There's no substitute

At one stage tipping, or spirits substitution, was costing the consumer £40m a year. Ben McFarland examines what's being done about it.

The entrepreneurial verve required to run a successful pub involves its fair share of ducking and diving, maybe a bit of a wheelin' and a dealin' and, if absolutely necessary, a dodge or a weave here and there.

But there are some cost-cutting exercises that are not big, not clever and, more importantly, not allowed. Tipping, not the procedure of adding a couple of quid or a "whatever you're having" onto a bar tab, but the crime of filling branded bottles with unbranded, cheaper liquids, is one such practice.

This is where a licensee's "capitalist spirit" enters the less palatable realm of spirit fraud.

Tipping, otherwise known as spirits substitution, is by no means a modern phenomenon. It's been going on for decades but it is only in recent years that the drinks manufacturers and the authorities have pooled their resources and clamped down on a custom that was at one stage costing the consumer an estimated £40m a year.

The International Federation of Spirits Producers (IFSP) was set up three years ago to oil the wheels of communication between the Trading Standards Authority (TSA) and the drinks manufacturers. The Publican caught up with IFSP consultant Philip Scatchard to help clarify what publicans and staff can and can't do.

Why and by whom was the IFSP created?​

All the major spirits brand owners such as Diageo, Allied Domecq, Bacardi-Martini, Highland Distillers and Pernod Ricard recognised that the biggest issue facing the spirits industry in the UK market was substitution in the on-trade.

Which brands are the biggest victims of tipping?​

It's predominantly those spirits that are used as a base for mixed drinks - which makes it harder for the consumer to tell the difference. The most common brands to be substituted are Smirnoff vodka, Bacardi rum and Gordon's gin. Then there's a second tier of dark spirits including The Famous Grouse, Bell's and Teachers.

Is there much evidence of substitution in other ​categories?​

It's not quite as widespread but in soft drinks dispensed using a gun, inferior syrups are often fobbed off as Coca-Cola and Pepsi. It's been known for barrels of beer to be purposely attached to the wrong pump and cheap wines to deputise for brands that use the wine box such as Stowells of Chelsea.

Are licensees allowed to flavour vodka or other spirits by adding things into the bottle, such as chocolate, ​garlic or strawberries for example, if it is not officially endorsed by the brand? If so, does he/she have to alter the label?​

As far as I know that is not an issue, as long as the vodka or spirit in question is not being tampered with in terms of alcohol content. If the barman tells the customer what it is there's not really a problem.

Are licensees allowed to legitimately top up bottles with the same brand as a time-saving exercise?​

There's nothing wrong with that at all but what can happen is that it leads to mistakes and also to temptation.

Although it's not illegal it's a matter of best practice.

Any other things licensees shouldn't be doing?​

If all the key brands are being displayed significantly on the back-bar but the spirits in the speed rail are different then the Trading Standards Officer (TSO) may have something to say about that.

As the customer may assume that what they're being poured is what's on display it's regarded as strictly "passing off" and TSOs will recommend publicans make the difference clear on the price list.

Double-packed spirit dispensers, where a row of key brands conceal lesser-known names behind, is another issue that needs considering.

What are you doing to raise awareness of tipping among pub-goers?​

We are using consumer press a lot more, especially local newspapers, to name and shame those found guilty of substitution. There's an underlying campaign that encourages drinkers to contact their local TSO if they suspect something rather than taking the issue up with the pub itself.

Dos and don'ts​

• Buy only from reputable sources
• Do not be tempted to buy cheap stock from individuals (white vans), it could be contraband
• Ensure staff are aware of the issue
• Don't top up bottles with alternative spirits
• Avoid topping up larger bottles, even if it is the correct brand. This could lead to sloppy practice by staff
• Ensure spirits are not contaminated, do not pour back drinks that have been wrongly served or not consumed.

The law​

Spirit fraud is illegal and there is an impressive trio of Acts under which prosecutions can be brought if a licensee is found to be substituting a Ustinov for a Smirnoff or a Glenoddle for a Glenfiddich: the Food Safety Act 1990, the Trade Descriptions Act 1968 and the Trade Marks Act 1994.

If found guilty the licensee can be fined up to a maximum of £20,000 plus costs and will be reported to the licensing authority.

Ignorance of the law is no defence and if a member of staff, unknown to the licensee, is the culprit, the person with his or her name above the door is still 100 per cent responsible.

The IFSP currently prosecutes around 200 premises each year. When it was set up in September 1999 one in 12 outlets were substituting at least one spirit brand at a cost of £40m to the consumer. By November last year, the cost to the consumer had fallen to £22m because of the number of outlets being visited by TSOs.

Trading Standards Officers​

• TSOs have the power to enter any business and carry out an inspection, make test purchases, look at paperwork such as invoices and also seize evidence
• Trading Standards Officers work on behalf of county councils and they can call on your pub any time they like. They're required to announce who they are and why they're visiting
• Several measures of spirits are ordered, paid for and checked using "dip-sticks", which change colour when immersed in spirits. Each branded spirit has a "chemical fingerprint" - unique ingredients in each spirit that react with the dipstick in different ways
• Although the dip-stick test is extremely consistent, it is only relied upon as an indicator. If a colour appears that isn't supposed to, a number of samples are then taken by the TSO
• The samples are then mixed together and divided into three measures. One is given to the licensee, one is kept by the TSO and the third is sent to some boffins in white coats for further scientific analysis. This can then be used in court.