now Tom is no fan of the French but did this cafe do the right thing or the wrong thing. This literally is all over the Hove news...

The family were unhappy that restaurant declined to serve them food that might kill them?

Fuckwits. That's a special kind of dumb entitlement right there.

Maybe the restaurant should apologise profusely for not killing them and by way of compensation offer a table for 4 and a choice of anything from the menu, all on the house.

Winston

It was vegan food, no one would have died, the restaurant were just trying to avoid cross contamination "

Pistachios or cashews couldn't have caused an allergic reaction?

Winston

Reply privately

Reply in forum

Reply +quote

By *ormorantMan
over a year ago

Lincolnshire

Now Tom is no fan of the French but did this cafe do the right thing or the wrong thing. This literally is all over the Hove news...

The family were unhappy that restaurant declined to serve them food that might kill them?

Fuckwits. That's a special kind of dumb entitlement right there.

Maybe the restaurant should apologise profusely for not killing them and by way of compensation offer a table for 4 and a choice of anything from the menu, all on the house.

Winston

It was vegan food, no one would have died, the restaurant were just trying to avoid cross contamination "

Really..!!

Reply privately

Reply in forum

Reply +quote

By *ssex_tom OP Man
over a year ago

Chelmsford

What about Scottish risotto ?

AKA porridge ?

Reply privately

Reply in forum

Reply +quote

Post new Message to Thread