| Fife store is first hit by under-age drink scheme | |||
|
By Claire Warrender A Fife shopkeeper yesterday became the first person in Scotland to have his licence to sell alcohol suspended under a pioneering test purchasing scheme. Staff employed by Bob Moreland at Kirkland Mini Market in Methil allegedly twice sold alcohol to 16-year-olds taking part in the police operation in two days. They allegedly sold lager to a boy on June 30 without asking for proof of age, then on July 2 a 16-year-old girl was able to buy alcohol unchallenged. Both teenagers were accompanied by police as part of the year-long pilot test purchasing scheme being spearheaded by Fife Constabulary. Of 337 premises visited since the scheme was introduced at the start of June, 49 have failed. Only three—including Kirkland Mini Market in Kirkland Walk —have failed twice. Mr Moreland’s licence was suspended for three months by Fife Council’s central area licensing board, who ruled he was not a fit and proper person to sell alcohol. A report has also been forwarded to the procurator fiscal in Kirkcaldy pending possible criminal proceedings. Mr Moreland’s solicitor, Tom Johnston, said his client was “deeply shocked” at the board’s decision and announced his intention to appeal against it. However police have welcomed the suspension, saying it “vigorously” hammered home the message: If You Can’t Tell, Don’t Sell. Mr Johnston tried to abort the hearing before it started by arguing that the 16-year-old tester used by the police in the second visit had a body piercing. He said the member of staff who served her had effectively used the piercing as proof of age in the belief it was illegal on anyone under 18. But, after a 10-minute adjournment to check legislation, it was ascertained this was not the case. Speaking on behalf of the chief constable, solicitor Susan Mackessack said all the test purchasers used in the scheme were 16 and looked their age. No attempt is made to make the teenagers look older than they are—and if they are asked, they must reveal their true age. She said if a licensed premises fails once, the licensee is warned another test purchase will be made within a fortnight. “The scheme has received a lot of publicity in Fife through Press publicity, through the licensed trade and through posters. This is not something done surreptitiously to catch people out,” she said. “It’s a matter of disappointment to the chief constable that this has happened. More importantly, it’s a matter of serious concern.” Mr Johnston did not dispute the facts but argued that Mr Moreland had displayed due diligence by taking swift action after the first failure. He ran four separate training sessions with staff, displayed additional posters in his store and warned staff to ask for identification if anyone trying to buy alcohol looked under 21. “The chief constable is disappointed with the outcome, but I can tell you there is nobody more disappointed and let down than Bob Moreland,” he said. After the decision, test purchasing project leader Chief Superintendent Andrew Laing said there was no excuse for failure. Mr Laing added, “Setting aside the fact that the sale of alcohol to someone under 18 is a criminal offence, we have written to every licensee (in Fife) to advise them of the scheme, invited them to a seminar, and advertised both on the radio and through leaflet drops to all licensed premises. “Given all of that, I find it incredible that a licensee or their staff could fail to check someone’s age. “We have tried hard to drive home the message that this is about stopping kids drinking, reducing the likelihood of them causing a disturbance to the community through drunkenness, and preventing the long-term health implications that are associated with early abuse of alcohol.” Mr Johnston said, “Mr Moreland is deeply shocked by the result but fully supports the police campaign. “He feels he provides a good service to the community in Methil, and hopes to be able to continue to do so. “He feels he has had a fair hearing, but will consider an appeal once we have seen written reasons for the board’s decision.” |
|||