Monthly Archives: April 2011

Barrel-Dregs, PIRRS or Arbitration an interesting question (177)

PIRRS or Arbitration, a vital question?

PIRRS costs savings (?) and the Pub Cos

City Pot Boy has been reading with close interest the two current cases reported in the Morning Advertiser (7th and 14th April 2011) of whacking great rent reductions against Enterprise Inns. You see City Pot Boy is up for a five yearly review on his tied pub next November and the time is winding down to what will as like as not be warfare between PB and his Pub Co. Which way to go? PIRRS or Arbitration?

These two arbitration results go against the Pub Co grain of “well if you take us on,we will win and you will be landed with our costs”. Both articles in the MA confirm massive Arbitration costs and how cheap PIRRS would have be as the Enterprise preferred option. So City PB decided to do a bit of research and tracked down David Morgan who was mentioned in both cases representing the Tenants. It seems all is not as was the printed word!

Settling down over a Dark Star Hophead and a Harvey’s Best in the constantly busy Harp in Chandos Place (‘cos it was handy for Leicester Square tube),a disturbing tale began to emerge from a man more than a little careful with his words. Enterprise confirmed (7th April) that the Fox and Duck case could have been resolved by PIRRS for “£2000 each” not at “costs well over £20,000” for Arbitration.

The PIRRS application would have been £2000 for each side plus the Tenant having to cough up about £1,000 for the legals in the Deed of Variation that is a required part of the referral to the PIRRS expert. (£5,000 total). If the Tenant went ahead under his own steam, then no extra cost for the tenant. Same as in Arbitration, but on his own, he would have been up against a hired Enterprise “independent expert” to present the Enterprise case. Hardly a level playing field methinks. Enterprise and Punch NEVER let their own BRMs or ARMs handle PIRRS or Arbitration referrals. Its always an expensive outsider who broadly dances to their tune. The Tenant would be on his own!! Pause for a big deep breath there!

Seems in the Fox and Duck Arbitration case, both sides had their own people (AG & G for Enterprise and Cooksey’s for the Tenant) to put their cases, just the same as if the whole thing went to PIRRS. So no cost saving at all. The point of somehow saving £15,000,which City PB thinks is well OTT, is only there to scare the hell out of anyone thinking of going to Arbitration rather than PIRRS.

Now the other case, with the 43% rent reduction. Fleuret’s handled the Enterprise case, Cooksey’s the tenants. Seems the Tenants are being ultra coy about being named, as they fear Enterprise reprisals. Sad old world innit. David Morgan says that when he was contacted by the MA to confirm the news rumour of the massive reduction, he was never asked about costs and never mentioned it. The MA would not have known about the costs and the article says that “Enterprise declined to comment”. Yet, surprise surprise, the article stated “costs have yet to be settled and could top £30,000”.Now just where did that little gem come from City PB wonders. You can draw your own obvious conclusions !!

It is now confirmed by Morgan that the tenants outlay was in total about £7.500 and that Enterprise were ultimately responsible for the Tenants costs.SO where did the £30,000 come from? Perchance it was a crude attempt from persons unidentified, to yet again scare off Tenants from going to Arbitration. Where, when and if they win, not only can they get their costs back, but they get a full reasoned Award and a good old chance that the Arbitrator won’t be in the pocket of the Pub Cos, like so many that City Pot Boy could name.

A lot of Surveyors have had to take a hard look at the latest RICS Guidelines, if they incur the wrath of the RIC’s, it could be a lot more costly than losing a Pub Co as a client, especially when some of the bigger ones are looking very suspect at this moment of time, maybe it’s a good time to change horses.

Going back to the costs, it’s like product placement in advertising, subtle and sneaky, but if repeated often enough, becomes accepted. But then again, who pays for the BII administrated PIRRS scheme?  It’s a mandatory levy on the members of the BBPA, of which almost all the Pub Cos are members.

Back to the Dark Star, not anything like Timmy Taylors, but a cracking pint nevertheless.

City Pot Boy.

Note:-It would appear that some Arbitrators are charging between £300 and £400 per hour, which has dramatically increased the cost of Arbitration.

Please refer to


The views expressed are not necessarily the editors and accepts no responsibility for them, we do try to avoid offensive or litigious statements being made. They are written by concerned professionals in the industry who feel that these issues should be raised to ensure that all licensees are made fully aware of many hidden pitfalls. 

Phone Scam

  Pub Phone Scams  

Beware message
I received a call from a ‘representative’ of BT, informing me that he was dis-connecting me because of an unpaid bill.
He demanded payment immediately of £31.00 or it would be £ 118.00 to re-connect at a later date.

The guy wasn’t even fazed when I told him I was with Virgin Media, allegedly VM have to pay BT a percentage for line rental!

I asked the guy’s name – he gave me the very ‘English’ John Peacock with a very ‘African’ accent – & phone number – 0800 0800 152.

Obviously the fellow realized I didn’t believe his story, so offered to demonstrate that he was from BT. I asked how & he told me to hang up
& try phoning someone – he would dis-connect my phone to prevent this. AND HE DID !!
My phone was dead – no engaged tone, nothing – until he phoned me again.

Very pleased with himself, he asked if that was enough proof that he was with BT. I asked how the payment was to be made
& he said credit card, there & then.

I said that I didn’t know how he’d done it, but I had absolutely no intention of paying him, I didn’t believe his name or that he worked for BT.

He hung up.
I dialed 1471 – number withheld
I phoned his fictitious 0800 number – not recognized.
so I phoned the police to let them know. I wasn’t the first! It’s only just started apparently, but it is escalating.

Their advice was to let as many people as possible know of this scam. The fact that the phone does go off would probably
convince some people it’s real, so please make as many friends & family aware of this.

How is it done?
This is good but not that clever. He gave the wrong number – it should have been 0800 800 152 which takes you through to BT Business.
The cutting off of the line is very simple, he stays on the line with the mute button on and you can’t dial out – but he can hear you trying
(This is because the person who initiates a call is the one to terminate it). When you stop trying he cuts off and immediately calls back.
You could almost be convinced!
The sad thing is that it is so simple that it will certainly fool many.

By the way this is not about getting the cash as this would not get past merchant services – it is all about getting the credit card
details which include the security number so that it can be used for far larger purchases.

Ironically, I had a call yesterday 20-4-11, unfortunately the line was so bad I couldn’t hear clearly what he was saying, but he did block the line for ten minutes before he gave up.


Please be careful

Poppleston Allen, 28 days means 28 days

An appeal against the quashing of a decision to vary a Licence

This was an appeal against the quashing of a decision to vary a Premises Licence on the basis that Westminster City Council had failed to fulfil local residents’ legitimate expectations that they would be notified of an application for a variation to a Premises Licence. 

The Judge in the original Judicial Review proceedings held Westminster’s decision to refuse to consider late representations as lawful, but the grant of the variation was still unlawful because the Council had failed to notify certain residents. The variation was therefore quashed. 

Both the Premises Licence holder and Westminster City Council appealed to the Court of Appeal. 

The Court held that where Westminster had not received any relevant representations within the 28 day period, it had a statutory duty to grant the application. Any failure by Westminster to notify the residents could not give rise to any right to interfere with the performance of its statutory duties under the Licensing Act. Westminster’s decision to exclude certain residents from its distribution of circulars was irrational, but the residents’ remedy lay with a Review, not the quashing of the variation application. 

This decision is the death knell for so called ‘late representations’. Moreover, the Court of Appeal gives some comfort to Licensing Authorities who routinely notify local residents on receipt of applications, that any administrative or other failure to comply with its own voluntary notification procedures is unlikely to affect the statutory process for the varying and granting of licences. 

Residents be warned – you still have to check your local paper and keep an eye on the window of that nearby night club.

Barrel-Dregs, Dinosaurs who are out of touch with the Industry (176)

 Pub Dinosaurs

I recently played golf in a Charity Golf Day with three colleagues and had a most enjoyable day, which was followed by supper.

The table was set for eight and a further three golfers joined us, two were known to me the third not.

One of them was the CEO for one of the larger training agencies, whose company was feeling the pinch with the recession, from some comments made recently.

I had on previous occasions crossed swords with him on the inadequacy of a one day or even a two week course without serious guidance and experience in running a pub, he had to my horror said that his courses were perfectly equipped to satisfy the demands of running a modern pub.

Strangely at least one of his trainers had said to me that without experience these courses would never, ever be sufficient to satisfy the demands of a modern pub, even more so a leased one.

He had until early retirement been the MD of a substantial division of a major traditional Pub Company and one would assume that he had his finger on the button.

I have always been passionate about staged development, constructive qualifications and the provision of the constant availability of information to help people improve their professionalism, these qualities are taken on board by a number of good companies, a large number do not and class licensees as an expendable entity when their money runs out. Which they will surely do without assistance and progressive development to a standard which meets Competent or Efficient Operator, nether standard are ever clearly defined leaving a loophole for the unscrupulous to drive a Horse and Cart through.

Returning to the story, the CEO was his usual ebullient self and the conversation went from training to the failure rate of pubs in the industry, to quote “I would welcome an open, robust and honest debate, both sides putting their own points of view, but I can see from the outset that we are never going to agree so there’s little point is there?” Followed by the permatan  smile that never leaves his face. Plus…”I blame the faults of the Industry on Freehouses, so many of them are failing it’s positively tragic. They’ve no big company support, nobody to turn to in their hour of need, no help when it’s really necessary.”

He immediately enlarged on his further views on the serious failure rates caused by the Freehouse sector, three of us had owned a number of freehouses between us over many years, I politely suggested that the serious failure rate was in the leased sector and to cover their failure rate they all called their pubs freehouses, when in fact they were more tied than the average tenancy.

I pointed out that the greater majority of privately owned genuine freehouses were very seldom under capitalised, had substantial asset value and a far higher profitability, he proceeded to waffle on about free trade debt being the major problem in his corporate days.

When one of my golfing colleagues let fly at this man’s total lack of real knowledge in the industry, the argument was just getting into full pitch when they announced that the prize giving would commence, this unfortunately stopped what could have been a very interesting argument.

My colleague immediately apologised to us for having seen a lighter shade of dark red at the CEO’s statements, two of us who knew the CEO well said we were waiting for the either one of us to chew him off and you stepped in.

Sadly the industry is saddled with dinosaurs who are totally out of touch, spending their lives being told what they want to hear, taking early retirement and immediately stepping into another corporate job for a couple of years, collecting substantial salaries, perks and pension benefits and achieving nothing apart from an ability to pontificate in board rooms or seriously failing in their allotted field.

I would hastily add, not all Directors are like that, but I have come across far too many in recent years, one MD of a major Pub owning company and brewery had absolutely no idea that the RICS were changing their guidelines on renting pubs and assessing their values etc., yet a substantial part of the business was based on tenants and lessees income.

But, as with any public or substantial body especially banks, nobody can be seen to fail and their accountability is never taken to task in public, so these buffoons emerge again like fungi on a rotten tree in a new position with full perks.

Sadly the CEO’s company is supposedly responsible for training a number of Pub Co Lessees, fortunately the trainers that I know have a different concept of what is happening in the industry.


If you would like to Advertise on the Site, please email us at

The views expressed are not necessarily the editors and accepts no responsibility for them, we do try to avoid offensive or litigious statements being made. They are written by concerned professionals in the industry who feel that these issues should be raised to ensure that all licensees are made fully aware of many hidden pitfalls.


Freedom2Choose, latest Chairman’s Newsletter

Chairman’s Announcement
Freedom2Choose will be undergoing a ‘Strategic Review’ over the next few months.

We need to re-assess our strengths and weaknesses, our opportunities and threats.

This will, I assure you, lead to a much more successful working practice.  All paid up members’ views will be sought – independently and anonymously, so it is much in your interest to partake.

I have asked a paid-up F2C member with relevant professional experience to carry out the review, reporting to a small working party, and have been assured that the results will be ready by September and circulated before October’s AGM.

Remember – your responses will shape the F2C that will be most active in the coming months!

Phil Johnson, Chairman

Display Ban and Plain Packaging

Could it be that the media – so often way ahead of politicians and lobby groups in their awareness of public feeling – have realised that the public’s enthusiasm for all things anti-smoking is on the wane? 

Coverage of the proposed display ban and plain packaging proposals would certainly indicate that something is afoot. In stark opposition to their stance before the implementation of the smoking ban, many publications have allowed critics of this latest move plenty of scope to vent their spleen, from Simon Clark of Forest onConservativehome to the packaging industry publication, Packaging News, which tears into proposals they call a “smugglers charter.” 

The Daily Expressthe Daily Mail, the Norwich Evening NewsThis Is Leicestershire, and This is Business – East Midlands all give ample column inches to the concerns of small businesses who feel that, notwithstanding the exhortations of the anti-smoking lobby that “bans don’t hurt business,” this one definitely will. Even the politically-neutral Bastiat Institute describes the move as a “War on Smokers and Shopkeepers.”

The traditionally Tory-supporting Daily Telegraph describes the move as “puritan”; the political blog is self-consciously neutral on the whole issue, giving scope for parties on both sides to say their piece, and both the Independent and the BBC – in the past such enthusiastic supporters of restrictions on smoking – are offering up stories that are, at best, lukewarm in their reporting.

The anti-smoking movement, hitherto used to having their every whim and desire pandered to by those in power, are of course putting on a brave face, but their evident dismay is clear for all to see, with ASH, the BMA and the BHF all admitting to being “disappointed” by the delays in implementation of the display ban and the government’s further dithering on plain packaging. 

Disappointed? And just a little bit furious!

The Budget: Penalising the Poorest
Duty on tobacco rose by 2pc above inflation, in line with the previous government’s plans. However, a change in the way tax is to be estimated will see higher price rises for economy brands and rolling tobacco than for premium cigarettes. In a bid to ‘narrow the equality gap’ between rich and poor, the government is heaping pressure on the least advantaged smokers in order to drive down smoking rates.  This policy discriminates against those who can least afford it, especially the elderly and the low paid.
Before and After: Typical  Price Increases
Tobacco £Old    £New
Economy brand cigarettes    per20 5.13 5.63
Premium brand cigarettes    per20 6.62 6.95
Hand rolling tobacco       per12.5g 3.12 3.38
Cigars                                  per5 2.06 2.11
Pipe tobacco                      per50g 9.70 9.83
As ever, the proposals are designed to reduce smoking. As ever, the proposals will raise a lot of revenue – in this case an extra £355m a year by 2015.

Combined with the tobacco display ban, it is widely accepted that the real beneficiaries of George Osborne’s first budget will be organised crime  

..from the petty criminal, selling ‘cheap fags’ in the local pub, through to organised crime syndicates who manage the trade through large-scale container fraud.

Reducing, not increasing tobacco taxes, might well boost the Treasury’s income while alleviating a burden that falls disproportionately upon the poor. As a bonus it might also produce a decrease in ‘racketeering’ and outsourcing – as countries around the globeare beginning to discover

A Postcard from Prague
The Czech Republic has little appetite for prohibition.  In July 2010, a multiple-choice scheme was introduced that was more about signage than banning things. 

Even the doctor who suggested this restaurant smoking ban is not in favour of a blanket smoking ban in bars and clubs.

I did not see any posters campaigning for support for smoke free restaurants, and I was actively looking for them.

Some premises do not display any signs and these are usually smoking. If you can’t see through the window go in and have a look. Although some places have the smoking permitted sign, they do not permit pipe or cigar smoking. These are rare and inside you will see a picture of a cigar and pipe with a cross through them.

Although smoking and non-smoking areas are supposed to have a dividing wall, I didn’t find any. Some places do have a separate room and some just have either a separate area or a few tables without ash trays.

Not sure how the restricted smoking times is supposed to work but I only saw one of these which was a restaurant.

Premises which permit smoking are in the vast majority. The places I saw which did not permit smoking were all restaurants and all of these had smoking areas outside with tables and seating. Most were covered and some had heating and lighting.

Overall verdict – Great, no change!

White Paper: Stragegy on Tobacco Control in England

For anyone interested in the future of smoking, this new Government White Paper on tobacco control in England is an essential, if joyless, read. Its radical, new approach to ‘driving down tobacco use’ is based upon two core principles: Localism and Behaviour Change.
Like all Public Health measures, tobacco control is to be devolved to ‘community’ level. Here, anyone who can make a contribution is invited to hector smokers into self-imposed bans and, although Westminster has no plans for further national bans, communities are free to legislate at local level. For example, Hospital Trusts may impose outdoor bans around hospitals. Such legislation is justified on grounds of behaviour change.

We want all communities  to see a tobacco-free world as the norm and we aim to stop the perpetuation of smoking from one generation to the next.

While the cost effectiveness of Nicotine Replacement Therapy (NRT) is emphasised, long term NRT use is being seriously considered to ‘help’ stubborn smokers. 

the Medicines and Healthcare products regulatory agency granted an extended indication in 2010 for NRT to be used for “harm reduction”, to assist smokers who are unwilling or unable to quit.

(our emphasis)

In the meantime, ongoing research will provide strategies for ‘smokeless tobacco’ cessation.  

Other points of interest
  • Successful ‘quit’ attempts have more or less stalled since 2007.
  • Further restrictions look likely for prisoners and mental health patients.
  • Cost of smoking to NHS is said to be ‘over £50million per week’ – with no word of thanks for the £200million-plus each week in tobacco taxes.
  • The jury is still out on e-cigarettes.
  • The use of cigarette papers as a tobacco marketing device is to be investigated.
  • And much, much more…
Academic Review of Smoking Ban in England

With its lack of data and substantial use of ‘international evidence’, this academic review bears all the hallmarks of being a rushed job.

Three areas are glossed over examined:

Exposure to ‘second-hand smoke’  
(reduced, amazingly)

On fairly safe ground here, but the reviewers are hampered by insufficient post-ban data: childhood exposure records are available only to the end of 2007,  and the bar-workers’ study lost almost two-thirds of its participants by the third and final assessment.

Changes in health and behaviour 

Health, here, relates solely to hospital admissions for heart attacks.

Two areas of behaviour change are looked at: ‘quit’ rates around the time the ban was implemented and changing attitudes to the ban itself. Both are compromised by lack of data.

Much of the behavioural section relies heavily on a study conducted in 2009.  This study recognised the deleterious effect smoking bans have on ‘some’ people, but thinks similar legislation should be used to tackle other ‘wicked issues’ like alcohol and food.  

Impact on Hospitality Industry

Six sources of information were chosen from which to assess the impact of the ban on hospitality venues:

Literature –  international evidence only
Labour Force Survey – sample size too small for analysis
Tourism figures – limited data
Licensing data – unavailable for England
Annual Business Inquiry – limited data giving mixed results. 
Gambling figures – Bingo! Enough data here for clear evidence that Bingo halls began to fail in the direct wake of the ban. Nevertheless, the authors are keen to suggest that the Bingo habit is merely being replaced by the rising popularity of other forms of gambling so nothing to do with the smoking ban, after all. 

Despite a lack of sufficient data across all three areas examined, the reviewers confidently conclude:

Results from the studies conducted in England show benefits for health, changes in attitudes and behaviour and no clear adverse impact on the hospitality industry.

Thank You, Nurse
Doctor Helen Evans, a senior nurse and the Director of Nurses for Reform, provides this month’s anti antidote.  She has written about her concerns for the ‘some’ people who find themselves at the receiving end of the denormalisation process.

Stigmatised, marginalised and treated with no sense of proportionality, British smokers are being reduced to the perilous and irrational status that a number of minorities suffered in Germany around 1934 and 5. Today, 23% of Britons are being made to feel guilty for who and what they are and everyone else is being encouraged to ‘un-normalise’ them.

So – THANK YOU Dr. Evans from Freedom2Choose for daring to stick your head above the parapet and reminding us that the NHS was once popularly known as ‘The Caring Profession’,   Too many of your colleagues appear to have forgotton.

Other News in Brief

Unintended consequences: Richmond College is having to reconsider the wisdom of chucking its students onto the surrounding residential streets for their smoking breaks.

Paramount pictures comes under fire for depicting more than 60 instances of smoking  The film Rango, which is not about smoking, grossed £38million in its opening weekend.

The most newsworthy event of this year’s No Smoking Day was Kate Moss’s Parisian cat-walk cigarette. The audience cheered,  Jan Moir booed.

Labour Shadow Ministers for Health from both sides of the border were busy getting the lifestyle message across last month. Diane Abbott heaped cross-party praise on the coalition’s display ban, while Jackie Baillie celebrated the Scottish ban’s fifth anniversary by admitting that any improvement to Scotland’s health cannot be measured.
Health Experts Jackie Baillie and Diane Abbott – Are They Keeping Up?


Latest BBPA figures show that the rate of pub closures slowed last year from 40 per week to 25 per week. This equates to about 1,300 closures in England and Wales for 2010.  Worth noting is the Daily Mail sub-headline which puts smoking in first place as a cause of pubs closing – a step change since early ban days when it was rarely, if ever, mentioned.

The percentage of Welsh women between the ages of 16 and 44 who smoke is a little over 30%.  Pregnancy appears to boost this figure to 37%. This is  adirectional embarrassment for the principality’s health providers who are forced to resort to bribery.

And finally…

Leicester theatre goers were not astounded to find fellow audience members not dropping like flies from the instantaeously non-toxic effects of second-hand smoke as they risked a showing of LOVE, LOVE, LOVE at the Curve Theatre.  Foolhardy?  Brave?  Or just  NOT BOTHERED?

c/o John H Baker 22 Glastonbury House, Priestfields, Middlesbrough, Cleveland TS3 0LF
Tel/Fax 0845 643 9469

Freedom2Choose (Scotland): 
c/o The Dalmeny Bar, 297 Leith Walk, 
Edinburgh EH6 8SA
Tel 0845 643 9552

Barrel-Dregs, whoever thought Punch were the Good Guys? (175)

News reaches Pot Boy Midlands of a further nail in Punch Taverns over inflated balloon of being thought of as Good Guys. Usual story of rent negotiations going nowhere with the Punch BRM. He tells the single lady tenant that the trade is 30% below par and that she’s a square peg in a round hole. No reasons given, no explanations, just that she’s not up to scratch and in his view, pretty useless. Punch know best and she had better listen to them, so there! Only problem with that little bit of bullying is that she’s hit and exceeded the barrelage target she had been set by a reasonable margin.Now pause for thought here. Two of my Chartered Surveyor regulars in the Snug tell Pot Boy that this is massively bully boy tactics following the change in the RICS Guidelines that PB hears were published last December. You see, it is up to the Pub Co to prove to the tenant beyond doubt that the tenant is no darn good, rather than the tenant to have to prove that she is competent. It’s apparently called the test of the Reasonably Efficient Operator. Or in the latest fad of initial speak, the REO. Well, the rent must be set to reflect the REO. Anything higher than that benchmark is being excessive. The boot is on the other foot in that the Pub Co has to give solid reasons as to why there is incompetence and she doesn’t qualify as the REO. With me ?

So the rent proposed is some 15% more than the already eye watering rent she’s already paying. No negotiated settlement is remotely likely and the recession is biting hard. Punch now propose that an independent surveyor should be called upon to settle matters and invite Humberts Leisure to step in. Charles Kalamaris arrives, does his stuff and (yes you’ve guessed it),finds at (remarkably) the same level as the Punch BRM. The good lady asks to see the detail of the Profits Test valuation as done by either Punch or Charles Kalamaris. No dice as Mr K. says he has to ask permission to release the figures even though he held the calculations in his hand and was in part quoting from them. Total twaddle from start to finish.

If you read the Punch Code of Practice, which you can download from their web site, they shout from the rooftops as to how transparent they are in rent review negotiations. Yet when push comes to shove, the true facts are hidden behind a smokescreen of assumed fog. Not impressive at all and deliberately designed to both bully and confuse. Will the BIIBAC do anything about their accredited Pub Co Code of Practice being yet again massaged to suit the Pub Co? Don’t hold your breath. Next step either the BBPA funded PIRRS scheme or Arbitration.

Pot Boy would like to record a few salient facts. Humberts Leisure do the majority of the Punch rent review valuations and consider them a very major and important client. Humberts Leisure are an independent firm staffed by Chartered Surveyors. Where did Charles Kalamaris work for a number of years, before he joined Humberts Leisure…er, Punch Taverns.

Time for a quick rub down with a cold bar towel.

Pot Boy Midlands.

If you would like to Advertise on the Site, please email us at

The views expressed are not necessarily the editors and accepts no responsibility for them, we do try to avoid offensive or litigious statements being made. They are written by concerned professionals in the industry who feel that these issues should be raised to ensure that all licensees are made fully aware of many hidden pitfalls. 


Barrel-Dregs, Common Sense at a Pub Rental Arbitration (174)

Pub Rent Reviews

At long last a victory for Common Sense

An interesting story has emerged from my mole involved with one of the major Pub Co’s that would appear to be causing concern and recrimination amongst the corporate untouchables, possibly the executioners axe will emerge and some of the lower order cannon fodder will have their heads removed to seek employment elsewhere.

It would appear that one of the lowly serfs had dared to take their rent increase to Arbitration, a Calderbank offer was made, and refused in the ensuing mayhem.

The Arbitrator, who was apparently not a surveyor with a track record of working for Pub Co’s, it would now appear correctly took all the issues into consideration and awarded a 40% plus reduction in rent equating to around 8% of Turnover. Which ironically is within my suggested figure in my discussions with the RICS last year, my figures had included the discount not passed on by the Pub Co’s, which should always be included in the divisible split calculations, but they have always been omitted by the Pub Co Surveyors.

This has left the Pub Co not only with the costs but a substantial repayment of rent, serious money, there is some justice in the world at last and the result could well represent a yard stick for other actions.

My mole said that suggestions were made that it would be inopportune for this information to see the light of day and careful phone call was made to the lessee who would now appear to be disinclined to celebrate his victory for common sense.

The Pub Co’s always impress on their estates their successes and the foolhardiness of litigation against them, but in this case the boot is on the other foot and should be made public.

The surveyors acting for the Pub Co, would appear to be totally out of touch with the industry to allow such a massive failure on their part.

I have crossed swords with two of the  Senior Surveyors from the company representing the Pub Co at different times and on both occasions they could not give an acceptable reason for their comments, which inspired no confidence in them as far as I was concerned.

Sadly my Mole in another large Pub Co has taken a safer position elsewhere, many thanks for his contribution on issues that he found unacceptable, which we have always endeavoured to raise within the law.


The views expressed are not necessarily the editors and accepts no responsibility for them, we do try to avoid offensive or litigious statements being made. They are written by concerned professionals in the industry who feel that these issues should be raised to ensure that all licensees are made fully aware of many hidden pitfalls.


Recruiting Staff, a company worth contacting.

A long standing colleague of mine, who owns an excellent Freehouse, in an area where staff are a problem, I had for many years wondered where he managed to recruit such a good consistent selection of young committed people. I tried to find out where he was recruiting them from and he finally revealed his secret, this is not a commercial for ACP but information, other recruitment companies have declined to provide comments or we have had adverse comments about the quality of their staff or service.


If you are having a problem it is worth giving ACP a call, I have been very envious of my colleagues staff, getting good staff that are committed and understand the hospitality industry without viewing their job as a temporary pastime until another better one crops up is very hard and extremely trying. 


This is not a hard commercial for ACP but it could be a very valid solution to a major problem, good, staff are the mainstay of a good business. 


 Anglo Continental Placements (ACP) is a leading provider of recruitment services with over eighteen years of experience. ACP offer a professional yet personal and friendly recruitment service focussed on supplying staff within the hospitality, beauty and caring industries. They specialises in supplying workers from over seas as well as sourcing candidates from the UK. Established in 1995, ACP is has built up a wide and diverse client base including independent and group owned hotels, spas, branded and independent restaurants, country pubs, baristas and golf & country clubs.

We specialises in the placement of both live out and live in staff recruited from within the UK and overseas. We can source candidates for positions for high street branded restaurants to the smallest bijou restaurants, from waiting staff and porters to head chefs and restaurant managers.

In addition we provide recruitment services for a number of leading hospitality based businesses including; Home Counties Pubs, Brunning & Price, Mitchell’s & Butler, Harvesters,TRGTRG Concessions (we supply staff to all the major UK airports) as well as many private hotels, restaurants and pubs.

For those that have been frustrated in previous catering recruitment companies, ACP has always done it’s very best to stand out from other agencies because of our core of long serving staff who truly understand the hospitality trade and ensure that the candidates we put forward fully meet the requirements of our client’s.

Contact Sharon for further information

Anglo Continental Placements Ltd
9 Wish Road Hove East Sussex BN3 4LL 


t 01273 77 66 60 f 01273 77 66 34