Wine bar told to increase servings or face prosecution
July 25, 2007 By Oliver Styles
UK retailer Selfridges is set to petition for a change in the law after it was told by trading standards officials that it could not sell sip-sized samples of wine to consumers.
The retailer, which recently opened its Wonder Bar wine bar in London, was told by Westminster City Council that it had to stop selling samples of wine in 25ml and 75ml measures. Only glass-sized 125ml and 175ml measures are recognised by law.
One of the 52 wines available was Petrus 1996, which originally cost £32 a sip. According to Selfridges, two bottles were sold through the system in the first week of Wonder Bar's opening.
Now, customers have to pay £160 for the wine in a 125ml glass.
The wines are served by a 'jukebox' (pictured) allowing customers to select the wine they want, the size of the serving, pay for and receive the sample.
The machines were re-set to provide only standard sizes after they were contacted by trading standards telling Selfridges they were selling wine in 'illegal amounts'.
UK broadsheet the Daily Telegraph raised the issue, saying that 'bureaucratic killjoys' were denying the public 'vinous delights'. The newspaper added that the law did not match the government's stance on alcohol abuse.
'One would think that the Government would wish to encourage such responsible drinking, given the current epidemic of alcohol bingeing,' said the Telegraph.
Local Authorities Coordinators of Regulatory Services policy officer Richard Kidd told wine trade magazine Harpers that the issue came down to consumer protection saying that there was no way of checking customers had been given the correct serving.
Westminster Council said they were happy the issue had been resolved, but Selfridges said they will be lobbying the Business, Enterprise and Regulatory Reform department to change the law.
'There is a crazy piece of legislation that needs changing,' said Selfridges sommelier Dawn Davies.
Jamie Hutchinson, at wine merchant The Sampler which also uses the wine 'jukebox' technology, agreed.
'Basically the law was there to protect people from being ripped off in bars,' he said. 'It's an insane application of that law.'
The Sampler, however, has not been told to increase its sample sizes due to being in a different London borough, the way samples are paid for and the fact that it is not a bar.
Have your say... To post your comment on this story, email us at news@decanter.com, making sure the relevant headline is in the subject field
This story is just another in the long list of bureaucratic nonsense that we have to put up with now in this country, where we have a rule for everything because no-one is allowed to exercise any common sense. We have over-zealous thought police in every walk of life now that we can't blink without falling foul of some new law or European Directive, with dire consequences for those upright and sensible citizens who are just trying to make a living and provide the customer with what they want.
The recent signing by Tony Blair of the European Treaty (formally known as "The Constitution") was another knife in the back for democracy and shows this Government's complete disregard for common sense and over-riding will to allow this country to be over-run by yet more of this sort of legislation. We have got the Government that we deserve because no-one is standing up and deriding this sort thing with enough vigour, with enough media coverage, to get through to those who have voted for and allowed this Government to keep on imposing this sort of thing upon us.
The end is nigh! We're all doomed!
Peter Bowyer, Wiltshire, UK
If these officials have nothing better to do then those who supervise and instruct them could be invited to seek more productive alternative employment. Would, or could, this happen in France or Italy? I doubt it.
Ken Gillman, Queensland, Australia
I am glad I live in NY City.
A bartender pours right from the bottle into the glass. No machines, no measuring. If you don't like the amount the house pours you make an adult decision and go to another pub.
Richard Carlson
While I agree with Peter Bowyer on the bureaucratic nonsense part, I don't see how this can be blamed on the EU. The pictured machine is an Enomatic of Italian manufacture, which is used in its home country and many other European countries without any legal problems, including Sweden were we aren't exactly under-regulated when it comes to alcohol. People tend to get the politicians they deserve, and that probably goes for UK as well...
By the way, the whole point of this machine, which keeps the wine under inert gas and at the correct temperature, is to serve small tasting portions and being able to offer a wide range of wines. Serving 125 ml from it makes much less sense, since the bottles are changed manually.
Tomas Eriksson, Stockholm, Sweden
Just imagine the thought process by which the decision was taken to instruct Selfridges to change its measures. Close your eyes and picture the scene and imagine the conversations as the Westminster Trading Standards boys and girls, sitting around a centrally placed civil service issue table in their open plan office, opened their tupperware containers and peeled the clingfilm off their homemade cheese and tomato sandwiches and opened their 100 ml bottles of freshly squeezed orange juice. In the mind of which of those evidently unhappy men or women was the epiphanous thought conceived that to serve less than 125 ml to patrons who wished to buy and taste only 125 ml of wine, might constitute an offence ? Decanter´s chosen term of "pettifogging" is not nearly sufficiently descriptive of the relevant official or officials. One must assume that the relevant individual(s) quite literally had nothing better to do or that, for a laugh, they perhaps closed their eyes and stuck a pin on a page containing a list of businesses in their area, the summer time office game then requiring them to use their impoverished imagination to come up with a possible infringement of trading standards by the relevant business. That seems to me to be the most plausible scenario.
Should not Decanter in its next issue run a full length profile of the men or women who took this uniquely bizarre decision: "The (Wo)Man who tried to kill wine". I would love to know how the decision was made, by whom it was made and why it was made. Interviews with the bewildered Selfridges staff who received the Westminster bureaucrats would add colour to the piece. I look forward to reading the article.
Colin Wynter, Devereux Chambers, London
I live in Melbourne and as far as I can tell no such a bar as
Selfridges has to offer is available out here. The idea is wonderful but ONLY if the quality of the wine is first class. The idea of being able to drink even a couple of mouthfuls of Petrus is exciting but who wants to pay huge amounts for a much larger bureaucratically designated measure? When I ask for a glass of wine in establishments here there are no lines at all. I have to hope that the sommelier's mood is forgiving. But I would far rather this and leave scope for someone to mirror the Selfridges idea than have to live in Westminster and not be able to drink Petrus at all.
F. Hugh Eveleigh, Australia
Register on decanter.com absolutely free for news alerts delivered direct to your email inbox, and our fortnightly newsletter with advance notice of what’s coming up in Decanter magazine, offers, competitions and more.
PLUS registration is a one-stop shop for the Decanter magazine Archive and Decanter Fine Wine Tracker.
This story is just another in the long list of bureaucratic nonsense that we have to put up with now in this country, where we have a rule for everything because no-one is allowed to exercise any common sense. We have over-zealous thought police in every walk of life now that we can't blink without falling foul of some new law or European Directive, with dire consequences for those upright and sensible citizens who are just trying to make a living and provide the customer with what they want.
