Popular town centre cafe Cappuccinos gets one star hygiene rating

Cappuccinos says it has made “major improvements”

Cappuccinos says it has made “major improvements”

First published in News
Last updated
The Bolton News: Photograph of the Author Exclusive by , reporter

TOWN centre cafe Cappuccinos has been given a one-star food hygiene rating, The Bolton News can reveal.

Bolton Council inspectors found the popular cafe, based at the Knowsley Street entrance to the Market Place, was in need of “major improvement” when they visited in December.

The cafe previously held a maximum five-star rating and displayed this using a “Scores on the Doors” sticker at the entrance — the sticker has since been taken down but not replaced with the current score.

Cappuccinos bosses say they have now implemented the council’s recommendations and believe they will regain their five-star rating when they are next inspected.

Council leader Cliff Morris said: “We will work with Cappuccinos and go to inspect the restaurant again. I would imagine that, when we go back, the food hygiene rating will be to a satisfactory standard.

“It is optional for restaurants as to whether or not they reveal their food hygiene rating to customers. We can’t force them to do this.

“I would imagine that, when the restaurant has a better rating, they will have the sticker on the front door.” Once an establishment has received its rating, it must wait three months, after which it can invite inspectors back.


MORE:


John Muller, managing director of Cappuccinos, said: “The situation is completely under control.

“Following the December report we have made the necessary investment in Cappuccinos and have implemented all of the recommendations as outlined in the statement plus much more.

"We look forward to welcoming the inspector back at the beginning of March, when we feel confident that we will regain the highest five-star rating which we have held since the business was established in 1991 and which is still held by our sister restaurant Mezzo and our outside catering business.”

A council spokesman said: “During a routine food safety inspection of Cappuccinos, we found a number of issues that needed to be improved, including food hygiene practices and staff training.

“The main concerns were around poor cleanliness and the lack of hot water supply to sinks and wash basins.

“We revisited the premises the day after the inspection to ensure that hot water was being provided and we were satisfied that this issue had been addressed.

“Although a business may choose not to display its food safety rating, scores for all businesses can be found on the Food Standards Agency website food.gov.uk.”

The council said it was unable to give the full hygiene report to The Bolton News.

Comments (69)

Please log in to enable comment sorting

12:05pm Sat 15 Feb 14

ruined heritage says...

If this happened in December and the improvements have been made why are you only just reporting it?!!........Oh and why the quote from Morris, surly he has more pressing matters to attend to such as the town hall finances and rejuvinating the town centre
If this happened in December and the improvements have been made why are you only just reporting it?!!........Oh and why the quote from Morris, surly he has more pressing matters to attend to such as the town hall finances and rejuvinating the town centre ruined heritage
  • Score: 42

12:07pm Sat 15 Feb 14

steveG says...

If domestic kitchens were visited all houses would be banned from preparing food. I would be perfectly happy to trust professional caterers and save money on the costly inspections.
If domestic kitchens were visited all houses would be banned from preparing food. I would be perfectly happy to trust professional caterers and save money on the costly inspections. steveG
  • Score: -55

12:14pm Sat 15 Feb 14

thomas222 says...

Perhaps the Bolton News could give us a weekly page with ever eatery on showing what they all are. The Council has all the information required & if printed would give urgency for eatery,s to improve their standards for fear of bad publicity. It would also be a welcome addition to the newspaper by the readers.
Perhaps the Bolton News could give us a weekly page with ever eatery on showing what they all are. The Council has all the information required & if printed would give urgency for eatery,s to improve their standards for fear of bad publicity. It would also be a welcome addition to the newspaper by the readers. thomas222
  • Score: 56

12:21pm Sat 15 Feb 14

dobbleman says...

thomas222 wrote:
Perhaps the Bolton News could give us a weekly page with ever eatery on showing what they all are. The Council has all the information required & if printed would give urgency for eatery,s to improve their standards for fear of bad publicity. It would also be a welcome addition to the newspaper by the readers.
All the information is available on the wbsite - scoresonthedoors.com
.
Just enter your postcode and you will get the hygiene ratings for all cafes , restaurants , takeaways and even supermarkets. It makes for good reading
[quote][p][bold]thomas222[/bold] wrote: Perhaps the Bolton News could give us a weekly page with ever eatery on showing what they all are. The Council has all the information required & if printed would give urgency for eatery,s to improve their standards for fear of bad publicity. It would also be a welcome addition to the newspaper by the readers.[/p][/quote]All the information is available on the wbsite - scoresonthedoors.com . Just enter your postcode and you will get the hygiene ratings for all cafes , restaurants , takeaways and even supermarkets. It makes for good reading dobbleman
  • Score: 38

12:24pm Sat 15 Feb 14

dobbleman says...

Correction to website , it is actually ... scoresonthedoors.org
.uk
Correction to website , it is actually ... scoresonthedoors.org .uk dobbleman
  • Score: 31

12:33pm Sat 15 Feb 14

bwfc2510 says...

Looks like an over zealous council inspector over reacting. Surely Bolton needs people like Mr Muller trying to keep the town centre alive with his various businesses who have a long standing and very good reputation. Perhaps the Bolton News should also support his efforts......
Looks like an over zealous council inspector over reacting. Surely Bolton needs people like Mr Muller trying to keep the town centre alive with his various businesses who have a long standing and very good reputation. Perhaps the Bolton News should also support his efforts...... bwfc2510
  • Score: -38

12:35pm Sat 15 Feb 14

127001 says...

I like the European outdoor tables and chairs... in winter time... Bolton, UK.
I like the European outdoor tables and chairs... in winter time... Bolton, UK. 127001
  • Score: 8

12:38pm Sat 15 Feb 14

thomas222 says...

dobbleman wrote:
thomas222 wrote: Perhaps the Bolton News could give us a weekly page with ever eatery on showing what they all are. The Council has all the information required & if printed would give urgency for eatery,s to improve their standards for fear of bad publicity. It would also be a welcome addition to the newspaper by the readers.
All the information is available on the wbsite - scoresonthedoors.com . Just enter your postcode and you will get the hygiene ratings for all cafes , restaurants , takeaways and even supermarkets. It makes for good reading
Not everyone is on the internet & the Bolton News would get full credit by people for giving them a public service that benefits people & a report from 2005 reported 200 deaths a year are caused by bad food handling practices excluding the many thousands who are very ill. Its a no brainer its a win win situation all round.
[quote][p][bold]dobbleman[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]thomas222[/bold] wrote: Perhaps the Bolton News could give us a weekly page with ever eatery on showing what they all are. The Council has all the information required & if printed would give urgency for eatery,s to improve their standards for fear of bad publicity. It would also be a welcome addition to the newspaper by the readers.[/p][/quote]All the information is available on the wbsite - scoresonthedoors.com . Just enter your postcode and you will get the hygiene ratings for all cafes , restaurants , takeaways and even supermarkets. It makes for good reading[/p][/quote]Not everyone is on the internet & the Bolton News would get full credit by people for giving them a public service that benefits people & a report from 2005 reported 200 deaths a year are caused by bad food handling practices excluding the many thousands who are very ill. Its a no brainer its a win win situation all round. thomas222
  • Score: 20

12:45pm Sat 15 Feb 14

thomas222 says...

bwfc2510 wrote:
Looks like an over zealous council inspector over reacting. Surely Bolton needs people like Mr Muller trying to keep the town centre alive with his various businesses who have a long standing and very good reputation. Perhaps the Bolton News should also support his efforts......
We welcome anyone who gives great service & good standards. Thats why we pay for it. Who we dont want to welcome are people who have no idea of having any responsiblity and duty to protecting the publics health with good food practices.
[quote][p][bold]bwfc2510[/bold] wrote: Looks like an over zealous council inspector over reacting. Surely Bolton needs people like Mr Muller trying to keep the town centre alive with his various businesses who have a long standing and very good reputation. Perhaps the Bolton News should also support his efforts......[/p][/quote]We welcome anyone who gives great service & good standards. Thats why we pay for it. Who we dont want to welcome are people who have no idea of having any responsiblity and duty to protecting the publics health with good food practices. thomas222
  • Score: 28

12:56pm Sat 15 Feb 14

Iluminati says...

Small business like them have to cut corners in order to be able to trade. I wished that the business rates and, in many cases applicable, the landlords would be given a one star rating. The small business always suffer first, and lots and lots have disappeared from the town centres and food halls.
Okay, the incident concerned happened last December, and should have been rectified by now. Some goodwill from the council wouldn't come amiss!!
Small business like them have to cut corners in order to be able to trade. I wished that the business rates and, in many cases applicable, the landlords would be given a one star rating. The small business always suffer first, and lots and lots have disappeared from the town centres and food halls. Okay, the incident concerned happened last December, and should have been rectified by now. Some goodwill from the council wouldn't come amiss!! Iluminati
  • Score: 1

1:02pm Sat 15 Feb 14

bwfc2510 says...

thomas222 wrote:
bwfc2510 wrote:
Looks like an over zealous council inspector over reacting. Surely Bolton needs people like Mr Muller trying to keep the town centre alive with his various businesses who have a long standing and very good reputation. Perhaps the Bolton News should also support his efforts......
We welcome anyone who gives great service & good standards. Thats why we pay for it. Who we dont want to welcome are people who have no idea of having any responsiblity and duty to protecting the publics health with good food practices.
I completely agree and as stated in the report Cappucinos and Mezzo have had a long standing five star rating. So to say they have "no idea" regarding their responsibilities is again another over reaction. It seems like a blip that has been sensationalized. May they continue to serve Bolton for years to come !!!
[quote][p][bold]thomas222[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]bwfc2510[/bold] wrote: Looks like an over zealous council inspector over reacting. Surely Bolton needs people like Mr Muller trying to keep the town centre alive with his various businesses who have a long standing and very good reputation. Perhaps the Bolton News should also support his efforts......[/p][/quote]We welcome anyone who gives great service & good standards. Thats why we pay for it. Who we dont want to welcome are people who have no idea of having any responsiblity and duty to protecting the publics health with good food practices.[/p][/quote]I completely agree and as stated in the report Cappucinos and Mezzo have had a long standing five star rating. So to say they have "no idea" regarding their responsibilities is again another over reaction. It seems like a blip that has been sensationalized. May they continue to serve Bolton for years to come !!! bwfc2510
  • Score: 2

1:13pm Sat 15 Feb 14

cmmummy says...

I once worked in a food and drink establishment and we always scored high but this one time the inspector was in a foul mood and nitpicked at everything she was determined to fail us without a doubt or food areas staff were so clean tidy our manager had cleaning check list and was very strict about it.
But they still marked us down with god knows what it was unbelievable.
We had three months to fix it and they came back different Inspector and he couldn't understand why we failed !!!

So they passed us and that was it.
I would still use this cafe establishment as it sounds like the same thing has happened, to go from five star to one doesn't add up.
I once worked in a food and drink establishment and we always scored high but this one time the inspector was in a foul mood and nitpicked at everything she was determined to fail us without a doubt or food areas staff were so clean tidy our manager had cleaning check list and was very strict about it. But they still marked us down with god knows what it was unbelievable. We had three months to fix it and they came back different Inspector and he couldn't understand why we failed !!! So they passed us and that was it. I would still use this cafe establishment as it sounds like the same thing has happened, to go from five star to one doesn't add up. cmmummy
  • Score: 5

1:47pm Sat 15 Feb 14

AnnaRad says...

I agree with many of the other comments on here

I do think though that the reporter should have shown a little fairness though..

Laibaz - Indian on Bradshawgate score of 1 since March 2013
Excellency - score of 2 since November 2013
Allens Fried Chicken - Score of 1 since July 2013
Little italy - Blackburn road - Score of 1 since Dec 2013
Mr Frys - Chippy on Newport Street - Score of 1 since March 2013
Shahs - Bradshawgate - Score of 1 Since March 2013
Curly Whirleez - Children Play Centre - Score of 2 since July 2013
Odessa Cafe - Score of 2 since March 2013

And nicks, nam ploy and quite a few other well known places score just 1 or 2...

seriously think there's an over zealous hygiene office at play here...maybe he's been transferred from traffic warden duties.
I agree with many of the other comments on here I do think though that the reporter should have shown a little fairness though.. Laibaz - Indian on Bradshawgate score of 1 since March 2013 Excellency - score of 2 since November 2013 Allens Fried Chicken - Score of 1 since July 2013 Little italy - Blackburn road - Score of 1 since Dec 2013 Mr Frys - Chippy on Newport Street - Score of 1 since March 2013 Shahs - Bradshawgate - Score of 1 Since March 2013 Curly Whirleez - Children Play Centre - Score of 2 since July 2013 Odessa Cafe - Score of 2 since March 2013 And nicks, nam ploy and quite a few other well known places score just 1 or 2... seriously think there's an over zealous hygiene office at play here...maybe he's been transferred from traffic warden duties. AnnaRad
  • Score: 13

2:06pm Sat 15 Feb 14

hal pel says...

bwfc2510 wrote:
Looks like an over zealous council inspector over reacting. Surely Bolton needs people like Mr Muller trying to keep the town centre alive with his various businesses who have a long standing and very good reputation. Perhaps the Bolton News should also support his efforts......
bwfc2510, you've missed the point entirely. Bolton can do without overstretched business proprietors trading on reputations while providing poor service. If Mr. Muller can't keep on top of his concerns he should downsize.
[quote][p][bold]bwfc2510[/bold] wrote: Looks like an over zealous council inspector over reacting. Surely Bolton needs people like Mr Muller trying to keep the town centre alive with his various businesses who have a long standing and very good reputation. Perhaps the Bolton News should also support his efforts......[/p][/quote]bwfc2510, you've missed the point entirely. Bolton can do without overstretched business proprietors trading on reputations while providing poor service. If Mr. Muller can't keep on top of his concerns he should downsize. hal pel
  • Score: 23

2:13pm Sat 15 Feb 14

thomas222 says...

bwfc2510 wrote:
thomas222 wrote:
bwfc2510 wrote: Looks like an over zealous council inspector over reacting. Surely Bolton needs people like Mr Muller trying to keep the town centre alive with his various businesses who have a long standing and very good reputation. Perhaps the Bolton News should also support his efforts......
We welcome anyone who gives great service & good standards. Thats why we pay for it. Who we dont want to welcome are people who have no idea of having any responsiblity and duty to protecting the publics health with good food practices.
I completely agree and as stated in the report Cappucinos and Mezzo have had a long standing five star rating. So to say they have "no idea" regarding their responsibilities is again another over reaction. It seems like a blip that has been sensationalized. May they continue to serve Bolton for years to come !!!
I agree with you when they have put their house in order. It will always act as a warning to them and others that food is a very serious business . I very nearly died because of it by the way so i have a interest in this issue.
[quote][p][bold]bwfc2510[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]thomas222[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]bwfc2510[/bold] wrote: Looks like an over zealous council inspector over reacting. Surely Bolton needs people like Mr Muller trying to keep the town centre alive with his various businesses who have a long standing and very good reputation. Perhaps the Bolton News should also support his efforts......[/p][/quote]We welcome anyone who gives great service & good standards. Thats why we pay for it. Who we dont want to welcome are people who have no idea of having any responsiblity and duty to protecting the publics health with good food practices.[/p][/quote]I completely agree and as stated in the report Cappucinos and Mezzo have had a long standing five star rating. So to say they have "no idea" regarding their responsibilities is again another over reaction. It seems like a blip that has been sensationalized. May they continue to serve Bolton for years to come !!![/p][/quote]I agree with you when they have put their house in order. It will always act as a warning to them and others that food is a very serious business . I very nearly died because of it by the way so i have a interest in this issue. thomas222
  • Score: 17

2:26pm Sat 15 Feb 14

thomas222 says...

I cannot believe that some people on here are supporting people who have dirty habits around food that make people very ill & can kill people. Where are their heads!
I cannot believe that some people on here are supporting people who have dirty habits around food that make people very ill & can kill people. Where are their heads! thomas222
  • Score: 39

2:46pm Sat 15 Feb 14

thomas222 says...

steveG wrote:
If domestic kitchens were visited all houses would be banned from preparing food. I would be perfectly happy to trust professional caterers and save money on the costly inspections.
If you kill yourself with dirty food practices at home then thats your own fault but when you are paying for a service there is a legal obligation to serve food that stands up to the British standards required. We are not quite yet a third world country as yet.
[quote][p][bold]steveG[/bold] wrote: If domestic kitchens were visited all houses would be banned from preparing food. I would be perfectly happy to trust professional caterers and save money on the costly inspections.[/p][/quote]If you kill yourself with dirty food practices at home then thats your own fault but when you are paying for a service there is a legal obligation to serve food that stands up to the British standards required. We are not quite yet a third world country as yet. thomas222
  • Score: 24

3:09pm Sat 15 Feb 14

MrBenggo says...

thomas222 wrote:
I cannot believe that some people on here are supporting people who have dirty habits around food that make people very ill & can kill people. Where are their heads!
Agree with you Thomas222, cleanliness is everything,people have died with unclean establishments serving food and drink.
[quote][p][bold]thomas222[/bold] wrote: I cannot believe that some people on here are supporting people who have dirty habits around food that make people very ill & can kill people. Where are their heads![/p][/quote]Agree with you Thomas222, cleanliness is everything,people have died with unclean establishments serving food and drink. MrBenggo
  • Score: 26

3:17pm Sat 15 Feb 14

AnnaRad says...

When it comes to these food hygiene ratings I have a few issues with how they are allocated.

Firstly it seems crazy to me how a hunk of donner meat can be prepared in a factory that has a 1 rating, to then be taken to a takeaway with a rating of 5 and served to a customer who thinks everything is perfect.

Secondly there is an element of the rating called confidence in management. This is purely a rating that is given by a single individual against another individual. To me this doesn't seem neither fair or scalable. If a hygiene officer doesn't particularly like or get on with the operator its very easy for them to down rate them. This is very subjective and not the best way to rate hygiene.

Thirdly, there is hundreds of micro business's popping up on the likes of facebook etc. These are the types of business's like cupcake makers etc. Where goods are made in domestic kitchens and sold on markets, fetes, internet etc...No regulation on these business's (that dont pay business rates)

Add all this together with a 'Poll' that Bolton news runs saying 9 out of 10 people wont visit these premises again adds up to a really useless and unfair environmental health rating system.

I just hope cappuccinos works through this and the numerous employees that work there dont lose their jobs thanks to this 'system'
When it comes to these food hygiene ratings I have a few issues with how they are allocated. Firstly it seems crazy to me how a hunk of donner meat can be prepared in a factory that has a 1 rating, to then be taken to a takeaway with a rating of 5 and served to a customer who thinks everything is perfect. Secondly there is an element of the rating called confidence in management. This is purely a rating that is given by a single individual against another individual. To me this doesn't seem neither fair or scalable. If a hygiene officer doesn't particularly like or get on with the operator its very easy for them to down rate them. This is very subjective and not the best way to rate hygiene. Thirdly, there is hundreds of micro business's popping up on the likes of facebook etc. These are the types of business's like cupcake makers etc. Where goods are made in domestic kitchens and sold on markets, fetes, internet etc...No regulation on these business's (that dont pay business rates) Add all this together with a 'Poll' that Bolton news runs saying 9 out of 10 people wont visit these premises again adds up to a really useless and unfair environmental health rating system. I just hope cappuccinos works through this and the numerous employees that work there dont lose their jobs thanks to this 'system' AnnaRad
  • Score: 8

3:17pm Sat 15 Feb 14

thomas222 says...

MrBenggo wrote:
thomas222 wrote: I cannot believe that some people on here are supporting people who have dirty habits around food that make people very ill & can kill people. Where are their heads!
Agree with you Thomas222, cleanliness is everything,people have died with unclean establishments serving food and drink.
I was a min to midnight from dying with dirty food and changed my life forever with the after effects. Its a serious situation.
[quote][p][bold]MrBenggo[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]thomas222[/bold] wrote: I cannot believe that some people on here are supporting people who have dirty habits around food that make people very ill & can kill people. Where are their heads![/p][/quote]Agree with you Thomas222, cleanliness is everything,people have died with unclean establishments serving food and drink.[/p][/quote]I was a min to midnight from dying with dirty food and changed my life forever with the after effects. Its a serious situation. thomas222
  • Score: 8

3:28pm Sat 15 Feb 14

thomas222 says...

AnnaRad wrote:
When it comes to these food hygiene ratings I have a few issues with how they are allocated. Firstly it seems crazy to me how a hunk of donner meat can be prepared in a factory that has a 1 rating, to then be taken to a takeaway with a rating of 5 and served to a customer who thinks everything is perfect. Secondly there is an element of the rating called confidence in management. This is purely a rating that is given by a single individual against another individual. To me this doesn't seem neither fair or scalable. If a hygiene officer doesn't particularly like or get on with the operator its very easy for them to down rate them. This is very subjective and not the best way to rate hygiene. Thirdly, there is hundreds of micro business's popping up on the likes of facebook etc. These are the types of business's like cupcake makers etc. Where goods are made in domestic kitchens and sold on markets, fetes, internet etc...No regulation on these business's (that dont pay business rates) Add all this together with a 'Poll' that Bolton news runs saying 9 out of 10 people wont visit these premises again adds up to a really useless and unfair environmental health rating system. I just hope cappuccinos works through this and the numerous employees that work there dont lose their jobs thanks to this 'system'
The system has worked perfectly well for many years as it is and even better these days, & a one star producer who produces bad food will have it tracked back to him and prosecuted as should food service operations,everyone has to abide by the same rules so its fair to all except the bad ones. Why your reluctance to have clean food from clean places is a very strange & unusual thing to want unless you have another agenda perhaps as possibility do the other people on here, who it seems agree with you..
[quote][p][bold]AnnaRad[/bold] wrote: When it comes to these food hygiene ratings I have a few issues with how they are allocated. Firstly it seems crazy to me how a hunk of donner meat can be prepared in a factory that has a 1 rating, to then be taken to a takeaway with a rating of 5 and served to a customer who thinks everything is perfect. Secondly there is an element of the rating called confidence in management. This is purely a rating that is given by a single individual against another individual. To me this doesn't seem neither fair or scalable. If a hygiene officer doesn't particularly like or get on with the operator its very easy for them to down rate them. This is very subjective and not the best way to rate hygiene. Thirdly, there is hundreds of micro business's popping up on the likes of facebook etc. These are the types of business's like cupcake makers etc. Where goods are made in domestic kitchens and sold on markets, fetes, internet etc...No regulation on these business's (that dont pay business rates) Add all this together with a 'Poll' that Bolton news runs saying 9 out of 10 people wont visit these premises again adds up to a really useless and unfair environmental health rating system. I just hope cappuccinos works through this and the numerous employees that work there dont lose their jobs thanks to this 'system'[/p][/quote]The system has worked perfectly well for many years as it is and even better these days, & a one star producer who produces bad food will have it tracked back to him and prosecuted as should food service operations,everyone has to abide by the same rules so its fair to all except the bad ones. Why your reluctance to have clean food from clean places is a very strange & unusual thing to want unless you have another agenda perhaps as possibility do the other people on here, who it seems agree with you.. thomas222
  • Score: 6

3:44pm Sat 15 Feb 14

AnnaRad says...

thomas222 wrote:
AnnaRad wrote:
When it comes to these food hygiene ratings I have a few issues with how they are allocated. Firstly it seems crazy to me how a hunk of donner meat can be prepared in a factory that has a 1 rating, to then be taken to a takeaway with a rating of 5 and served to a customer who thinks everything is perfect. Secondly there is an element of the rating called confidence in management. This is purely a rating that is given by a single individual against another individual. To me this doesn't seem neither fair or scalable. If a hygiene officer doesn't particularly like or get on with the operator its very easy for them to down rate them. This is very subjective and not the best way to rate hygiene. Thirdly, there is hundreds of micro business's popping up on the likes of facebook etc. These are the types of business's like cupcake makers etc. Where goods are made in domestic kitchens and sold on markets, fetes, internet etc...No regulation on these business's (that dont pay business rates) Add all this together with a 'Poll' that Bolton news runs saying 9 out of 10 people wont visit these premises again adds up to a really useless and unfair environmental health rating system. I just hope cappuccinos works through this and the numerous employees that work there dont lose their jobs thanks to this 'system'
The system has worked perfectly well for many years as it is and even better these days, & a one star producer who produces bad food will have it tracked back to him and prosecuted as should food service operations,everyone has to abide by the same rules so its fair to all except the bad ones. Why your reluctance to have clean food from clean places is a very strange & unusual thing to want unless you have another agenda perhaps as possibility do the other people on here, who it seems agree with you..
Im starting to think thomas222 either just likes provoking things to create an argument or works for environmental health. Either way you are living in cloud cuckoo land. There's no agenda here other than the councils trying to justify the role of too many environmental health officers

There are several producers in the local area distributing dodgy substandard meat and raw food produce to takeaways. The prosecutions are very thin on the ground and when one operation is eventually closed down after several months, its very easy to set up again the next day under a different name.

My point is that you don't know what you're eating (horse lasagne anyone??) but going after a company because of a cracked tile in a kitchen or a sign in the wrong place seems like a crazy system. I'm not saying their shouldn't be a system in place as there obviously should. The point i'm making is the current one is open to abuse and is nowhere near as transparent as it perhaps should be.
[quote][p][bold]thomas222[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]AnnaRad[/bold] wrote: When it comes to these food hygiene ratings I have a few issues with how they are allocated. Firstly it seems crazy to me how a hunk of donner meat can be prepared in a factory that has a 1 rating, to then be taken to a takeaway with a rating of 5 and served to a customer who thinks everything is perfect. Secondly there is an element of the rating called confidence in management. This is purely a rating that is given by a single individual against another individual. To me this doesn't seem neither fair or scalable. If a hygiene officer doesn't particularly like or get on with the operator its very easy for them to down rate them. This is very subjective and not the best way to rate hygiene. Thirdly, there is hundreds of micro business's popping up on the likes of facebook etc. These are the types of business's like cupcake makers etc. Where goods are made in domestic kitchens and sold on markets, fetes, internet etc...No regulation on these business's (that dont pay business rates) Add all this together with a 'Poll' that Bolton news runs saying 9 out of 10 people wont visit these premises again adds up to a really useless and unfair environmental health rating system. I just hope cappuccinos works through this and the numerous employees that work there dont lose their jobs thanks to this 'system'[/p][/quote]The system has worked perfectly well for many years as it is and even better these days, & a one star producer who produces bad food will have it tracked back to him and prosecuted as should food service operations,everyone has to abide by the same rules so its fair to all except the bad ones. Why your reluctance to have clean food from clean places is a very strange & unusual thing to want unless you have another agenda perhaps as possibility do the other people on here, who it seems agree with you..[/p][/quote]Im starting to think thomas222 either just likes provoking things to create an argument or works for environmental health. Either way you are living in cloud cuckoo land. There's no agenda here other than the councils trying to justify the role of too many environmental health officers There are several producers in the local area distributing dodgy substandard meat and raw food produce to takeaways. The prosecutions are very thin on the ground and when one operation is eventually closed down after several months, its very easy to set up again the next day under a different name. My point is that you don't know what you're eating (horse lasagne anyone??) but going after a company because of a cracked tile in a kitchen or a sign in the wrong place seems like a crazy system. I'm not saying their shouldn't be a system in place as there obviously should. The point i'm making is the current one is open to abuse and is nowhere near as transparent as it perhaps should be. AnnaRad
  • Score: -2

5:56pm Sat 15 Feb 14

atlas123 says...

I have to say since scores on the doors first came out a couple of years ago I have change a couple of my regular eat out aries.
I have to say since scores on the doors first came out a couple of years ago I have change a couple of my regular eat out aries. atlas123
  • Score: 7

6:34pm Sat 15 Feb 14

thomas222 says...

AnnaRad wrote:
thomas222 wrote:
AnnaRad wrote: When it comes to these food hygiene ratings I have a few issues with how they are allocated. Firstly it seems crazy to me how a hunk of donner meat can be prepared in a factory that has a 1 rating, to then be taken to a takeaway with a rating of 5 and served to a customer who thinks everything is perfect. Secondly there is an element of the rating called confidence in management. This is purely a rating that is given by a single individual against another individual. To me this doesn't seem neither fair or scalable. If a hygiene officer doesn't particularly like or get on with the operator its very easy for them to down rate them. This is very subjective and not the best way to rate hygiene. Thirdly, there is hundreds of micro business's popping up on the likes of facebook etc. These are the types of business's like cupcake makers etc. Where goods are made in domestic kitchens and sold on markets, fetes, internet etc...No regulation on these business's (that dont pay business rates) Add all this together with a 'Poll' that Bolton news runs saying 9 out of 10 people wont visit these premises again adds up to a really useless and unfair environmental health rating system. I just hope cappuccinos works through this and the numerous employees that work there dont lose their jobs thanks to this 'system'
The system has worked perfectly well for many years as it is and even better these days, & a one star producer who produces bad food will have it tracked back to him and prosecuted as should food service operations,everyone has to abide by the same rules so its fair to all except the bad ones. Why your reluctance to have clean food from clean places is a very strange & unusual thing to want unless you have another agenda perhaps as possibility do the other people on here, who it seems agree with you..
Im starting to think thomas222 either just likes provoking things to create an argument or works for environmental health. Either way you are living in cloud cuckoo land. There's no agenda here other than the councils trying to justify the role of too many environmental health officers There are several producers in the local area distributing dodgy substandard meat and raw food produce to takeaways. The prosecutions are very thin on the ground and when one operation is eventually closed down after several months, its very easy to set up again the next day under a different name. My point is that you don't know what you're eating (horse lasagne anyone??) but going after a company because of a cracked tile in a kitchen or a sign in the wrong place seems like a crazy system. I'm not saying their shouldn't be a system in place as there obviously should. The point i'm making is the current one is open to abuse and is nowhere near as transparent as it perhaps should be.
Hundreds of people die every year with bad food practice and millions ill in this country. Do you own a dirty take away because your starting to sound like you may do.
[quote][p][bold]AnnaRad[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]thomas222[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]AnnaRad[/bold] wrote: When it comes to these food hygiene ratings I have a few issues with how they are allocated. Firstly it seems crazy to me how a hunk of donner meat can be prepared in a factory that has a 1 rating, to then be taken to a takeaway with a rating of 5 and served to a customer who thinks everything is perfect. Secondly there is an element of the rating called confidence in management. This is purely a rating that is given by a single individual against another individual. To me this doesn't seem neither fair or scalable. If a hygiene officer doesn't particularly like or get on with the operator its very easy for them to down rate them. This is very subjective and not the best way to rate hygiene. Thirdly, there is hundreds of micro business's popping up on the likes of facebook etc. These are the types of business's like cupcake makers etc. Where goods are made in domestic kitchens and sold on markets, fetes, internet etc...No regulation on these business's (that dont pay business rates) Add all this together with a 'Poll' that Bolton news runs saying 9 out of 10 people wont visit these premises again adds up to a really useless and unfair environmental health rating system. I just hope cappuccinos works through this and the numerous employees that work there dont lose their jobs thanks to this 'system'[/p][/quote]The system has worked perfectly well for many years as it is and even better these days, & a one star producer who produces bad food will have it tracked back to him and prosecuted as should food service operations,everyone has to abide by the same rules so its fair to all except the bad ones. Why your reluctance to have clean food from clean places is a very strange & unusual thing to want unless you have another agenda perhaps as possibility do the other people on here, who it seems agree with you..[/p][/quote]Im starting to think thomas222 either just likes provoking things to create an argument or works for environmental health. Either way you are living in cloud cuckoo land. There's no agenda here other than the councils trying to justify the role of too many environmental health officers There are several producers in the local area distributing dodgy substandard meat and raw food produce to takeaways. The prosecutions are very thin on the ground and when one operation is eventually closed down after several months, its very easy to set up again the next day under a different name. My point is that you don't know what you're eating (horse lasagne anyone??) but going after a company because of a cracked tile in a kitchen or a sign in the wrong place seems like a crazy system. I'm not saying their shouldn't be a system in place as there obviously should. The point i'm making is the current one is open to abuse and is nowhere near as transparent as it perhaps should be.[/p][/quote]Hundreds of people die every year with bad food practice and millions ill in this country. Do you own a dirty take away because your starting to sound like you may do. thomas222
  • Score: 5

6:39pm Sat 15 Feb 14

thomas222 says...

AnnaRad wrote:
thomas222 wrote:
AnnaRad wrote: When it comes to these food hygiene ratings I have a few issues with how they are allocated. Firstly it seems crazy to me how a hunk of donner meat can be prepared in a factory that has a 1 rating, to then be taken to a takeaway with a rating of 5 and served to a customer who thinks everything is perfect. Secondly there is an element of the rating called confidence in management. This is purely a rating that is given by a single individual against another individual. To me this doesn't seem neither fair or scalable. If a hygiene officer doesn't particularly like or get on with the operator its very easy for them to down rate them. This is very subjective and not the best way to rate hygiene. Thirdly, there is hundreds of micro business's popping up on the likes of facebook etc. These are the types of business's like cupcake makers etc. Where goods are made in domestic kitchens and sold on markets, fetes, internet etc...No regulation on these business's (that dont pay business rates) Add all this together with a 'Poll' that Bolton news runs saying 9 out of 10 people wont visit these premises again adds up to a really useless and unfair environmental health rating system. I just hope cappuccinos works through this and the numerous employees that work there dont lose their jobs thanks to this 'system'
The system has worked perfectly well for many years as it is and even better these days, & a one star producer who produces bad food will have it tracked back to him and prosecuted as should food service operations,everyone has to abide by the same rules so its fair to all except the bad ones. Why your reluctance to have clean food from clean places is a very strange & unusual thing to want unless you have another agenda perhaps as possibility do the other people on here, who it seems agree with you..
Im starting to think thomas222 either just likes provoking things to create an argument or works for environmental health. Either way you are living in cloud cuckoo land. There's no agenda here other than the councils trying to justify the role of too many environmental health officers There are several producers in the local area distributing dodgy substandard meat and raw food produce to takeaways. The prosecutions are very thin on the ground and when one operation is eventually closed down after several months, its very easy to set up again the next day under a different name. My point is that you don't know what you're eating (horse lasagne anyone??) but going after a company because of a cracked tile in a kitchen or a sign in the wrong place seems like a crazy system. I'm not saying their shouldn't be a system in place as there obviously should. The point i'm making is the current one is open to abuse and is nowhere near as transparent as it perhaps should be.
Germs cause some horrible things like salmonella that i got from infected chicken &The issue in case you have missed it is regarding how dirty and unhygenic it is and not what butties they serve.
[quote][p][bold]AnnaRad[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]thomas222[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]AnnaRad[/bold] wrote: When it comes to these food hygiene ratings I have a few issues with how they are allocated. Firstly it seems crazy to me how a hunk of donner meat can be prepared in a factory that has a 1 rating, to then be taken to a takeaway with a rating of 5 and served to a customer who thinks everything is perfect. Secondly there is an element of the rating called confidence in management. This is purely a rating that is given by a single individual against another individual. To me this doesn't seem neither fair or scalable. If a hygiene officer doesn't particularly like or get on with the operator its very easy for them to down rate them. This is very subjective and not the best way to rate hygiene. Thirdly, there is hundreds of micro business's popping up on the likes of facebook etc. These are the types of business's like cupcake makers etc. Where goods are made in domestic kitchens and sold on markets, fetes, internet etc...No regulation on these business's (that dont pay business rates) Add all this together with a 'Poll' that Bolton news runs saying 9 out of 10 people wont visit these premises again adds up to a really useless and unfair environmental health rating system. I just hope cappuccinos works through this and the numerous employees that work there dont lose their jobs thanks to this 'system'[/p][/quote]The system has worked perfectly well for many years as it is and even better these days, & a one star producer who produces bad food will have it tracked back to him and prosecuted as should food service operations,everyone has to abide by the same rules so its fair to all except the bad ones. Why your reluctance to have clean food from clean places is a very strange & unusual thing to want unless you have another agenda perhaps as possibility do the other people on here, who it seems agree with you..[/p][/quote]Im starting to think thomas222 either just likes provoking things to create an argument or works for environmental health. Either way you are living in cloud cuckoo land. There's no agenda here other than the councils trying to justify the role of too many environmental health officers There are several producers in the local area distributing dodgy substandard meat and raw food produce to takeaways. The prosecutions are very thin on the ground and when one operation is eventually closed down after several months, its very easy to set up again the next day under a different name. My point is that you don't know what you're eating (horse lasagne anyone??) but going after a company because of a cracked tile in a kitchen or a sign in the wrong place seems like a crazy system. I'm not saying their shouldn't be a system in place as there obviously should. The point i'm making is the current one is open to abuse and is nowhere near as transparent as it perhaps should be.[/p][/quote]Germs cause some horrible things like salmonella that i got from infected chicken &The issue in case you have missed it is regarding how dirty and unhygenic it is and not what butties they serve. thomas222
  • Score: 1

6:54pm Sat 15 Feb 14

Hollieanne says...

While food hygiene is of the utmost importance and should be strictly upheld, is it only me that wonders, perhaps cynically, that this may have something to do with Clifford's vision of a cinema and more restaurants/eateries at the Market Place? Maybe a humble cafe won't fit in with the plans?
While food hygiene is of the utmost importance and should be strictly upheld, is it only me that wonders, perhaps cynically, that this may have something to do with Clifford's vision of a cinema and more restaurants/eateries at the Market Place? Maybe a humble cafe won't fit in with the plans? Hollieanne
  • Score: 0

7:16pm Sat 15 Feb 14

ruined heritage says...

Hollieanne wrote:
While food hygiene is of the utmost importance and should be strictly upheld, is it only me that wonders, perhaps cynically, that this may have something to do with Clifford's vision of a cinema and more restaurants/eateries at the Market Place? Maybe a humble cafe won't fit in with the plans?
That was my initial thoughts
[quote][p][bold]Hollieanne[/bold] wrote: While food hygiene is of the utmost importance and should be strictly upheld, is it only me that wonders, perhaps cynically, that this may have something to do with Clifford's vision of a cinema and more restaurants/eateries at the Market Place? Maybe a humble cafe won't fit in with the plans?[/p][/quote]That was my initial thoughts ruined heritage
  • Score: -1

7:36pm Sat 15 Feb 14

thomas222 says...

Hollieanne wrote:
While food hygiene is of the utmost importance and should be strictly upheld, is it only me that wonders, perhaps cynically, that this may have something to do with Clifford's vision of a cinema and more restaurants/eateries at the Market Place? Maybe a humble cafe won't fit in with the plans?
Dont think he would risk killing people though he may have thought it....
[quote][p][bold]Hollieanne[/bold] wrote: While food hygiene is of the utmost importance and should be strictly upheld, is it only me that wonders, perhaps cynically, that this may have something to do with Clifford's vision of a cinema and more restaurants/eateries at the Market Place? Maybe a humble cafe won't fit in with the plans?[/p][/quote]Dont think he would risk killing people though he may have thought it.... thomas222
  • Score: 5

7:46pm Sat 15 Feb 14

fat fin says...

what about colemans bakery on chorley old road Bolton , highest fine ever fine for poor hygene, £30,000 AND STILL OPEN, and I bet they have not paid a penny of it....
what about colemans bakery on chorley old road Bolton , highest fine ever fine for poor hygene, £30,000 AND STILL OPEN, and I bet they have not paid a penny of it.... fat fin
  • Score: 7

7:54pm Sat 15 Feb 14

Unequalrights says...

whilst were at it....what about Wayne Walkers Meats on Bradshawgate

a big fat 0 (zero) rating...dished up on 28th October 2013

But i guess that's not mentioned due to the amount of advertising they do through the bolton news??
whilst were at it....what about Wayne Walkers Meats on Bradshawgate a big fat 0 (zero) rating...dished up on 28th October 2013 But i guess that's not mentioned due to the amount of advertising they do through the bolton news?? Unequalrights
  • Score: 19

8:14pm Sat 15 Feb 14

thomas222 says...

Unequalrights wrote:
whilst were at it....what about Wayne Walkers Meats on Bradshawgate a big fat 0 (zero) rating...dished up on 28th October 2013 But i guess that's not mentioned due to the amount of advertising they do through the bolton news??
well spotted...
[quote][p][bold]Unequalrights[/bold] wrote: whilst were at it....what about Wayne Walkers Meats on Bradshawgate a big fat 0 (zero) rating...dished up on 28th October 2013 But i guess that's not mentioned due to the amount of advertising they do through the bolton news??[/p][/quote]well spotted... thomas222
  • Score: 12

11:05pm Sat 15 Feb 14

steveG says...

Reading the above posts,this system employed by Councils would appear to be a form of protection similar to that of the mafia. Keep the Council and Local paper sweet and no bad publicity will result.
Reading the above posts,this system employed by Councils would appear to be a form of protection similar to that of the mafia. Keep the Council and Local paper sweet and no bad publicity will result. steveG
  • Score: 5

11:16pm Sat 15 Feb 14

Donkey Stone says...

When will we get a list of councillors who pay the council tax on time. Or councillors with convictions.
When will we get a list of councillors who pay the council tax on time. Or councillors with convictions. Donkey Stone
  • Score: 9

11:54pm Sat 15 Feb 14

anonymus891 says...

This was an unfair rating on the business, if the eho had a problem with standards they should of given a week to get the correct standards in place before the rating was handed out. the problem was not with the standard of the food, as is mentioned. if there was any risk to public health the eho has the rights to close them down with immediate effect.the business has been open since 1991 and has an excellent reputation. the food is of a good standard, which is always well prepared, with a fresh salad.
This was an unfair rating on the business, if the eho had a problem with standards they should of given a week to get the correct standards in place before the rating was handed out. the problem was not with the standard of the food, as is mentioned. if there was any risk to public health the eho has the rights to close them down with immediate effect.the business has been open since 1991 and has an excellent reputation. the food is of a good standard, which is always well prepared, with a fresh salad. anonymus891
  • Score: -8

3:56am Sun 16 Feb 14

BoltonLancs says...

Yep, Morris making a statement on this says everything. John Muller, I hope you will one day divulge Cllr Morris' conduct in these matters to add to his other misdemeanours in public office.
Yep, Morris making a statement on this says everything. John Muller, I hope you will one day divulge Cllr Morris' conduct in these matters to add to his other misdemeanours in public office. BoltonLancs
  • Score: 4

7:33am Sun 16 Feb 14

paulrich says...

Oh, I could say soooo muchabout this.
Oh, I could say soooo muchabout this. paulrich
  • Score: 4

12:28pm Sun 16 Feb 14

BWFC71 says...

thomas222 wrote:
AnnaRad wrote:
When it comes to these food hygiene ratings I have a few issues with how they are allocated. Firstly it seems crazy to me how a hunk of donner meat can be prepared in a factory that has a 1 rating, to then be taken to a takeaway with a rating of 5 and served to a customer who thinks everything is perfect. Secondly there is an element of the rating called confidence in management. This is purely a rating that is given by a single individual against another individual. To me this doesn't seem neither fair or scalable. If a hygiene officer doesn't particularly like or get on with the operator its very easy for them to down rate them. This is very subjective and not the best way to rate hygiene. Thirdly, there is hundreds of micro business's popping up on the likes of facebook etc. These are the types of business's like cupcake makers etc. Where goods are made in domestic kitchens and sold on markets, fetes, internet etc...No regulation on these business's (that dont pay business rates) Add all this together with a 'Poll' that Bolton news runs saying 9 out of 10 people wont visit these premises again adds up to a really useless and unfair environmental health rating system. I just hope cappuccinos works through this and the numerous employees that work there dont lose their jobs thanks to this 'system'
The system has worked perfectly well for many years as it is and even better these days, & a one star producer who produces bad food will have it tracked back to him and prosecuted as should food service operations,everyone has to abide by the same rules so its fair to all except the bad ones. Why your reluctance to have clean food from clean places is a very strange & unusual thing to want unless you have another agenda perhaps as possibility do the other people on here, who it seems agree with you..
This system has been going for less than 5 years!!!
And it is not even operated by the Council but a Government Quango (Food Standards Agency - established 2001) set up by the last Government to take it away from local councils to give a more independent feel about them, whilst the Food Hygiene Rating System was established

As a few have stated basically it is down to the inspector of the day whether thy are in a foul mood or not as to whether they get a good rating or not and many on the tick points of the list are very subjective and not about cleanliness at all!!! To view the official FHRS website go to.... http://foodhygienera
tingscheme.com/index
.htm

As from the website only a small fraction of any inspection is about cleanliness and most is about the proprietors and paperwork!!!!

Therefore the cleanliness of an establishment is not of a high priority for the inspectors and as such basically the ratings do not mean a thing!!!
[quote][p][bold]thomas222[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]AnnaRad[/bold] wrote: When it comes to these food hygiene ratings I have a few issues with how they are allocated. Firstly it seems crazy to me how a hunk of donner meat can be prepared in a factory that has a 1 rating, to then be taken to a takeaway with a rating of 5 and served to a customer who thinks everything is perfect. Secondly there is an element of the rating called confidence in management. This is purely a rating that is given by a single individual against another individual. To me this doesn't seem neither fair or scalable. If a hygiene officer doesn't particularly like or get on with the operator its very easy for them to down rate them. This is very subjective and not the best way to rate hygiene. Thirdly, there is hundreds of micro business's popping up on the likes of facebook etc. These are the types of business's like cupcake makers etc. Where goods are made in domestic kitchens and sold on markets, fetes, internet etc...No regulation on these business's (that dont pay business rates) Add all this together with a 'Poll' that Bolton news runs saying 9 out of 10 people wont visit these premises again adds up to a really useless and unfair environmental health rating system. I just hope cappuccinos works through this and the numerous employees that work there dont lose their jobs thanks to this 'system'[/p][/quote]The system has worked perfectly well for many years as it is and even better these days, & a one star producer who produces bad food will have it tracked back to him and prosecuted as should food service operations,everyone has to abide by the same rules so its fair to all except the bad ones. Why your reluctance to have clean food from clean places is a very strange & unusual thing to want unless you have another agenda perhaps as possibility do the other people on here, who it seems agree with you..[/p][/quote]This system has been going for less than 5 years!!! And it is not even operated by the Council but a Government Quango (Food Standards Agency - established 2001) set up by the last Government to take it away from local councils to give a more independent feel about them, whilst the Food Hygiene Rating System was established As a few have stated basically it is down to the inspector of the day whether thy are in a foul mood or not as to whether they get a good rating or not and many on the tick points of the list are very subjective and not about cleanliness at all!!! To view the official FHRS website go to.... http://foodhygienera tingscheme.com/index .htm As from the website only a small fraction of any inspection is about cleanliness and most is about the proprietors and paperwork!!!! Therefore the cleanliness of an establishment is not of a high priority for the inspectors and as such basically the ratings do not mean a thing!!! BWFC71
  • Score: -57

12:34pm Sun 16 Feb 14

BWFC71 says...

thomas222 wrote:
AnnaRad wrote:
thomas222 wrote:
AnnaRad wrote: When it comes to these food hygiene ratings I have a few issues with how they are allocated. Firstly it seems crazy to me how a hunk of donner meat can be prepared in a factory that has a 1 rating, to then be taken to a takeaway with a rating of 5 and served to a customer who thinks everything is perfect. Secondly there is an element of the rating called confidence in management. This is purely a rating that is given by a single individual against another individual. To me this doesn't seem neither fair or scalable. If a hygiene officer doesn't particularly like or get on with the operator its very easy for them to down rate them. This is very subjective and not the best way to rate hygiene. Thirdly, there is hundreds of micro business's popping up on the likes of facebook etc. These are the types of business's like cupcake makers etc. Where goods are made in domestic kitchens and sold on markets, fetes, internet etc...No regulation on these business's (that dont pay business rates) Add all this together with a 'Poll' that Bolton news runs saying 9 out of 10 people wont visit these premises again adds up to a really useless and unfair environmental health rating system. I just hope cappuccinos works through this and the numerous employees that work there dont lose their jobs thanks to this 'system'
The system has worked perfectly well for many years as it is and even better these days, & a one star producer who produces bad food will have it tracked back to him and prosecuted as should food service operations,everyone has to abide by the same rules so its fair to all except the bad ones. Why your reluctance to have clean food from clean places is a very strange & unusual thing to want unless you have another agenda perhaps as possibility do the other people on here, who it seems agree with you..
Im starting to think thomas222 either just likes provoking things to create an argument or works for environmental health. Either way you are living in cloud cuckoo land. There's no agenda here other than the councils trying to justify the role of too many environmental health officers There are several producers in the local area distributing dodgy substandard meat and raw food produce to takeaways. The prosecutions are very thin on the ground and when one operation is eventually closed down after several months, its very easy to set up again the next day under a different name. My point is that you don't know what you're eating (horse lasagne anyone??) but going after a company because of a cracked tile in a kitchen or a sign in the wrong place seems like a crazy system. I'm not saying their shouldn't be a system in place as there obviously should. The point i'm making is the current one is open to abuse and is nowhere near as transparent as it perhaps should be.
Germs cause some horrible things like salmonella that i got from infected chicken &The issue in case you have missed it is regarding how dirty and unhygenic it is and not what butties they serve.
No that salmonella case could have actually come from your own kitchen!!!

Thing is you cannot say for sure

Yes cleanliess needs to be upheld but wen the FSA don't even make it a priority and put the proprietor and paperwork above cleanliness then do you not think that the ratings system is actually massively flawed?
[quote][p][bold]thomas222[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]AnnaRad[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]thomas222[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]AnnaRad[/bold] wrote: When it comes to these food hygiene ratings I have a few issues with how they are allocated. Firstly it seems crazy to me how a hunk of donner meat can be prepared in a factory that has a 1 rating, to then be taken to a takeaway with a rating of 5 and served to a customer who thinks everything is perfect. Secondly there is an element of the rating called confidence in management. This is purely a rating that is given by a single individual against another individual. To me this doesn't seem neither fair or scalable. If a hygiene officer doesn't particularly like or get on with the operator its very easy for them to down rate them. This is very subjective and not the best way to rate hygiene. Thirdly, there is hundreds of micro business's popping up on the likes of facebook etc. These are the types of business's like cupcake makers etc. Where goods are made in domestic kitchens and sold on markets, fetes, internet etc...No regulation on these business's (that dont pay business rates) Add all this together with a 'Poll' that Bolton news runs saying 9 out of 10 people wont visit these premises again adds up to a really useless and unfair environmental health rating system. I just hope cappuccinos works through this and the numerous employees that work there dont lose their jobs thanks to this 'system'[/p][/quote]The system has worked perfectly well for many years as it is and even better these days, & a one star producer who produces bad food will have it tracked back to him and prosecuted as should food service operations,everyone has to abide by the same rules so its fair to all except the bad ones. Why your reluctance to have clean food from clean places is a very strange & unusual thing to want unless you have another agenda perhaps as possibility do the other people on here, who it seems agree with you..[/p][/quote]Im starting to think thomas222 either just likes provoking things to create an argument or works for environmental health. Either way you are living in cloud cuckoo land. There's no agenda here other than the councils trying to justify the role of too many environmental health officers There are several producers in the local area distributing dodgy substandard meat and raw food produce to takeaways. The prosecutions are very thin on the ground and when one operation is eventually closed down after several months, its very easy to set up again the next day under a different name. My point is that you don't know what you're eating (horse lasagne anyone??) but going after a company because of a cracked tile in a kitchen or a sign in the wrong place seems like a crazy system. I'm not saying their shouldn't be a system in place as there obviously should. The point i'm making is the current one is open to abuse and is nowhere near as transparent as it perhaps should be.[/p][/quote]Germs cause some horrible things like salmonella that i got from infected chicken &The issue in case you have missed it is regarding how dirty and unhygenic it is and not what butties they serve.[/p][/quote]No that salmonella case could have actually come from your own kitchen!!! Thing is you cannot say for sure Yes cleanliess needs to be upheld but wen the FSA don't even make it a priority and put the proprietor and paperwork above cleanliness then do you not think that the ratings system is actually massively flawed? BWFC71
  • Score: -43

4:35pm Sun 16 Feb 14

adatherton says...

thomas222 wrote:
Perhaps the Bolton News could give us a weekly page with ever eatery on showing what they all are. The Council has all the information required & if printed would give urgency for eatery,s to improve their standards for fear of bad publicity. It would also be a welcome addition to the newspaper by the readers.
The article clearly states you can get all these on food.co.uk
[quote][p][bold]thomas222[/bold] wrote: Perhaps the Bolton News could give us a weekly page with ever eatery on showing what they all are. The Council has all the information required & if printed would give urgency for eatery,s to improve their standards for fear of bad publicity. It would also be a welcome addition to the newspaper by the readers.[/p][/quote]The article clearly states you can get all these on food.co.uk adatherton
  • Score: 2

7:51pm Sun 16 Feb 14

Comment777 says...

Business will be forced to close to make way for new development...anyone want to provide evidence to disprove?
Business will be forced to close to make way for new development...anyone want to provide evidence to disprove? Comment777
  • Score: 1

8:16pm Sun 16 Feb 14

longballs r us says...

I know a lot of people may not like BWFC71 but it seems to me that no matter what he says he always gets a lot of thumbs down.
Back to the story and in my opinion food hygiene should be of the utmost importance in any food establishment. Maybe the business was unlucky that on the day they were not upto the usual high standards, and got caught out.
I am sure they will have rectified it and back to it's best.
I know a lot of people may not like BWFC71 but it seems to me that no matter what he says he always gets a lot of thumbs down. Back to the story and in my opinion food hygiene should be of the utmost importance in any food establishment. Maybe the business was unlucky that on the day they were not upto the usual high standards, and got caught out. I am sure they will have rectified it and back to it's best. longballs r us
  • Score: -24

9:56pm Sun 16 Feb 14

BWFC71 says...

longballs r us wrote:
I know a lot of people may not like BWFC71 but it seems to me that no matter what he says he always gets a lot of thumbs down.
Back to the story and in my opinion food hygiene should be of the utmost importance in any food establishment. Maybe the business was unlucky that on the day they were not upto the usual high standards, and got caught out.
I am sure they will have rectified it and back to it's best.
No worries longballs

It just shows people don't like the truth being written down because they'd rather believe urban myth and old wives tales than actual fact! Plus I also believe, as I am anti-UKIP, that it is a group of UKIPers doing their usual NAZI propaganda to stop the truth from coming out.

But I will carry on, no matter what, and also know that the editors know what is happening ad are looking into the matter.

As for the story, I have said my piece which is all factually correct and taken from the Government websites and seems to me that the company fell foul of a grumpy inspector on that day.
[quote][p][bold]longballs r us[/bold] wrote: I know a lot of people may not like BWFC71 but it seems to me that no matter what he says he always gets a lot of thumbs down. Back to the story and in my opinion food hygiene should be of the utmost importance in any food establishment. Maybe the business was unlucky that on the day they were not upto the usual high standards, and got caught out. I am sure they will have rectified it and back to it's best.[/p][/quote]No worries longballs It just shows people don't like the truth being written down because they'd rather believe urban myth and old wives tales than actual fact! Plus I also believe, as I am anti-UKIP, that it is a group of UKIPers doing their usual NAZI propaganda to stop the truth from coming out. But I will carry on, no matter what, and also know that the editors know what is happening ad are looking into the matter. As for the story, I have said my piece which is all factually correct and taken from the Government websites and seems to me that the company fell foul of a grumpy inspector on that day. BWFC71
  • Score: -53

11:20pm Sun 16 Feb 14

Maplins Holiday Camp says...

longballs r us wrote:
I know a lot of people may not like BWFC71 but it seems to me that no matter what he says he always gets a lot of thumbs down.
Back to the story and in my opinion food hygiene should be of the utmost importance in any food establishment. Maybe the business was unlucky that on the day they were not upto the usual high standards, and got caught out.
I am sure they will have rectified it and back to it's best.
Agree with you with regards to the thumbs down as there does seem to be some sort of campaign against BWFC71, although the person does post accurate information in many of his/her posts.

After checking what BWFC71 said, his/her post is actually 100% accurate. So what is the problem with the poster?
[quote][p][bold]longballs r us[/bold] wrote: I know a lot of people may not like BWFC71 but it seems to me that no matter what he says he always gets a lot of thumbs down. Back to the story and in my opinion food hygiene should be of the utmost importance in any food establishment. Maybe the business was unlucky that on the day they were not upto the usual high standards, and got caught out. I am sure they will have rectified it and back to it's best.[/p][/quote]Agree with you with regards to the thumbs down as there does seem to be some sort of campaign against BWFC71, although the person does post accurate information in many of his/her posts. After checking what BWFC71 said, his/her post is actually 100% accurate. So what is the problem with the poster? Maplins Holiday Camp
  • Score: -57

6:47am Mon 17 Feb 14

thomas222 says...

BWFC71 wrote:
thomas222 wrote:
AnnaRad wrote:
thomas222 wrote:
AnnaRad wrote: When it comes to these food hygiene ratings I have a few issues with how they are allocated. Firstly it seems crazy to me how a hunk of donner meat can be prepared in a factory that has a 1 rating, to then be taken to a takeaway with a rating of 5 and served to a customer who thinks everything is perfect. Secondly there is an element of the rating called confidence in management. This is purely a rating that is given by a single individual against another individual. To me this doesn't seem neither fair or scalable. If a hygiene officer doesn't particularly like or get on with the operator its very easy for them to down rate them. This is very subjective and not the best way to rate hygiene. Thirdly, there is hundreds of micro business's popping up on the likes of facebook etc. These are the types of business's like cupcake makers etc. Where goods are made in domestic kitchens and sold on markets, fetes, internet etc...No regulation on these business's (that dont pay business rates) Add all this together with a 'Poll' that Bolton news runs saying 9 out of 10 people wont visit these premises again adds up to a really useless and unfair environmental health rating system. I just hope cappuccinos works through this and the numerous employees that work there dont lose their jobs thanks to this 'system'
The system has worked perfectly well for many years as it is and even better these days, & a one star producer who produces bad food will have it tracked back to him and prosecuted as should food service operations,everyone has to abide by the same rules so its fair to all except the bad ones. Why your reluctance to have clean food from clean places is a very strange & unusual thing to want unless you have another agenda perhaps as possibility do the other people on here, who it seems agree with you..
Im starting to think thomas222 either just likes provoking things to create an argument or works for environmental health. Either way you are living in cloud cuckoo land. There's no agenda here other than the councils trying to justify the role of too many environmental health officers There are several producers in the local area distributing dodgy substandard meat and raw food produce to takeaways. The prosecutions are very thin on the ground and when one operation is eventually closed down after several months, its very easy to set up again the next day under a different name. My point is that you don't know what you're eating (horse lasagne anyone??) but going after a company because of a cracked tile in a kitchen or a sign in the wrong place seems like a crazy system. I'm not saying their shouldn't be a system in place as there obviously should. The point i'm making is the current one is open to abuse and is nowhere near as transparent as it perhaps should be.
Germs cause some horrible things like salmonella that i got from infected chicken &The issue in case you have missed it is regarding how dirty and unhygenic it is and not what butties they serve.
No that salmonella case could have actually come from your own kitchen!!! Thing is you cannot say for sure Yes cleanliess needs to be upheld but wen the FSA don't even make it a priority and put the proprietor and paperwork above cleanliness then do you not think that the ratings system is actually massively flawed?
It wasnt my kitchen because i wasnt in bolton & they found the source with back tracking what i had eaten and from where, my mate i was with also contacted btw..... It was from a pizza from a pool hall. Do you have family & friends or even your self own food outlets.... seems you protest to much.
[quote][p][bold]BWFC71[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]thomas222[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]AnnaRad[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]thomas222[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]AnnaRad[/bold] wrote: When it comes to these food hygiene ratings I have a few issues with how they are allocated. Firstly it seems crazy to me how a hunk of donner meat can be prepared in a factory that has a 1 rating, to then be taken to a takeaway with a rating of 5 and served to a customer who thinks everything is perfect. Secondly there is an element of the rating called confidence in management. This is purely a rating that is given by a single individual against another individual. To me this doesn't seem neither fair or scalable. If a hygiene officer doesn't particularly like or get on with the operator its very easy for them to down rate them. This is very subjective and not the best way to rate hygiene. Thirdly, there is hundreds of micro business's popping up on the likes of facebook etc. These are the types of business's like cupcake makers etc. Where goods are made in domestic kitchens and sold on markets, fetes, internet etc...No regulation on these business's (that dont pay business rates) Add all this together with a 'Poll' that Bolton news runs saying 9 out of 10 people wont visit these premises again adds up to a really useless and unfair environmental health rating system. I just hope cappuccinos works through this and the numerous employees that work there dont lose their jobs thanks to this 'system'[/p][/quote]The system has worked perfectly well for many years as it is and even better these days, & a one star producer who produces bad food will have it tracked back to him and prosecuted as should food service operations,everyone has to abide by the same rules so its fair to all except the bad ones. Why your reluctance to have clean food from clean places is a very strange & unusual thing to want unless you have another agenda perhaps as possibility do the other people on here, who it seems agree with you..[/p][/quote]Im starting to think thomas222 either just likes provoking things to create an argument or works for environmental health. Either way you are living in cloud cuckoo land. There's no agenda here other than the councils trying to justify the role of too many environmental health officers There are several producers in the local area distributing dodgy substandard meat and raw food produce to takeaways. The prosecutions are very thin on the ground and when one operation is eventually closed down after several months, its very easy to set up again the next day under a different name. My point is that you don't know what you're eating (horse lasagne anyone??) but going after a company because of a cracked tile in a kitchen or a sign in the wrong place seems like a crazy system. I'm not saying their shouldn't be a system in place as there obviously should. The point i'm making is the current one is open to abuse and is nowhere near as transparent as it perhaps should be.[/p][/quote]Germs cause some horrible things like salmonella that i got from infected chicken &The issue in case you have missed it is regarding how dirty and unhygenic it is and not what butties they serve.[/p][/quote]No that salmonella case could have actually come from your own kitchen!!! Thing is you cannot say for sure Yes cleanliess needs to be upheld but wen the FSA don't even make it a priority and put the proprietor and paperwork above cleanliness then do you not think that the ratings system is actually massively flawed?[/p][/quote]It wasnt my kitchen because i wasnt in bolton & they found the source with back tracking what i had eaten and from where, my mate i was with also contacted btw..... It was from a pizza from a pool hall. Do you have family & friends or even your self own food outlets.... seems you protest to much. thomas222
  • Score: 2

7:45am Mon 17 Feb 14

thomas222 says...

BWFC71 wrote:
longballs r us wrote: I know a lot of people may not like BWFC71 but it seems to me that no matter what he says he always gets a lot of thumbs down. Back to the story and in my opinion food hygiene should be of the utmost importance in any food establishment. Maybe the business was unlucky that on the day they were not upto the usual high standards, and got caught out. I am sure they will have rectified it and back to it's best.
No worries longballs It just shows people don't like the truth being written down because they'd rather believe urban myth and old wives tales than actual fact! Plus I also believe, as I am anti-UKIP, that it is a group of UKIPers doing their usual NAZI propaganda to stop the truth from coming out. But I will carry on, no matter what, and also know that the editors know what is happening ad are looking into the matter. As for the story, I have said my piece which is all factually correct and taken from the Government websites and seems to me that the company fell foul of a grumpy inspector on that day.
So its UKIP,S fault that a kitchen is found to be dirty filthy is it for gods sake what next. UKIP responsible for the bad bwfc run perhaps.... Responsibility is the owner/manager . If the inspection was not done correctly i would have thought they would have complained,they didn,not complain they had been treated unfairly and said they would clean their act up asap. The poll of 98% tells me most people agree & your disregard for peoples health sounds like a third world understanding of this issue. Not a clue about hygeine or standards.
[quote][p][bold]BWFC71[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]longballs r us[/bold] wrote: I know a lot of people may not like BWFC71 but it seems to me that no matter what he says he always gets a lot of thumbs down. Back to the story and in my opinion food hygiene should be of the utmost importance in any food establishment. Maybe the business was unlucky that on the day they were not upto the usual high standards, and got caught out. I am sure they will have rectified it and back to it's best.[/p][/quote]No worries longballs It just shows people don't like the truth being written down because they'd rather believe urban myth and old wives tales than actual fact! Plus I also believe, as I am anti-UKIP, that it is a group of UKIPers doing their usual NAZI propaganda to stop the truth from coming out. But I will carry on, no matter what, and also know that the editors know what is happening ad are looking into the matter. As for the story, I have said my piece which is all factually correct and taken from the Government websites and seems to me that the company fell foul of a grumpy inspector on that day.[/p][/quote]So its UKIP,S fault that a kitchen is found to be dirty filthy is it for gods sake what next. UKIP responsible for the bad bwfc run perhaps.... Responsibility is the owner/manager . If the inspection was not done correctly i would have thought they would have complained,they didn,not complain they had been treated unfairly and said they would clean their act up asap. The poll of 98% tells me most people agree & your disregard for peoples health sounds like a third world understanding of this issue. Not a clue about hygeine or standards. thomas222
  • Score: 5

7:50am Mon 17 Feb 14

thomas222 says...

longballs r us wrote:
I know a lot of people may not like BWFC71 but it seems to me that no matter what he says he always gets a lot of thumbs down. Back to the story and in my opinion food hygiene should be of the utmost importance in any food establishment. Maybe the business was unlucky that on the day they were not upto the usual high standards, and got caught out. I am sure they will have rectified it and back to it's best.
They have many visits to try and get the people to get their standards up first,if nothing changes they then take action. This is the tip of the iceberg.
[quote][p][bold]longballs r us[/bold] wrote: I know a lot of people may not like BWFC71 but it seems to me that no matter what he says he always gets a lot of thumbs down. Back to the story and in my opinion food hygiene should be of the utmost importance in any food establishment. Maybe the business was unlucky that on the day they were not upto the usual high standards, and got caught out. I am sure they will have rectified it and back to it's best.[/p][/quote]They have many visits to try and get the people to get their standards up first,if nothing changes they then take action. This is the tip of the iceberg. thomas222
  • Score: 4

7:57am Mon 17 Feb 14

thomas222 says...

BWFC71 wrote:
longballs r us wrote: I know a lot of people may not like BWFC71 but it seems to me that no matter what he says he always gets a lot of thumbs down. Back to the story and in my opinion food hygiene should be of the utmost importance in any food establishment. Maybe the business was unlucky that on the day they were not upto the usual high standards, and got caught out. I am sure they will have rectified it and back to it's best.
No worries longballs It just shows people don't like the truth being written down because they'd rather believe urban myth and old wives tales than actual fact! Plus I also believe, as I am anti-UKIP, that it is a group of UKIPers doing their usual NAZI propaganda to stop the truth from coming out. But I will carry on, no matter what, and also know that the editors know what is happening ad are looking into the matter. As for the story, I have said my piece which is all factually correct and taken from the Government websites and seems to me that the company fell foul of a grumpy inspector on that day.
The reason you get the thumbs down is because people dont agree with you and not some conspiracy as you say, you also have been saying this is being investigated by the BN but you have been saying that for a long time now and nothing has happened with regard to this because it is not happening, if it was the BN would be on it like yesterday. Perhaps the BN could come out and tell us if your assumptions are correct shall we.
[quote][p][bold]BWFC71[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]longballs r us[/bold] wrote: I know a lot of people may not like BWFC71 but it seems to me that no matter what he says he always gets a lot of thumbs down. Back to the story and in my opinion food hygiene should be of the utmost importance in any food establishment. Maybe the business was unlucky that on the day they were not upto the usual high standards, and got caught out. I am sure they will have rectified it and back to it's best.[/p][/quote]No worries longballs It just shows people don't like the truth being written down because they'd rather believe urban myth and old wives tales than actual fact! Plus I also believe, as I am anti-UKIP, that it is a group of UKIPers doing their usual NAZI propaganda to stop the truth from coming out. But I will carry on, no matter what, and also know that the editors know what is happening ad are looking into the matter. As for the story, I have said my piece which is all factually correct and taken from the Government websites and seems to me that the company fell foul of a grumpy inspector on that day.[/p][/quote]The reason you get the thumbs down is because people dont agree with you and not some conspiracy as you say, you also have been saying this is being investigated by the BN but you have been saying that for a long time now and nothing has happened with regard to this because it is not happening, if it was the BN would be on it like yesterday. Perhaps the BN could come out and tell us if your assumptions are correct shall we. thomas222
  • Score: 9

8:12am Mon 17 Feb 14

thomas222 says...

BWFC71 wrote:
thomas222 wrote:
AnnaRad wrote:
thomas222 wrote:
AnnaRad wrote: When it comes to these food hygiene ratings I have a few issues with how they are allocated. Firstly it seems crazy to me how a hunk of donner meat can be prepared in a factory that has a 1 rating, to then be taken to a takeaway with a rating of 5 and served to a customer who thinks everything is perfect. Secondly there is an element of the rating called confidence in management. This is purely a rating that is given by a single individual against another individual. To me this doesn't seem neither fair or scalable. If a hygiene officer doesn't particularly like or get on with the operator its very easy for them to down rate them. This is very subjective and not the best way to rate hygiene. Thirdly, there is hundreds of micro business's popping up on the likes of facebook etc. These are the types of business's like cupcake makers etc. Where goods are made in domestic kitchens and sold on markets, fetes, internet etc...No regulation on these business's (that dont pay business rates) Add all this together with a 'Poll' that Bolton news runs saying 9 out of 10 people wont visit these premises again adds up to a really useless and unfair environmental health rating system. I just hope cappuccinos works through this and the numerous employees that work there dont lose their jobs thanks to this 'system'
The system has worked perfectly well for many years as it is and even better these days, & a one star producer who produces bad food will have it tracked back to him and prosecuted as should food service operations,everyone has to abide by the same rules so its fair to all except the bad ones. Why your reluctance to have clean food from clean places is a very strange & unusual thing to want unless you have another agenda perhaps as possibility do the other people on here, who it seems agree with you..
Im starting to think thomas222 either just likes provoking things to create an argument or works for environmental health. Either way you are living in cloud cuckoo land. There's no agenda here other than the councils trying to justify the role of too many environmental health officers There are several producers in the local area distributing dodgy substandard meat and raw food produce to takeaways. The prosecutions are very thin on the ground and when one operation is eventually closed down after several months, its very easy to set up again the next day under a different name. My point is that you don't know what you're eating (horse lasagne anyone??) but going after a company because of a cracked tile in a kitchen or a sign in the wrong place seems like a crazy system. I'm not saying their shouldn't be a system in place as there obviously should. The point i'm making is the current one is open to abuse and is nowhere near as transparent as it perhaps should be.
Germs cause some horrible things like salmonella that i got from infected chicken &The issue in case you have missed it is regarding how dirty and unhygenic it is and not what butties they serve.
No that salmonella case could have actually come from your own kitchen!!! Thing is you cannot say for sure Yes cleanliess needs to be upheld but wen the FSA don't even make it a priority and put the proprietor and paperwork above cleanliness then do you not think that the ratings system is actually massively flawed?
I did not see anything in the article saying the reason this place is a health risk was because of bad book keeping or bad spelling mistakes. It happened because it was a danger to the public & needed to be brought to British standards & not some ones idea of their own standards. They sign up to that deal when they take it on.
[quote][p][bold]BWFC71[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]thomas222[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]AnnaRad[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]thomas222[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]AnnaRad[/bold] wrote: When it comes to these food hygiene ratings I have a few issues with how they are allocated. Firstly it seems crazy to me how a hunk of donner meat can be prepared in a factory that has a 1 rating, to then be taken to a takeaway with a rating of 5 and served to a customer who thinks everything is perfect. Secondly there is an element of the rating called confidence in management. This is purely a rating that is given by a single individual against another individual. To me this doesn't seem neither fair or scalable. If a hygiene officer doesn't particularly like or get on with the operator its very easy for them to down rate them. This is very subjective and not the best way to rate hygiene. Thirdly, there is hundreds of micro business's popping up on the likes of facebook etc. These are the types of business's like cupcake makers etc. Where goods are made in domestic kitchens and sold on markets, fetes, internet etc...No regulation on these business's (that dont pay business rates) Add all this together with a 'Poll' that Bolton news runs saying 9 out of 10 people wont visit these premises again adds up to a really useless and unfair environmental health rating system. I just hope cappuccinos works through this and the numerous employees that work there dont lose their jobs thanks to this 'system'[/p][/quote]The system has worked perfectly well for many years as it is and even better these days, & a one star producer who produces bad food will have it tracked back to him and prosecuted as should food service operations,everyone has to abide by the same rules so its fair to all except the bad ones. Why your reluctance to have clean food from clean places is a very strange & unusual thing to want unless you have another agenda perhaps as possibility do the other people on here, who it seems agree with you..[/p][/quote]Im starting to think thomas222 either just likes provoking things to create an argument or works for environmental health. Either way you are living in cloud cuckoo land. There's no agenda here other than the councils trying to justify the role of too many environmental health officers There are several producers in the local area distributing dodgy substandard meat and raw food produce to takeaways. The prosecutions are very thin on the ground and when one operation is eventually closed down after several months, its very easy to set up again the next day under a different name. My point is that you don't know what you're eating (horse lasagne anyone??) but going after a company because of a cracked tile in a kitchen or a sign in the wrong place seems like a crazy system. I'm not saying their shouldn't be a system in place as there obviously should. The point i'm making is the current one is open to abuse and is nowhere near as transparent as it perhaps should be.[/p][/quote]Germs cause some horrible things like salmonella that i got from infected chicken &The issue in case you have missed it is regarding how dirty and unhygenic it is and not what butties they serve.[/p][/quote]No that salmonella case could have actually come from your own kitchen!!! Thing is you cannot say for sure Yes cleanliess needs to be upheld but wen the FSA don't even make it a priority and put the proprietor and paperwork above cleanliness then do you not think that the ratings system is actually massively flawed?[/p][/quote]I did not see anything in the article saying the reason this place is a health risk was because of bad book keeping or bad spelling mistakes. It happened because it was a danger to the public & needed to be brought to British standards & not some ones idea of their own standards. They sign up to that deal when they take it on. thomas222
  • Score: 3

8:44am Mon 17 Feb 14

The Righteous One says...

thomas222 wrote:
BWFC71 wrote:
thomas222 wrote:
AnnaRad wrote:
thomas222 wrote:
AnnaRad wrote: When it comes to these food hygiene ratings I have a few issues with how they are allocated. Firstly it seems crazy to me how a hunk of donner meat can be prepared in a factory that has a 1 rating, to then be taken to a takeaway with a rating of 5 and served to a customer who thinks everything is perfect. Secondly there is an element of the rating called confidence in management. This is purely a rating that is given by a single individual against another individual. To me this doesn't seem neither fair or scalable. If a hygiene officer doesn't particularly like or get on with the operator its very easy for them to down rate them. This is very subjective and not the best way to rate hygiene. Thirdly, there is hundreds of micro business's popping up on the likes of facebook etc. These are the types of business's like cupcake makers etc. Where goods are made in domestic kitchens and sold on markets, fetes, internet etc...No regulation on these business's (that dont pay business rates) Add all this together with a 'Poll' that Bolton news runs saying 9 out of 10 people wont visit these premises again adds up to a really useless and unfair environmental health rating system. I just hope cappuccinos works through this and the numerous employees that work there dont lose their jobs thanks to this 'system'
The system has worked perfectly well for many years as it is and even better these days, & a one star producer who produces bad food will have it tracked back to him and prosecuted as should food service operations,everyone has to abide by the same rules so its fair to all except the bad ones. Why your reluctance to have clean food from clean places is a very strange & unusual thing to want unless you have another agenda perhaps as possibility do the other people on here, who it seems agree with you..
Im starting to think thomas222 either just likes provoking things to create an argument or works for environmental health. Either way you are living in cloud cuckoo land. There's no agenda here other than the councils trying to justify the role of too many environmental health officers There are several producers in the local area distributing dodgy substandard meat and raw food produce to takeaways. The prosecutions are very thin on the ground and when one operation is eventually closed down after several months, its very easy to set up again the next day under a different name. My point is that you don't know what you're eating (horse lasagne anyone??) but going after a company because of a cracked tile in a kitchen or a sign in the wrong place seems like a crazy system. I'm not saying their shouldn't be a system in place as there obviously should. The point i'm making is the current one is open to abuse and is nowhere near as transparent as it perhaps should be.
Germs cause some horrible things like salmonella that i got from infected chicken &The issue in case you have missed it is regarding how dirty and unhygenic it is and not what butties they serve.
No that salmonella case could have actually come from your own kitchen!!! Thing is you cannot say for sure Yes cleanliess needs to be upheld but wen the FSA don't even make it a priority and put the proprietor and paperwork above cleanliness then do you not think that the ratings system is actually massively flawed?
I did not see anything in the article saying the reason this place is a health risk was because of bad book keeping or bad spelling mistakes. It happened because it was a danger to the public & needed to be brought to British standards & not some ones idea of their own standards. They sign up to that deal when they take it on.
But if you read the criteria of how to get points the criteria of Cleanliess is only 25% of the overall mark - the other 75% is based upon paperwork and the proprietors undertaking during the interview/reporting process.

Now if you do not believe I can easily give you the link once more....

At the end of the day it comes down to how grumpy the inspectors are on teh day!!
[quote][p][bold]thomas222[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]BWFC71[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]thomas222[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]AnnaRad[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]thomas222[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]AnnaRad[/bold] wrote: When it comes to these food hygiene ratings I have a few issues with how they are allocated. Firstly it seems crazy to me how a hunk of donner meat can be prepared in a factory that has a 1 rating, to then be taken to a takeaway with a rating of 5 and served to a customer who thinks everything is perfect. Secondly there is an element of the rating called confidence in management. This is purely a rating that is given by a single individual against another individual. To me this doesn't seem neither fair or scalable. If a hygiene officer doesn't particularly like or get on with the operator its very easy for them to down rate them. This is very subjective and not the best way to rate hygiene. Thirdly, there is hundreds of micro business's popping up on the likes of facebook etc. These are the types of business's like cupcake makers etc. Where goods are made in domestic kitchens and sold on markets, fetes, internet etc...No regulation on these business's (that dont pay business rates) Add all this together with a 'Poll' that Bolton news runs saying 9 out of 10 people wont visit these premises again adds up to a really useless and unfair environmental health rating system. I just hope cappuccinos works through this and the numerous employees that work there dont lose their jobs thanks to this 'system'[/p][/quote]The system has worked perfectly well for many years as it is and even better these days, & a one star producer who produces bad food will have it tracked back to him and prosecuted as should food service operations,everyone has to abide by the same rules so its fair to all except the bad ones. Why your reluctance to have clean food from clean places is a very strange & unusual thing to want unless you have another agenda perhaps as possibility do the other people on here, who it seems agree with you..[/p][/quote]Im starting to think thomas222 either just likes provoking things to create an argument or works for environmental health. Either way you are living in cloud cuckoo land. There's no agenda here other than the councils trying to justify the role of too many environmental health officers There are several producers in the local area distributing dodgy substandard meat and raw food produce to takeaways. The prosecutions are very thin on the ground and when one operation is eventually closed down after several months, its very easy to set up again the next day under a different name. My point is that you don't know what you're eating (horse lasagne anyone??) but going after a company because of a cracked tile in a kitchen or a sign in the wrong place seems like a crazy system. I'm not saying their shouldn't be a system in place as there obviously should. The point i'm making is the current one is open to abuse and is nowhere near as transparent as it perhaps should be.[/p][/quote]Germs cause some horrible things like salmonella that i got from infected chicken &The issue in case you have missed it is regarding how dirty and unhygenic it is and not what butties they serve.[/p][/quote]No that salmonella case could have actually come from your own kitchen!!! Thing is you cannot say for sure Yes cleanliess needs to be upheld but wen the FSA don't even make it a priority and put the proprietor and paperwork above cleanliness then do you not think that the ratings system is actually massively flawed?[/p][/quote]I did not see anything in the article saying the reason this place is a health risk was because of bad book keeping or bad spelling mistakes. It happened because it was a danger to the public & needed to be brought to British standards & not some ones idea of their own standards. They sign up to that deal when they take it on.[/p][/quote]But if you read the criteria of how to get points the criteria of Cleanliess is only 25% of the overall mark - the other 75% is based upon paperwork and the proprietors undertaking during the interview/reporting process. Now if you do not believe I can easily give you the link once more.... At the end of the day it comes down to how grumpy the inspectors are on teh day!! The Righteous One
  • Score: -26

8:49am Mon 17 Feb 14

thomas222 says...

The Righteous One wrote:
thomas222 wrote:
BWFC71 wrote:
thomas222 wrote:
AnnaRad wrote:
thomas222 wrote:
AnnaRad wrote: When it comes to these food hygiene ratings I have a few issues with how they are allocated. Firstly it seems crazy to me how a hunk of donner meat can be prepared in a factory that has a 1 rating, to then be taken to a takeaway with a rating of 5 and served to a customer who thinks everything is perfect. Secondly there is an element of the rating called confidence in management. This is purely a rating that is given by a single individual against another individual. To me this doesn't seem neither fair or scalable. If a hygiene officer doesn't particularly like or get on with the operator its very easy for them to down rate them. This is very subjective and not the best way to rate hygiene. Thirdly, there is hundreds of micro business's popping up on the likes of facebook etc. These are the types of business's like cupcake makers etc. Where goods are made in domestic kitchens and sold on markets, fetes, internet etc...No regulation on these business's (that dont pay business rates) Add all this together with a 'Poll' that Bolton news runs saying 9 out of 10 people wont visit these premises again adds up to a really useless and unfair environmental health rating system. I just hope cappuccinos works through this and the numerous employees that work there dont lose their jobs thanks to this 'system'
The system has worked perfectly well for many years as it is and even better these days, & a one star producer who produces bad food will have it tracked back to him and prosecuted as should food service operations,everyone has to abide by the same rules so its fair to all except the bad ones. Why your reluctance to have clean food from clean places is a very strange & unusual thing to want unless you have another agenda perhaps as possibility do the other people on here, who it seems agree with you..
Im starting to think thomas222 either just likes provoking things to create an argument or works for environmental health. Either way you are living in cloud cuckoo land. There's no agenda here other than the councils trying to justify the role of too many environmental health officers There are several producers in the local area distributing dodgy substandard meat and raw food produce to takeaways. The prosecutions are very thin on the ground and when one operation is eventually closed down after several months, its very easy to set up again the next day under a different name. My point is that you don't know what you're eating (horse lasagne anyone??) but going after a company because of a cracked tile in a kitchen or a sign in the wrong place seems like a crazy system. I'm not saying their shouldn't be a system in place as there obviously should. The point i'm making is the current one is open to abuse and is nowhere near as transparent as it perhaps should be.
Germs cause some horrible things like salmonella that i got from infected chicken &The issue in case you have missed it is regarding how dirty and unhygenic it is and not what butties they serve.
No that salmonella case could have actually come from your own kitchen!!! Thing is you cannot say for sure Yes cleanliess needs to be upheld but wen the FSA don't even make it a priority and put the proprietor and paperwork above cleanliness then do you not think that the ratings system is actually massively flawed?
I did not see anything in the article saying the reason this place is a health risk was because of bad book keeping or bad spelling mistakes. It happened because it was a danger to the public & needed to be brought to British standards & not some ones idea of their own standards. They sign up to that deal when they take it on.
But if you read the criteria of how to get points the criteria of Cleanliess is only 25% of the overall mark - the other 75% is based upon paperwork and the proprietors undertaking during the interview/reporting process. Now if you do not believe I can easily give you the link once more.... At the end of the day it comes down to how grumpy the inspectors are on teh day!!
Why no complaint regarding that from the owners i wonder. If you have a case you have a right to object. They dint so i think we can assume they didn,t have any objections. Its hard to object when they have video & pics showing the filth food is being prepared in. This kills people give your head a shake.
[quote][p][bold]The Righteous One[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]thomas222[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]BWFC71[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]thomas222[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]AnnaRad[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]thomas222[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]AnnaRad[/bold] wrote: When it comes to these food hygiene ratings I have a few issues with how they are allocated. Firstly it seems crazy to me how a hunk of donner meat can be prepared in a factory that has a 1 rating, to then be taken to a takeaway with a rating of 5 and served to a customer who thinks everything is perfect. Secondly there is an element of the rating called confidence in management. This is purely a rating that is given by a single individual against another individual. To me this doesn't seem neither fair or scalable. If a hygiene officer doesn't particularly like or get on with the operator its very easy for them to down rate them. This is very subjective and not the best way to rate hygiene. Thirdly, there is hundreds of micro business's popping up on the likes of facebook etc. These are the types of business's like cupcake makers etc. Where goods are made in domestic kitchens and sold on markets, fetes, internet etc...No regulation on these business's (that dont pay business rates) Add all this together with a 'Poll' that Bolton news runs saying 9 out of 10 people wont visit these premises again adds up to a really useless and unfair environmental health rating system. I just hope cappuccinos works through this and the numerous employees that work there dont lose their jobs thanks to this 'system'[/p][/quote]The system has worked perfectly well for many years as it is and even better these days, & a one star producer who produces bad food will have it tracked back to him and prosecuted as should food service operations,everyone has to abide by the same rules so its fair to all except the bad ones. Why your reluctance to have clean food from clean places is a very strange & unusual thing to want unless you have another agenda perhaps as possibility do the other people on here, who it seems agree with you..[/p][/quote]Im starting to think thomas222 either just likes provoking things to create an argument or works for environmental health. Either way you are living in cloud cuckoo land. There's no agenda here other than the councils trying to justify the role of too many environmental health officers There are several producers in the local area distributing dodgy substandard meat and raw food produce to takeaways. The prosecutions are very thin on the ground and when one operation is eventually closed down after several months, its very easy to set up again the next day under a different name. My point is that you don't know what you're eating (horse lasagne anyone??) but going after a company because of a cracked tile in a kitchen or a sign in the wrong place seems like a crazy system. I'm not saying their shouldn't be a system in place as there obviously should. The point i'm making is the current one is open to abuse and is nowhere near as transparent as it perhaps should be.[/p][/quote]Germs cause some horrible things like salmonella that i got from infected chicken &The issue in case you have missed it is regarding how dirty and unhygenic it is and not what butties they serve.[/p][/quote]No that salmonella case could have actually come from your own kitchen!!! Thing is you cannot say for sure Yes cleanliess needs to be upheld but wen the FSA don't even make it a priority and put the proprietor and paperwork above cleanliness then do you not think that the ratings system is actually massively flawed?[/p][/quote]I did not see anything in the article saying the reason this place is a health risk was because of bad book keeping or bad spelling mistakes. It happened because it was a danger to the public & needed to be brought to British standards & not some ones idea of their own standards. They sign up to that deal when they take it on.[/p][/quote]But if you read the criteria of how to get points the criteria of Cleanliess is only 25% of the overall mark - the other 75% is based upon paperwork and the proprietors undertaking during the interview/reporting process. Now if you do not believe I can easily give you the link once more.... At the end of the day it comes down to how grumpy the inspectors are on teh day!![/p][/quote]Why no complaint regarding that from the owners i wonder. If you have a case you have a right to object. They dint so i think we can assume they didn,t have any objections. Its hard to object when they have video & pics showing the filth food is being prepared in. This kills people give your head a shake. thomas222
  • Score: 2

8:51am Mon 17 Feb 14

The Righteous One says...

thomas222 wrote:
BWFC71 wrote:
longballs r us wrote: I know a lot of people may not like BWFC71 but it seems to me that no matter what he says he always gets a lot of thumbs down. Back to the story and in my opinion food hygiene should be of the utmost importance in any food establishment. Maybe the business was unlucky that on the day they were not upto the usual high standards, and got caught out. I am sure they will have rectified it and back to it's best.
No worries longballs It just shows people don't like the truth being written down because they'd rather believe urban myth and old wives tales than actual fact! Plus I also believe, as I am anti-UKIP, that it is a group of UKIPers doing their usual NAZI propaganda to stop the truth from coming out. But I will carry on, no matter what, and also know that the editors know what is happening ad are looking into the matter. As for the story, I have said my piece which is all factually correct and taken from the Government websites and seems to me that the company fell foul of a grumpy inspector on that day.
The reason you get the thumbs down is because people dont agree with you and not some conspiracy as you say, you also have been saying this is being investigated by the BN but you have been saying that for a long time now and nothing has happened with regard to this because it is not happening, if it was the BN would be on it like yesterday. Perhaps the BN could come out and tell us if your assumptions are correct shall we.
Funnily enough the people who don't agree with me say NOTHING and yet the people who agree with me are saying something.

What is uit, teh silent majority?

Also isn't it weird how there are far more thumbs down than those who actually comment - isn't that stifling debate.

The fact is I post FACTS and not hear'say or rumours or unsubstaniated reports. ANd its eems that teh"Minoroty" don't like facts and as such, and due to them bneing weak willed give thumkbs down and get their cohorts to give the thumbs down through the social media campaigns which I have discovered, even by YOU and your so-called UKIPers.

The strange fact is that other people actually repeat what I say, or I repeat other people but they don't get the thumbs down, and in fact they get the thumbs up!!!! I have even used a friends sign-in and expressed the same thoughts and wording as my usual screen names (BWFC71 & TRO) and guess what - actually getting thumbs up and not thumbs down.

Therefore you tell me if that is not a camapign against me only!!!!
[quote][p][bold]thomas222[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]BWFC71[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]longballs r us[/bold] wrote: I know a lot of people may not like BWFC71 but it seems to me that no matter what he says he always gets a lot of thumbs down. Back to the story and in my opinion food hygiene should be of the utmost importance in any food establishment. Maybe the business was unlucky that on the day they were not upto the usual high standards, and got caught out. I am sure they will have rectified it and back to it's best.[/p][/quote]No worries longballs It just shows people don't like the truth being written down because they'd rather believe urban myth and old wives tales than actual fact! Plus I also believe, as I am anti-UKIP, that it is a group of UKIPers doing their usual NAZI propaganda to stop the truth from coming out. But I will carry on, no matter what, and also know that the editors know what is happening ad are looking into the matter. As for the story, I have said my piece which is all factually correct and taken from the Government websites and seems to me that the company fell foul of a grumpy inspector on that day.[/p][/quote]The reason you get the thumbs down is because people dont agree with you and not some conspiracy as you say, you also have been saying this is being investigated by the BN but you have been saying that for a long time now and nothing has happened with regard to this because it is not happening, if it was the BN would be on it like yesterday. Perhaps the BN could come out and tell us if your assumptions are correct shall we.[/p][/quote]Funnily enough the people who don't agree with me say NOTHING and yet the people who agree with me are saying something. What is uit, teh silent majority? Also isn't it weird how there are far more thumbs down than those who actually comment - isn't that stifling debate. The fact is I post FACTS and not hear'say or rumours or unsubstaniated reports. ANd its eems that teh"Minoroty" don't like facts and as such, and due to them bneing weak willed give thumkbs down and get their cohorts to give the thumbs down through the social media campaigns which I have discovered, even by YOU and your so-called UKIPers. The strange fact is that other people actually repeat what I say, or I repeat other people but they don't get the thumbs down, and in fact they get the thumbs up!!!! I have even used a friends sign-in and expressed the same thoughts and wording as my usual screen names (BWFC71 & TRO) and guess what - actually getting thumbs up and not thumbs down. Therefore you tell me if that is not a camapign against me only!!!! The Righteous One
  • Score: -29

8:54am Mon 17 Feb 14

thomas222 says...

paulrich wrote:
Oh, I could say soooo muchabout this.
Please do.
[quote][p][bold]paulrich[/bold] wrote: Oh, I could say soooo muchabout this.[/p][/quote]Please do. thomas222
  • Score: 2

8:55am Mon 17 Feb 14

The Righteous One says...

thomas222 wrote:
The Righteous One wrote:
thomas222 wrote:
BWFC71 wrote:
thomas222 wrote:
AnnaRad wrote:
thomas222 wrote:
AnnaRad wrote: When it comes to these food hygiene ratings I have a few issues with how they are allocated. Firstly it seems crazy to me how a hunk of donner meat can be prepared in a factory that has a 1 rating, to then be taken to a takeaway with a rating of 5 and served to a customer who thinks everything is perfect. Secondly there is an element of the rating called confidence in management. This is purely a rating that is given by a single individual against another individual. To me this doesn't seem neither fair or scalable. If a hygiene officer doesn't particularly like or get on with the operator its very easy for them to down rate them. This is very subjective and not the best way to rate hygiene. Thirdly, there is hundreds of micro business's popping up on the likes of facebook etc. These are the types of business's like cupcake makers etc. Where goods are made in domestic kitchens and sold on markets, fetes, internet etc...No regulation on these business's (that dont pay business rates) Add all this together with a 'Poll' that Bolton news runs saying 9 out of 10 people wont visit these premises again adds up to a really useless and unfair environmental health rating system. I just hope cappuccinos works through this and the numerous employees that work there dont lose their jobs thanks to this 'system'
The system has worked perfectly well for many years as it is and even better these days, & a one star producer who produces bad food will have it tracked back to him and prosecuted as should food service operations,everyone has to abide by the same rules so its fair to all except the bad ones. Why your reluctance to have clean food from clean places is a very strange & unusual thing to want unless you have another agenda perhaps as possibility do the other people on here, who it seems agree with you..
Im starting to think thomas222 either just likes provoking things to create an argument or works for environmental health. Either way you are living in cloud cuckoo land. There's no agenda here other than the councils trying to justify the role of too many environmental health officers There are several producers in the local area distributing dodgy substandard meat and raw food produce to takeaways. The prosecutions are very thin on the ground and when one operation is eventually closed down after several months, its very easy to set up again the next day under a different name. My point is that you don't know what you're eating (horse lasagne anyone??) but going after a company because of a cracked tile in a kitchen or a sign in the wrong place seems like a crazy system. I'm not saying their shouldn't be a system in place as there obviously should. The point i'm making is the current one is open to abuse and is nowhere near as transparent as it perhaps should be.
Germs cause some horrible things like salmonella that i got from infected chicken &The issue in case you have missed it is regarding how dirty and unhygenic it is and not what butties they serve.
No that salmonella case could have actually come from your own kitchen!!! Thing is you cannot say for sure Yes cleanliess needs to be upheld but wen the FSA don't even make it a priority and put the proprietor and paperwork above cleanliness then do you not think that the ratings system is actually massively flawed?
I did not see anything in the article saying the reason this place is a health risk was because of bad book keeping or bad spelling mistakes. It happened because it was a danger to the public & needed to be brought to British standards & not some ones idea of their own standards. They sign up to that deal when they take it on.
But if you read the criteria of how to get points the criteria of Cleanliess is only 25% of the overall mark - the other 75% is based upon paperwork and the proprietors undertaking during the interview/reporting process. Now if you do not believe I can easily give you the link once more.... At the end of the day it comes down to how grumpy the inspectors are on teh day!!
Why no complaint regarding that from the owners i wonder. If you have a case you have a right to object. They dint so i think we can assume they didn,t have any objections. Its hard to object when they have video & pics showing the filth food is being prepared in. This kills people give your head a shake.
Because that is a private matter and is not open to public or the press until a formal decision has been made. Thats why!!!

How deadly is your kitchen

What about the where the food comes from - remember most food is not prepared onsite but is deleivered each morning from various sources!

Now if you want to have a thorough investigation it could actually be the case that the problems stems from teh suppliers and NOT the actual kitchen itself!
[quote][p][bold]thomas222[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]The Righteous One[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]thomas222[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]BWFC71[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]thomas222[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]AnnaRad[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]thomas222[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]AnnaRad[/bold] wrote: When it comes to these food hygiene ratings I have a few issues with how they are allocated. Firstly it seems crazy to me how a hunk of donner meat can be prepared in a factory that has a 1 rating, to then be taken to a takeaway with a rating of 5 and served to a customer who thinks everything is perfect. Secondly there is an element of the rating called confidence in management. This is purely a rating that is given by a single individual against another individual. To me this doesn't seem neither fair or scalable. If a hygiene officer doesn't particularly like or get on with the operator its very easy for them to down rate them. This is very subjective and not the best way to rate hygiene. Thirdly, there is hundreds of micro business's popping up on the likes of facebook etc. These are the types of business's like cupcake makers etc. Where goods are made in domestic kitchens and sold on markets, fetes, internet etc...No regulation on these business's (that dont pay business rates) Add all this together with a 'Poll' that Bolton news runs saying 9 out of 10 people wont visit these premises again adds up to a really useless and unfair environmental health rating system. I just hope cappuccinos works through this and the numerous employees that work there dont lose their jobs thanks to this 'system'[/p][/quote]The system has worked perfectly well for many years as it is and even better these days, & a one star producer who produces bad food will have it tracked back to him and prosecuted as should food service operations,everyone has to abide by the same rules so its fair to all except the bad ones. Why your reluctance to have clean food from clean places is a very strange & unusual thing to want unless you have another agenda perhaps as possibility do the other people on here, who it seems agree with you..[/p][/quote]Im starting to think thomas222 either just likes provoking things to create an argument or works for environmental health. Either way you are living in cloud cuckoo land. There's no agenda here other than the councils trying to justify the role of too many environmental health officers There are several producers in the local area distributing dodgy substandard meat and raw food produce to takeaways. The prosecutions are very thin on the ground and when one operation is eventually closed down after several months, its very easy to set up again the next day under a different name. My point is that you don't know what you're eating (horse lasagne anyone??) but going after a company because of a cracked tile in a kitchen or a sign in the wrong place seems like a crazy system. I'm not saying their shouldn't be a system in place as there obviously should. The point i'm making is the current one is open to abuse and is nowhere near as transparent as it perhaps should be.[/p][/quote]Germs cause some horrible things like salmonella that i got from infected chicken &The issue in case you have missed it is regarding how dirty and unhygenic it is and not what butties they serve.[/p][/quote]No that salmonella case could have actually come from your own kitchen!!! Thing is you cannot say for sure Yes cleanliess needs to be upheld but wen the FSA don't even make it a priority and put the proprietor and paperwork above cleanliness then do you not think that the ratings system is actually massively flawed?[/p][/quote]I did not see anything in the article saying the reason this place is a health risk was because of bad book keeping or bad spelling mistakes. It happened because it was a danger to the public & needed to be brought to British standards & not some ones idea of their own standards. They sign up to that deal when they take it on.[/p][/quote]But if you read the criteria of how to get points the criteria of Cleanliess is only 25% of the overall mark - the other 75% is based upon paperwork and the proprietors undertaking during the interview/reporting process. Now if you do not believe I can easily give you the link once more.... At the end of the day it comes down to how grumpy the inspectors are on teh day!![/p][/quote]Why no complaint regarding that from the owners i wonder. If you have a case you have a right to object. They dint so i think we can assume they didn,t have any objections. Its hard to object when they have video & pics showing the filth food is being prepared in. This kills people give your head a shake.[/p][/quote]Because that is a private matter and is not open to public or the press until a formal decision has been made. Thats why!!! How deadly is your kitchen What about the where the food comes from - remember most food is not prepared onsite but is deleivered each morning from various sources! Now if you want to have a thorough investigation it could actually be the case that the problems stems from teh suppliers and NOT the actual kitchen itself! The Righteous One
  • Score: -26

9:03am Mon 17 Feb 14

thomas222 says...

The Righteous One wrote:
thomas222 wrote:
The Righteous One wrote:
thomas222 wrote:
BWFC71 wrote:
thomas222 wrote:
AnnaRad wrote:
thomas222 wrote:
AnnaRad wrote: When it comes to these food hygiene ratings I have a few issues with how they are allocated. Firstly it seems crazy to me how a hunk of donner meat can be prepared in a factory that has a 1 rating, to then be taken to a takeaway with a rating of 5 and served to a customer who thinks everything is perfect. Secondly there is an element of the rating called confidence in management. This is purely a rating that is given by a single individual against another individual. To me this doesn't seem neither fair or scalable. If a hygiene officer doesn't particularly like or get on with the operator its very easy for them to down rate them. This is very subjective and not the best way to rate hygiene. Thirdly, there is hundreds of micro business's popping up on the likes of facebook etc. These are the types of business's like cupcake makers etc. Where goods are made in domestic kitchens and sold on markets, fetes, internet etc...No regulation on these business's (that dont pay business rates) Add all this together with a 'Poll' that Bolton news runs saying 9 out of 10 people wont visit these premises again adds up to a really useless and unfair environmental health rating system. I just hope cappuccinos works through this and the numerous employees that work there dont lose their jobs thanks to this 'system'
The system has worked perfectly well for many years as it is and even better these days, & a one star producer who produces bad food will have it tracked back to him and prosecuted as should food service operations,everyone has to abide by the same rules so its fair to all except the bad ones. Why your reluctance to have clean food from clean places is a very strange & unusual thing to want unless you have another agenda perhaps as possibility do the other people on here, who it seems agree with you..
Im starting to think thomas222 either just likes provoking things to create an argument or works for environmental health. Either way you are living in cloud cuckoo land. There's no agenda here other than the councils trying to justify the role of too many environmental health officers There are several producers in the local area distributing dodgy substandard meat and raw food produce to takeaways. The prosecutions are very thin on the ground and when one operation is eventually closed down after several months, its very easy to set up again the next day under a different name. My point is that you don't know what you're eating (horse lasagne anyone??) but going after a company because of a cracked tile in a kitchen or a sign in the wrong place seems like a crazy system. I'm not saying their shouldn't be a system in place as there obviously should. The point i'm making is the current one is open to abuse and is nowhere near as transparent as it perhaps should be.
Germs cause some horrible things like salmonella that i got from infected chicken &The issue in case you have missed it is regarding how dirty and unhygenic it is and not what butties they serve.
No that salmonella case could have actually come from your own kitchen!!! Thing is you cannot say for sure Yes cleanliess needs to be upheld but wen the FSA don't even make it a priority and put the proprietor and paperwork above cleanliness then do you not think that the ratings system is actually massively flawed?
I did not see anything in the article saying the reason this place is a health risk was because of bad book keeping or bad spelling mistakes. It happened because it was a danger to the public & needed to be brought to British standards & not some ones idea of their own standards. They sign up to that deal when they take it on.
But if you read the criteria of how to get points the criteria of Cleanliess is only 25% of the overall mark - the other 75% is based upon paperwork and the proprietors undertaking during the interview/reporting process. Now if you do not believe I can easily give you the link once more.... At the end of the day it comes down to how grumpy the inspectors are on teh day!!
Why no complaint regarding that from the owners i wonder. If you have a case you have a right to object. They dint so i think we can assume they didn,t have any objections. Its hard to object when they have video & pics showing the filth food is being prepared in. This kills people give your head a shake.
Because that is a private matter and is not open to public or the press until a formal decision has been made. Thats why!!! How deadly is your kitchen What about the where the food comes from - remember most food is not prepared onsite but is deleivered each morning from various sources! Now if you want to have a thorough investigation it could actually be the case that the problems stems from teh suppliers and NOT the actual kitchen itself!
98% of people do not agree with you i wonder why ?. My kitchen is not the issue is it & had it been the suppliers it would have been tracked back to them as has happened many times all over this Country before & always will be. This did not happen so the problem lies with dirty food practice of this eatery & again i mention they did not object to the findings.
[quote][p][bold]The Righteous One[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]thomas222[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]The Righteous One[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]thomas222[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]BWFC71[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]thomas222[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]AnnaRad[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]thomas222[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]AnnaRad[/bold] wrote: When it comes to these food hygiene ratings I have a few issues with how they are allocated. Firstly it seems crazy to me how a hunk of donner meat can be prepared in a factory that has a 1 rating, to then be taken to a takeaway with a rating of 5 and served to a customer who thinks everything is perfect. Secondly there is an element of the rating called confidence in management. This is purely a rating that is given by a single individual against another individual. To me this doesn't seem neither fair or scalable. If a hygiene officer doesn't particularly like or get on with the operator its very easy for them to down rate them. This is very subjective and not the best way to rate hygiene. Thirdly, there is hundreds of micro business's popping up on the likes of facebook etc. These are the types of business's like cupcake makers etc. Where goods are made in domestic kitchens and sold on markets, fetes, internet etc...No regulation on these business's (that dont pay business rates) Add all this together with a 'Poll' that Bolton news runs saying 9 out of 10 people wont visit these premises again adds up to a really useless and unfair environmental health rating system. I just hope cappuccinos works through this and the numerous employees that work there dont lose their jobs thanks to this 'system'[/p][/quote]The system has worked perfectly well for many years as it is and even better these days, & a one star producer who produces bad food will have it tracked back to him and prosecuted as should food service operations,everyone has to abide by the same rules so its fair to all except the bad ones. Why your reluctance to have clean food from clean places is a very strange & unusual thing to want unless you have another agenda perhaps as possibility do the other people on here, who it seems agree with you..[/p][/quote]Im starting to think thomas222 either just likes provoking things to create an argument or works for environmental health. Either way you are living in cloud cuckoo land. There's no agenda here other than the councils trying to justify the role of too many environmental health officers There are several producers in the local area distributing dodgy substandard meat and raw food produce to takeaways. The prosecutions are very thin on the ground and when one operation is eventually closed down after several months, its very easy to set up again the next day under a different name. My point is that you don't know what you're eating (horse lasagne anyone??) but going after a company because of a cracked tile in a kitchen or a sign in the wrong place seems like a crazy system. I'm not saying their shouldn't be a system in place as there obviously should. The point i'm making is the current one is open to abuse and is nowhere near as transparent as it perhaps should be.[/p][/quote]Germs cause some horrible things like salmonella that i got from infected chicken &The issue in case you have missed it is regarding how dirty and unhygenic it is and not what butties they serve.[/p][/quote]No that salmonella case could have actually come from your own kitchen!!! Thing is you cannot say for sure Yes cleanliess needs to be upheld but wen the FSA don't even make it a priority and put the proprietor and paperwork above cleanliness then do you not think that the ratings system is actually massively flawed?[/p][/quote]I did not see anything in the article saying the reason this place is a health risk was because of bad book keeping or bad spelling mistakes. It happened because it was a danger to the public & needed to be brought to British standards & not some ones idea of their own standards. They sign up to that deal when they take it on.[/p][/quote]But if you read the criteria of how to get points the criteria of Cleanliess is only 25% of the overall mark - the other 75% is based upon paperwork and the proprietors undertaking during the interview/reporting process. Now if you do not believe I can easily give you the link once more.... At the end of the day it comes down to how grumpy the inspectors are on teh day!![/p][/quote]Why no complaint regarding that from the owners i wonder. If you have a case you have a right to object. They dint so i think we can assume they didn,t have any objections. Its hard to object when they have video & pics showing the filth food is being prepared in. This kills people give your head a shake.[/p][/quote]Because that is a private matter and is not open to public or the press until a formal decision has been made. Thats why!!! How deadly is your kitchen What about the where the food comes from - remember most food is not prepared onsite but is deleivered each morning from various sources! Now if you want to have a thorough investigation it could actually be the case that the problems stems from teh suppliers and NOT the actual kitchen itself![/p][/quote]98% of people do not agree with you i wonder why ?. My kitchen is not the issue is it & had it been the suppliers it would have been tracked back to them as has happened many times all over this Country before & always will be. This did not happen so the problem lies with dirty food practice of this eatery & again i mention they did not object to the findings. thomas222
  • Score: 18

10:57am Mon 17 Feb 14

Garys987 says...

No hot water for hand washing? E-Coli sandwich anyone?
No hot water for hand washing? E-Coli sandwich anyone? Garys987
  • Score: 19

12:40pm Mon 17 Feb 14

The Righteous One says...

Thomas222

You do not seem to grasp teh basics of these hygiene scores.

It is 20-25% based on clenliness and 75-80% based upon paperwork and interview of proprietor

Therefore, as I keep repeating myself, the score isn't actually fully based upon cleanliness but its more about the paperwork and the owner.

Therefore do you honestly want to rely of hygiene scores that are not based overwhelmingly based on claenliness like in this case? OR are you just a sheep and believe everything you see on face value, without carefully reading the small print??

Also, have you ever been into and used the services of this coffee shop? If not then what is YOUR problem.

As for hot water/cold water - in most other EU countries they use cold water to wash hands and clean glasses and the number of E.Coli, and other so-called unhygieneic case, are actually lower than in the UK!!!! Why is that?
Thomas222 You do not seem to grasp teh basics of these hygiene scores. It is 20-25% based on clenliness and 75-80% based upon paperwork and interview of proprietor Therefore, as I keep repeating myself, the score isn't actually fully based upon cleanliness but its more about the paperwork and the owner. Therefore do you honestly want to rely of hygiene scores that are not based overwhelmingly based on claenliness like in this case? OR are you just a sheep and believe everything you see on face value, without carefully reading the small print?? Also, have you ever been into and used the services of this coffee shop? If not then what is YOUR problem. As for hot water/cold water - in most other EU countries they use cold water to wash hands and clean glasses and the number of E.Coli, and other so-called unhygieneic case, are actually lower than in the UK!!!! Why is that? The Righteous One
  • Score: -37

12:44pm Mon 17 Feb 14

The Righteous One says...

The Righteous One wrote:
thomas222 wrote:
BWFC71 wrote:
longballs r us wrote: I know a lot of people may not like BWFC71 but it seems to me that no matter what he says he always gets a lot of thumbs down. Back to the story and in my opinion food hygiene should be of the utmost importance in any food establishment. Maybe the business was unlucky that on the day they were not upto the usual high standards, and got caught out. I am sure they will have rectified it and back to it's best.
No worries longballs It just shows people don't like the truth being written down because they'd rather believe urban myth and old wives tales than actual fact! Plus I also believe, as I am anti-UKIP, that it is a group of UKIPers doing their usual NAZI propaganda to stop the truth from coming out. But I will carry on, no matter what, and also know that the editors know what is happening ad are looking into the matter. As for the story, I have said my piece which is all factually correct and taken from the Government websites and seems to me that the company fell foul of a grumpy inspector on that day.
The reason you get the thumbs down is because people dont agree with you and not some conspiracy as you say, you also have been saying this is being investigated by the BN but you have been saying that for a long time now and nothing has happened with regard to this because it is not happening, if it was the BN would be on it like yesterday. Perhaps the BN could come out and tell us if your assumptions are correct shall we.
Funnily enough the people who don't agree with me say NOTHING and yet the people who agree with me are saying something.

What is uit, teh silent majority?

Also isn't it weird how there are far more thumbs down than those who actually comment - isn't that stifling debate.

The fact is I post FACTS and not hear'say or rumours or unsubstaniated reports. ANd its eems that teh"Minoroty" don't like facts and as such, and due to them bneing weak willed give thumkbs down and get their cohorts to give the thumbs down through the social media campaigns which I have discovered, even by YOU and your so-called UKIPers.

The strange fact is that other people actually repeat what I say, or I repeat other people but they don't get the thumbs down, and in fact they get the thumbs up!!!! I have even used a friends sign-in and expressed the same thoughts and wording as my usual screen names (BWFC71 & TRO) and guess what - actually getting thumbs up and not thumbs down.

Therefore you tell me if that is not a camapign against me only!!!!
I see you still having your friends in UKIP to downgrade EVERYTHING I say - how much of a sheep are you? At least I do not rely on underhand tactics like that - I fight for what is right and believe in myself rather than getting backup because I am too week willed to do my own battles, like you!!!!!

But once again, you have failed to naswer yet another question posed to you -why is that. Does Farage or Nuttall not have a stock answer to give?

Whay is it that other people are coming out defending me whilst none of these so-called 28-399 thumb downers are saying NOTHING - saying nothing actually says quite a lot about these people!!!!
[quote][p][bold]The Righteous One[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]thomas222[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]BWFC71[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]longballs r us[/bold] wrote: I know a lot of people may not like BWFC71 but it seems to me that no matter what he says he always gets a lot of thumbs down. Back to the story and in my opinion food hygiene should be of the utmost importance in any food establishment. Maybe the business was unlucky that on the day they were not upto the usual high standards, and got caught out. I am sure they will have rectified it and back to it's best.[/p][/quote]No worries longballs It just shows people don't like the truth being written down because they'd rather believe urban myth and old wives tales than actual fact! Plus I also believe, as I am anti-UKIP, that it is a group of UKIPers doing their usual NAZI propaganda to stop the truth from coming out. But I will carry on, no matter what, and also know that the editors know what is happening ad are looking into the matter. As for the story, I have said my piece which is all factually correct and taken from the Government websites and seems to me that the company fell foul of a grumpy inspector on that day.[/p][/quote]The reason you get the thumbs down is because people dont agree with you and not some conspiracy as you say, you also have been saying this is being investigated by the BN but you have been saying that for a long time now and nothing has happened with regard to this because it is not happening, if it was the BN would be on it like yesterday. Perhaps the BN could come out and tell us if your assumptions are correct shall we.[/p][/quote]Funnily enough the people who don't agree with me say NOTHING and yet the people who agree with me are saying something. What is uit, teh silent majority? Also isn't it weird how there are far more thumbs down than those who actually comment - isn't that stifling debate. The fact is I post FACTS and not hear'say or rumours or unsubstaniated reports. ANd its eems that teh"Minoroty" don't like facts and as such, and due to them bneing weak willed give thumkbs down and get their cohorts to give the thumbs down through the social media campaigns which I have discovered, even by YOU and your so-called UKIPers. The strange fact is that other people actually repeat what I say, or I repeat other people but they don't get the thumbs down, and in fact they get the thumbs up!!!! I have even used a friends sign-in and expressed the same thoughts and wording as my usual screen names (BWFC71 & TRO) and guess what - actually getting thumbs up and not thumbs down. Therefore you tell me if that is not a camapign against me only!!!![/p][/quote]I see you still having your friends in UKIP to downgrade EVERYTHING I say - how much of a sheep are you? At least I do not rely on underhand tactics like that - I fight for what is right and believe in myself rather than getting backup because I am too week willed to do my own battles, like you!!!!! But once again, you have failed to naswer yet another question posed to you -why is that. Does Farage or Nuttall not have a stock answer to give? Whay is it that other people are coming out defending me whilst none of these so-called 28-399 thumb downers are saying NOTHING - saying nothing actually says quite a lot about these people!!!! The Righteous One
  • Score: -23

12:47pm Mon 17 Feb 14

The Righteous One says...

thomas222 wrote:
paulrich wrote:
Oh, I could say soooo muchabout this.
Please do.
You haven't said enough and what you have said has been nothing of worth - nothing factually correct about this story and all very subjective with no evidence to back it up.
[quote][p][bold]thomas222[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]paulrich[/bold] wrote: Oh, I could say soooo muchabout this.[/p][/quote]Please do.[/p][/quote]You haven't said enough and what you have said has been nothing of worth - nothing factually correct about this story and all very subjective with no evidence to back it up. The Righteous One
  • Score: -18

12:48pm Mon 17 Feb 14

The Righteous One says...

thomas222 wrote:
paulrich wrote:
Oh, I could say soooo muchabout this.
Please do.
You haven't said enough and what you have said has been nothing of worth - nothing factually correct about this story and all very subjective with no evidence to back it up.
[quote][p][bold]thomas222[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]paulrich[/bold] wrote: Oh, I could say soooo muchabout this.[/p][/quote]Please do.[/p][/quote]You haven't said enough and what you have said has been nothing of worth - nothing factually correct about this story and all very subjective with no evidence to back it up. The Righteous One
  • Score: -15

12:58pm Mon 17 Feb 14

The Righteous One says...

THIS NEXT BIT IS TAKEN FROM THE FOOD STANDARD AGENCY WEBSITE WITH REGARDS TO THE FOOD HYGIENE RATING SYSTEM:-


The Council work out your score in three areas.
1.Your practices and procedures (20%)
2.The structural condition of the premises (25%)
3.Their overall view of you as the person operating the business including your paperwork (55%)



Now if you thumb-downers want to carry on giving thumbs down to facts 9taken straight from Government websites), then carry on but you have to start questioning yourself as to why you are so gullable to believe a score on face value without actually looking at how the scores are produced!!!
THIS NEXT BIT IS TAKEN FROM THE FOOD STANDARD AGENCY WEBSITE WITH REGARDS TO THE FOOD HYGIENE RATING SYSTEM:- The Council work out your score in three areas. 1.Your practices and procedures (20%) 2.The structural condition of the premises (25%) 3.Their overall view of you as the person operating the business including your paperwork (55%) Now if you thumb-downers want to carry on giving thumbs down to facts 9taken straight from Government websites), then carry on but you have to start questioning yourself as to why you are so gullable to believe a score on face value without actually looking at how the scores are produced!!! The Righteous One
  • Score: -21

1:43pm Mon 17 Feb 14

George X says...

The Righteous One wrote:
The Righteous One wrote:
thomas222 wrote:
BWFC71 wrote:
longballs r us wrote: I know a lot of people may not like BWFC71 but it seems to me that no matter what he says he always gets a lot of thumbs down. Back to the story and in my opinion food hygiene should be of the utmost importance in any food establishment. Maybe the business was unlucky that on the day they were not upto the usual high standards, and got caught out. I am sure they will have rectified it and back to it's best.
No worries longballs It just shows people don't like the truth being written down because they'd rather believe urban myth and old wives tales than actual fact! Plus I also believe, as I am anti-UKIP, that it is a group of UKIPers doing their usual NAZI propaganda to stop the truth from coming out. But I will carry on, no matter what, and also know that the editors know what is happening ad are looking into the matter. As for the story, I have said my piece which is all factually correct and taken from the Government websites and seems to me that the company fell foul of a grumpy inspector on that day.
The reason you get the thumbs down is because people dont agree with you and not some conspiracy as you say, you also have been saying this is being investigated by the BN but you have been saying that for a long time now and nothing has happened with regard to this because it is not happening, if it was the BN would be on it like yesterday. Perhaps the BN could come out and tell us if your assumptions are correct shall we.
Funnily enough the people who don't agree with me say NOTHING and yet the people who agree with me are saying something.

What is uit, teh silent majority?

Also isn't it weird how there are far more thumbs down than those who actually comment - isn't that stifling debate.

The fact is I post FACTS and not hear'say or rumours or unsubstaniated reports. ANd its eems that teh"Minoroty" don't like facts and as such, and due to them bneing weak willed give thumkbs down and get their cohorts to give the thumbs down through the social media campaigns which I have discovered, even by YOU and your so-called UKIPers.

The strange fact is that other people actually repeat what I say, or I repeat other people but they don't get the thumbs down, and in fact they get the thumbs up!!!! I have even used a friends sign-in and expressed the same thoughts and wording as my usual screen names (BWFC71 & TRO) and guess what - actually getting thumbs up and not thumbs down.

Therefore you tell me if that is not a camapign against me only!!!!
I see you still having your friends in UKIP to downgrade EVERYTHING I say - how much of a sheep are you? At least I do not rely on underhand tactics like that - I fight for what is right and believe in myself rather than getting backup because I am too week willed to do my own battles, like you!!!!!

But once again, you have failed to naswer yet another question posed to you -why is that. Does Farage or Nuttall not have a stock answer to give?

Whay is it that other people are coming out defending me whilst none of these so-called 28-399 thumb downers are saying NOTHING - saying nothing actually says quite a lot about these people!!!!
Do you think were all stupid ? everybody knows you have multiple usernames and Bwfc71 and maplins Holiday camp are one and the same user as well as TheRighteousOne and Big Ern.
I'm just waiting for Eric Draven showing up then we'll have the full set ...or will we ?
[quote][p][bold]The Righteous One[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]The Righteous One[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]thomas222[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]BWFC71[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]longballs r us[/bold] wrote: I know a lot of people may not like BWFC71 but it seems to me that no matter what he says he always gets a lot of thumbs down. Back to the story and in my opinion food hygiene should be of the utmost importance in any food establishment. Maybe the business was unlucky that on the day they were not upto the usual high standards, and got caught out. I am sure they will have rectified it and back to it's best.[/p][/quote]No worries longballs It just shows people don't like the truth being written down because they'd rather believe urban myth and old wives tales than actual fact! Plus I also believe, as I am anti-UKIP, that it is a group of UKIPers doing their usual NAZI propaganda to stop the truth from coming out. But I will carry on, no matter what, and also know that the editors know what is happening ad are looking into the matter. As for the story, I have said my piece which is all factually correct and taken from the Government websites and seems to me that the company fell foul of a grumpy inspector on that day.[/p][/quote]The reason you get the thumbs down is because people dont agree with you and not some conspiracy as you say, you also have been saying this is being investigated by the BN but you have been saying that for a long time now and nothing has happened with regard to this because it is not happening, if it was the BN would be on it like yesterday. Perhaps the BN could come out and tell us if your assumptions are correct shall we.[/p][/quote]Funnily enough the people who don't agree with me say NOTHING and yet the people who agree with me are saying something. What is uit, teh silent majority? Also isn't it weird how there are far more thumbs down than those who actually comment - isn't that stifling debate. The fact is I post FACTS and not hear'say or rumours or unsubstaniated reports. ANd its eems that teh"Minoroty" don't like facts and as such, and due to them bneing weak willed give thumkbs down and get their cohorts to give the thumbs down through the social media campaigns which I have discovered, even by YOU and your so-called UKIPers. The strange fact is that other people actually repeat what I say, or I repeat other people but they don't get the thumbs down, and in fact they get the thumbs up!!!! I have even used a friends sign-in and expressed the same thoughts and wording as my usual screen names (BWFC71 & TRO) and guess what - actually getting thumbs up and not thumbs down. Therefore you tell me if that is not a camapign against me only!!!![/p][/quote]I see you still having your friends in UKIP to downgrade EVERYTHING I say - how much of a sheep are you? At least I do not rely on underhand tactics like that - I fight for what is right and believe in myself rather than getting backup because I am too week willed to do my own battles, like you!!!!! But once again, you have failed to naswer yet another question posed to you -why is that. Does Farage or Nuttall not have a stock answer to give? Whay is it that other people are coming out defending me whilst none of these so-called 28-399 thumb downers are saying NOTHING - saying nothing actually says quite a lot about these people!!!![/p][/quote]Do you think were all stupid ? everybody knows you have multiple usernames and Bwfc71 and maplins Holiday camp are one and the same user as well as TheRighteousOne and Big Ern. I'm just waiting for Eric Draven showing up then we'll have the full set ...or will we ? George X
  • Score: 4

2:29pm Mon 17 Feb 14

thomas222 says...

The Righteous One wrote:
Thomas222 You do not seem to grasp teh basics of these hygiene scores. It is 20-25% based on clenliness and 75-80% based upon paperwork and interview of proprietor Therefore, as I keep repeating myself, the score isn't actually fully based upon cleanliness but its more about the paperwork and the owner. Therefore do you honestly want to rely of hygiene scores that are not based overwhelmingly based on claenliness like in this case? OR are you just a sheep and believe everything you see on face value, without carefully reading the small print?? Also, have you ever been into and used the services of this coffee shop? If not then what is YOUR problem. As for hot water/cold water - in most other EU countries they use cold water to wash hands and clean glasses and the number of E.Coli, and other so-called unhygieneic case, are actually lower than in the UK!!!! Why is that?
I only eat in British,Spanish,Ital
ian,Chinese type non Halal Establishments personally. Stopped using Halal take away and Pizza two years ago as many also have. We are losing and have lost trust what we are being served up & also the standards of food prepared by them.People like this bad operator do more damage to the good Halal run shops so its themselves causing the decline. I also prefer to eat my food free of Halal products because i don,t agree with it. We are in Great Britain just in case you missed it so what the hell has the EU got to do with it ?.
[quote][p][bold]The Righteous One[/bold] wrote: Thomas222 You do not seem to grasp teh basics of these hygiene scores. It is 20-25% based on clenliness and 75-80% based upon paperwork and interview of proprietor Therefore, as I keep repeating myself, the score isn't actually fully based upon cleanliness but its more about the paperwork and the owner. Therefore do you honestly want to rely of hygiene scores that are not based overwhelmingly based on claenliness like in this case? OR are you just a sheep and believe everything you see on face value, without carefully reading the small print?? Also, have you ever been into and used the services of this coffee shop? If not then what is YOUR problem. As for hot water/cold water - in most other EU countries they use cold water to wash hands and clean glasses and the number of E.Coli, and other so-called unhygieneic case, are actually lower than in the UK!!!! Why is that?[/p][/quote]I only eat in British,Spanish,Ital ian,Chinese type non Halal Establishments personally. Stopped using Halal take away and Pizza two years ago as many also have. We are losing and have lost trust what we are being served up & also the standards of food prepared by them.People like this bad operator do more damage to the good Halal run shops so its themselves causing the decline. I also prefer to eat my food free of Halal products because i don,t agree with it. We are in Great Britain just in case you missed it so what the hell has the EU got to do with it ?. thomas222
  • Score: 4

6:14pm Mon 17 Feb 14

Reebok Rhythm says...

thomas222 wrote:
The Righteous One wrote:
Thomas222 You do not seem to grasp teh basics of these hygiene scores. It is 20-25% based on clenliness and 75-80% based upon paperwork and interview of proprietor Therefore, as I keep repeating myself, the score isn't actually fully based upon cleanliness but its more about the paperwork and the owner. Therefore do you honestly want to rely of hygiene scores that are not based overwhelmingly based on claenliness like in this case? OR are you just a sheep and believe everything you see on face value, without carefully reading the small print?? Also, have you ever been into and used the services of this coffee shop? If not then what is YOUR problem. As for hot water/cold water - in most other EU countries they use cold water to wash hands and clean glasses and the number of E.Coli, and other so-called unhygieneic case, are actually lower than in the UK!!!! Why is that?
I only eat in British,Spanish,Ital

ian,Chinese type non Halal Establishments personally. Stopped using Halal take away and Pizza two years ago as many also have. We are losing and have lost trust what we are being served up & also the standards of food prepared by them.People like this bad operator do more damage to the good Halal run shops so its themselves causing the decline. I also prefer to eat my food free of Halal products because i don,t agree with it. We are in Great Britain just in case you missed it so what the hell has the EU got to do with it ?.
Thomas lol. You're being very diplomatic and hospitable lately. It's a nice change ha ha!
[quote][p][bold]thomas222[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]The Righteous One[/bold] wrote: Thomas222 You do not seem to grasp teh basics of these hygiene scores. It is 20-25% based on clenliness and 75-80% based upon paperwork and interview of proprietor Therefore, as I keep repeating myself, the score isn't actually fully based upon cleanliness but its more about the paperwork and the owner. Therefore do you honestly want to rely of hygiene scores that are not based overwhelmingly based on claenliness like in this case? OR are you just a sheep and believe everything you see on face value, without carefully reading the small print?? Also, have you ever been into and used the services of this coffee shop? If not then what is YOUR problem. As for hot water/cold water - in most other EU countries they use cold water to wash hands and clean glasses and the number of E.Coli, and other so-called unhygieneic case, are actually lower than in the UK!!!! Why is that?[/p][/quote]I only eat in British,Spanish,Ital ian,Chinese type non Halal Establishments personally. Stopped using Halal take away and Pizza two years ago as many also have. We are losing and have lost trust what we are being served up & also the standards of food prepared by them.People like this bad operator do more damage to the good Halal run shops so its themselves causing the decline. I also prefer to eat my food free of Halal products because i don,t agree with it. We are in Great Britain just in case you missed it so what the hell has the EU got to do with it ?.[/p][/quote]Thomas lol. You're being very diplomatic and hospitable lately. It's a nice change ha ha! Reebok Rhythm
  • Score: -2

6:43pm Mon 17 Feb 14

BWFC71 says...

George X wrote:
The Righteous One wrote:
The Righteous One wrote:
thomas222 wrote:
BWFC71 wrote:
longballs r us wrote: I know a lot of people may not like BWFC71 but it seems to me that no matter what he says he always gets a lot of thumbs down. Back to the story and in my opinion food hygiene should be of the utmost importance in any food establishment. Maybe the business was unlucky that on the day they were not upto the usual high standards, and got caught out. I am sure they will have rectified it and back to it's best.
No worries longballs It just shows people don't like the truth being written down because they'd rather believe urban myth and old wives tales than actual fact! Plus I also believe, as I am anti-UKIP, that it is a group of UKIPers doing their usual NAZI propaganda to stop the truth from coming out. But I will carry on, no matter what, and also know that the editors know what is happening ad are looking into the matter. As for the story, I have said my piece which is all factually correct and taken from the Government websites and seems to me that the company fell foul of a grumpy inspector on that day.
The reason you get the thumbs down is because people dont agree with you and not some conspiracy as you say, you also have been saying this is being investigated by the BN but you have been saying that for a long time now and nothing has happened with regard to this because it is not happening, if it was the BN would be on it like yesterday. Perhaps the BN could come out and tell us if your assumptions are correct shall we.
Funnily enough the people who don't agree with me say NOTHING and yet the people who agree with me are saying something.

What is uit, teh silent majority?

Also isn't it weird how there are far more thumbs down than those who actually comment - isn't that stifling debate.

The fact is I post FACTS and not hear'say or rumours or unsubstaniated reports. ANd its eems that teh"Minoroty" don't like facts and as such, and due to them bneing weak willed give thumkbs down and get their cohorts to give the thumbs down through the social media campaigns which I have discovered, even by YOU and your so-called UKIPers.

The strange fact is that other people actually repeat what I say, or I repeat other people but they don't get the thumbs down, and in fact they get the thumbs up!!!! I have even used a friends sign-in and expressed the same thoughts and wording as my usual screen names (BWFC71 & TRO) and guess what - actually getting thumbs up and not thumbs down.

Therefore you tell me if that is not a camapign against me only!!!!
I see you still having your friends in UKIP to downgrade EVERYTHING I say - how much of a sheep are you? At least I do not rely on underhand tactics like that - I fight for what is right and believe in myself rather than getting backup because I am too week willed to do my own battles, like you!!!!!

But once again, you have failed to naswer yet another question posed to you -why is that. Does Farage or Nuttall not have a stock answer to give?

Whay is it that other people are coming out defending me whilst none of these so-called 28-399 thumb downers are saying NOTHING - saying nothing actually says quite a lot about these people!!!!
Do you think were all stupid ? everybody knows you have multiple usernames and Bwfc71 and maplins Holiday camp are one and the same user as well as TheRighteousOne and Big Ern.
I'm just waiting for Eric Draven showing up then we'll have the full set ...or will we ?
FFS I have to names: one for work PC as I cannot login via Facebook 9and that is TRO) and this one which is my Facebook login.

I have no need for any other usernames!!!

Why should I , I am brave enough to stand up to you pathetic individuals anytime without backup from others via social media- to downthumbs everything I say!!!

If I could log in with the one name, then I would.

It is NOT my fault that other people support my viewpoints - in fact my viewpoints are very intellectual and factually correct - so much so that often I have to post the various websites as to where I get the information from because people like you, very thick, only want to believe old wives tales and urban myths and anything else that can not be substantiated!!!!

For the same reason I could say that you are also Thomas222, Boltonchap, and a few others because you all write the same style and think the same!!!

But, unlike you, I am not thick and believe that you are all individuals with the same wronged reasonings and thoughts and same pathetic excuse for intellect with nothing to back you up!

Now, go back to your way of life, under the stone, being very ignorant of the truth and facts and lets see how much more of a NAZI you can become - remember people fought for this country to be as free as possible, and here you, and your cohorts, are destroying that freedom!
[quote][p][bold]George X[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]The Righteous One[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]The Righteous One[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]thomas222[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]BWFC71[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]longballs r us[/bold] wrote: I know a lot of people may not like BWFC71 but it seems to me that no matter what he says he always gets a lot of thumbs down. Back to the story and in my opinion food hygiene should be of the utmost importance in any food establishment. Maybe the business was unlucky that on the day they were not upto the usual high standards, and got caught out. I am sure they will have rectified it and back to it's best.[/p][/quote]No worries longballs It just shows people don't like the truth being written down because they'd rather believe urban myth and old wives tales than actual fact! Plus I also believe, as I am anti-UKIP, that it is a group of UKIPers doing their usual NAZI propaganda to stop the truth from coming out. But I will carry on, no matter what, and also know that the editors know what is happening ad are looking into the matter. As for the story, I have said my piece which is all factually correct and taken from the Government websites and seems to me that the company fell foul of a grumpy inspector on that day.[/p][/quote]The reason you get the thumbs down is because people dont agree with you and not some conspiracy as you say, you also have been saying this is being investigated by the BN but you have been saying that for a long time now and nothing has happened with regard to this because it is not happening, if it was the BN would be on it like yesterday. Perhaps the BN could come out and tell us if your assumptions are correct shall we.[/p][/quote]Funnily enough the people who don't agree with me say NOTHING and yet the people who agree with me are saying something. What is uit, teh silent majority? Also isn't it weird how there are far more thumbs down than those who actually comment - isn't that stifling debate. The fact is I post FACTS and not hear'say or rumours or unsubstaniated reports. ANd its eems that teh"Minoroty" don't like facts and as such, and due to them bneing weak willed give thumkbs down and get their cohorts to give the thumbs down through the social media campaigns which I have discovered, even by YOU and your so-called UKIPers. The strange fact is that other people actually repeat what I say, or I repeat other people but they don't get the thumbs down, and in fact they get the thumbs up!!!! I have even used a friends sign-in and expressed the same thoughts and wording as my usual screen names (BWFC71 & TRO) and guess what - actually getting thumbs up and not thumbs down. Therefore you tell me if that is not a camapign against me only!!!![/p][/quote]I see you still having your friends in UKIP to downgrade EVERYTHING I say - how much of a sheep are you? At least I do not rely on underhand tactics like that - I fight for what is right and believe in myself rather than getting backup because I am too week willed to do my own battles, like you!!!!! But once again, you have failed to naswer yet another question posed to you -why is that. Does Farage or Nuttall not have a stock answer to give? Whay is it that other people are coming out defending me whilst none of these so-called 28-399 thumb downers are saying NOTHING - saying nothing actually says quite a lot about these people!!!![/p][/quote]Do you think were all stupid ? everybody knows you have multiple usernames and Bwfc71 and maplins Holiday camp are one and the same user as well as TheRighteousOne and Big Ern. I'm just waiting for Eric Draven showing up then we'll have the full set ...or will we ?[/p][/quote]FFS I have to names: one for work PC as I cannot login via Facebook 9and that is TRO) and this one which is my Facebook login. I have no need for any other usernames!!! Why should I , I am brave enough to stand up to you pathetic individuals anytime without backup from others via social media- to downthumbs everything I say!!! If I could log in with the one name, then I would. It is NOT my fault that other people support my viewpoints - in fact my viewpoints are very intellectual and factually correct - so much so that often I have to post the various websites as to where I get the information from because people like you, very thick, only want to believe old wives tales and urban myths and anything else that can not be substantiated!!!! For the same reason I could say that you are also Thomas222, Boltonchap, and a few others because you all write the same style and think the same!!! But, unlike you, I am not thick and believe that you are all individuals with the same wronged reasonings and thoughts and same pathetic excuse for intellect with nothing to back you up! Now, go back to your way of life, under the stone, being very ignorant of the truth and facts and lets see how much more of a NAZI you can become - remember people fought for this country to be as free as possible, and here you, and your cohorts, are destroying that freedom! BWFC71
  • Score: -24

8:11pm Mon 17 Feb 14

Reebok Rhythm says...

BWFC71 wrote:
George X wrote:
The Righteous One wrote:
The Righteous One wrote:
thomas222 wrote:
BWFC71 wrote:
longballs r us wrote: I know a lot of people may not like BWFC71 but it seems to me that no matter what he says he always gets a lot of thumbs down. Back to the story and in my opinion food hygiene should be of the utmost importance in any food establishment. Maybe the business was unlucky that on the day they were not upto the usual high standards, and got caught out. I am sure they will have rectified it and back to it's best.
No worries longballs It just shows people don't like the truth being written down because they'd rather believe urban myth and old wives tales than actual fact! Plus I also believe, as I am anti-UKIP, that it is a group of UKIPers doing their usual NAZI propaganda to stop the truth from coming out. But I will carry on, no matter what, and also know that the editors know what is happening ad are looking into the matter. As for the story, I have said my piece which is all factually correct and taken from the Government websites and seems to me that the company fell foul of a grumpy inspector on that day.
The reason you get the thumbs down is because people dont agree with you and not some conspiracy as you say, you also have been saying this is being investigated by the BN but you have been saying that for a long time now and nothing has happened with regard to this because it is not happening, if it was the BN would be on it like yesterday. Perhaps the BN could come out and tell us if your assumptions are correct shall we.
Funnily enough the people who don't agree with me say NOTHING and yet the people who agree with me are saying something.

What is uit, teh silent majority?

Also isn't it weird how there are far more thumbs down than those who actually comment - isn't that stifling debate.

The fact is I post FACTS and not hear'say or rumours or unsubstaniated reports. ANd its eems that teh"Minoroty" don't like facts and as such, and due to them bneing weak willed give thumkbs down and get their cohorts to give the thumbs down through the social media campaigns which I have discovered, even by YOU and your so-called UKIPers.

The strange fact is that other people actually repeat what I say, or I repeat other people but they don't get the thumbs down, and in fact they get the thumbs up!!!! I have even used a friends sign-in and expressed the same thoughts and wording as my usual screen names (BWFC71 & TRO) and guess what - actually getting thumbs up and not thumbs down.

Therefore you tell me if that is not a camapign against me only!!!!
I see you still having your friends in UKIP to downgrade EVERYTHING I say - how much of a sheep are you? At least I do not rely on underhand tactics like that - I fight for what is right and believe in myself rather than getting backup because I am too week willed to do my own battles, like you!!!!!

But once again, you have failed to naswer yet another question posed to you -why is that. Does Farage or Nuttall not have a stock answer to give?

Whay is it that other people are coming out defending me whilst none of these so-called 28-399 thumb downers are saying NOTHING - saying nothing actually says quite a lot about these people!!!!
Do you think were all stupid ? everybody knows you have multiple usernames and Bwfc71 and maplins Holiday camp are one and the same user as well as TheRighteousOne and Big Ern.
I'm just waiting for Eric Draven showing up then we'll have the full set ...or will we ?
FFS I have to names: one for work PC as I cannot login via Facebook 9and that is TRO) and this one which is my Facebook login.

I have no need for any other usernames!!!

Why should I , I am brave enough to stand up to you pathetic individuals anytime without backup from others via social media- to downthumbs everything I say!!!

If I could log in with the one name, then I would.

It is NOT my fault that other people support my viewpoints - in fact my viewpoints are very intellectual and factually correct - so much so that often I have to post the various websites as to where I get the information from because people like you, very thick, only want to believe old wives tales and urban myths and anything else that can not be substantiated!!!!

For the same reason I could say that you are also Thomas222, Boltonchap, and a few others because you all write the same style and think the same!!!

But, unlike you, I am not thick and believe that you are all individuals with the same wronged reasonings and thoughts and same pathetic excuse for intellect with nothing to back you up!

Now, go back to your way of life, under the stone, being very ignorant of the truth and facts and lets see how much more of a NAZI you can become - remember people fought for this country to be as free as possible, and here you, and your cohorts, are destroying that freedom!
Another verbose, tiresome statement of gibberish from the self proclaimed pseudo-intellectual.
[quote][p][bold]BWFC71[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]George X[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]The Righteous One[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]The Righteous One[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]thomas222[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]BWFC71[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]longballs r us[/bold] wrote: I know a lot of people may not like BWFC71 but it seems to me that no matter what he says he always gets a lot of thumbs down. Back to the story and in my opinion food hygiene should be of the utmost importance in any food establishment. Maybe the business was unlucky that on the day they were not upto the usual high standards, and got caught out. I am sure they will have rectified it and back to it's best.[/p][/quote]No worries longballs It just shows people don't like the truth being written down because they'd rather believe urban myth and old wives tales than actual fact! Plus I also believe, as I am anti-UKIP, that it is a group of UKIPers doing their usual NAZI propaganda to stop the truth from coming out. But I will carry on, no matter what, and also know that the editors know what is happening ad are looking into the matter. As for the story, I have said my piece which is all factually correct and taken from the Government websites and seems to me that the company fell foul of a grumpy inspector on that day.[/p][/quote]The reason you get the thumbs down is because people dont agree with you and not some conspiracy as you say, you also have been saying this is being investigated by the BN but you have been saying that for a long time now and nothing has happened with regard to this because it is not happening, if it was the BN would be on it like yesterday. Perhaps the BN could come out and tell us if your assumptions are correct shall we.[/p][/quote]Funnily enough the people who don't agree with me say NOTHING and yet the people who agree with me are saying something. What is uit, teh silent majority? Also isn't it weird how there are far more thumbs down than those who actually comment - isn't that stifling debate. The fact is I post FACTS and not hear'say or rumours or unsubstaniated reports. ANd its eems that teh"Minoroty" don't like facts and as such, and due to them bneing weak willed give thumkbs down and get their cohorts to give the thumbs down through the social media campaigns which I have discovered, even by YOU and your so-called UKIPers. The strange fact is that other people actually repeat what I say, or I repeat other people but they don't get the thumbs down, and in fact they get the thumbs up!!!! I have even used a friends sign-in and expressed the same thoughts and wording as my usual screen names (BWFC71 & TRO) and guess what - actually getting thumbs up and not thumbs down. Therefore you tell me if that is not a camapign against me only!!!![/p][/quote]I see you still having your friends in UKIP to downgrade EVERYTHING I say - how much of a sheep are you? At least I do not rely on underhand tactics like that - I fight for what is right and believe in myself rather than getting backup because I am too week willed to do my own battles, like you!!!!! But once again, you have failed to naswer yet another question posed to you -why is that. Does Farage or Nuttall not have a stock answer to give? Whay is it that other people are coming out defending me whilst none of these so-called 28-399 thumb downers are saying NOTHING - saying nothing actually says quite a lot about these people!!!![/p][/quote]Do you think were all stupid ? everybody knows you have multiple usernames and Bwfc71 and maplins Holiday camp are one and the same user as well as TheRighteousOne and Big Ern. I'm just waiting for Eric Draven showing up then we'll have the full set ...or will we ?[/p][/quote]FFS I have to names: one for work PC as I cannot login via Facebook 9and that is TRO) and this one which is my Facebook login. I have no need for any other usernames!!! Why should I , I am brave enough to stand up to you pathetic individuals anytime without backup from others via social media- to downthumbs everything I say!!! If I could log in with the one name, then I would. It is NOT my fault that other people support my viewpoints - in fact my viewpoints are very intellectual and factually correct - so much so that often I have to post the various websites as to where I get the information from because people like you, very thick, only want to believe old wives tales and urban myths and anything else that can not be substantiated!!!! For the same reason I could say that you are also Thomas222, Boltonchap, and a few others because you all write the same style and think the same!!! But, unlike you, I am not thick and believe that you are all individuals with the same wronged reasonings and thoughts and same pathetic excuse for intellect with nothing to back you up! Now, go back to your way of life, under the stone, being very ignorant of the truth and facts and lets see how much more of a NAZI you can become - remember people fought for this country to be as free as possible, and here you, and your cohorts, are destroying that freedom![/p][/quote]Another verbose, tiresome statement of gibberish from the self proclaimed pseudo-intellectual. Reebok Rhythm
  • Score: 10

10:06pm Mon 17 Feb 14

bumblebeefeet says...

Iluminati wrote:
Small business like them have to cut corners in order to be able to trade. I wished that the business rates and, in many cases applicable, the landlords would be given a one star rating. The small business always suffer first, and lots and lots have disappeared from the town centres and food halls.
Okay, the incident concerned happened last December, and should have been rectified by now. Some goodwill from the council wouldn't come amiss!!
it doesn't matter how small your business is, you should follow the right practices whether your feeding a few or thousands!
[quote][p][bold]Iluminati[/bold] wrote: Small business like them have to cut corners in order to be able to trade. I wished that the business rates and, in many cases applicable, the landlords would be given a one star rating. The small business always suffer first, and lots and lots have disappeared from the town centres and food halls. Okay, the incident concerned happened last December, and should have been rectified by now. Some goodwill from the council wouldn't come amiss!![/p][/quote]it doesn't matter how small your business is, you should follow the right practices whether your feeding a few or thousands! bumblebeefeet
  • Score: 1

10:11pm Mon 17 Feb 14

bumblebeefeet says...

AnnaRad wrote:
When it comes to these food hygiene ratings I have a few issues with how they are allocated.

Firstly it seems crazy to me how a hunk of donner meat can be prepared in a factory that has a 1 rating, to then be taken to a takeaway with a rating of 5 and served to a customer who thinks everything is perfect.

Secondly there is an element of the rating called confidence in management. This is purely a rating that is given by a single individual against another individual. To me this doesn't seem neither fair or scalable. If a hygiene officer doesn't particularly like or get on with the operator its very easy for them to down rate them. This is very subjective and not the best way to rate hygiene.

Thirdly, there is hundreds of micro business's popping up on the likes of facebook etc. These are the types of business's like cupcake makers etc. Where goods are made in domestic kitchens and sold on markets, fetes, internet etc...No regulation on these business's (that dont pay business rates)

Add all this together with a 'Poll' that Bolton news runs saying 9 out of 10 people wont visit these premises again adds up to a really useless and unfair environmental health rating system.

I just hope cappuccinos works through this and the numerous employees that work there dont lose their jobs thanks to this 'system'
These small businesses on facebook SHOULD be signed to the rating system, if they are trading and selling to the public.
Also when you are being inspected, you have to list every single place where you purchase food/drink from in your 'safer food better business' folder. If the inspector see's its from somewhere unfit then they will pull you up on that..
And yes they do nitpick, its not fair and some can be really nasty but the business I work for complained about the inspector (he downrated because he didn't like my manager) and we got re-checked randomly and given a 5.
[quote][p][bold]AnnaRad[/bold] wrote: When it comes to these food hygiene ratings I have a few issues with how they are allocated. Firstly it seems crazy to me how a hunk of donner meat can be prepared in a factory that has a 1 rating, to then be taken to a takeaway with a rating of 5 and served to a customer who thinks everything is perfect. Secondly there is an element of the rating called confidence in management. This is purely a rating that is given by a single individual against another individual. To me this doesn't seem neither fair or scalable. If a hygiene officer doesn't particularly like or get on with the operator its very easy for them to down rate them. This is very subjective and not the best way to rate hygiene. Thirdly, there is hundreds of micro business's popping up on the likes of facebook etc. These are the types of business's like cupcake makers etc. Where goods are made in domestic kitchens and sold on markets, fetes, internet etc...No regulation on these business's (that dont pay business rates) Add all this together with a 'Poll' that Bolton news runs saying 9 out of 10 people wont visit these premises again adds up to a really useless and unfair environmental health rating system. I just hope cappuccinos works through this and the numerous employees that work there dont lose their jobs thanks to this 'system'[/p][/quote]These small businesses on facebook SHOULD be signed to the rating system, if they are trading and selling to the public. Also when you are being inspected, you have to list every single place where you purchase food/drink from in your 'safer food better business' folder. If the inspector see's its from somewhere unfit then they will pull you up on that.. And yes they do nitpick, its not fair and some can be really nasty but the business I work for complained about the inspector (he downrated because he didn't like my manager) and we got re-checked randomly and given a 5. bumblebeefeet
  • Score: 1

7:11pm Thu 20 Feb 14

w1ggan says...

BWFC71 wrote:
George X wrote:
The Righteous One wrote:
The Righteous One wrote:
thomas222 wrote:
BWFC71 wrote:
longballs r us wrote: I know a lot of people may not like BWFC71 but it seems to me that no matter what he says he always gets a lot of thumbs down. Back to the story and in my opinion food hygiene should be of the utmost importance in any food establishment. Maybe the business was unlucky that on the day they were not upto the usual high standards, and got caught out. I am sure they will have rectified it and back to it's best.
No worries longballs It just shows people don't like the truth being written down because they'd rather believe urban myth and old wives tales than actual fact! Plus I also believe, as I am anti-UKIP, that it is a group of UKIPers doing their usual NAZI propaganda to stop the truth from coming out. But I will carry on, no matter what, and also know that the editors know what is happening ad are looking into the matter. As for the story, I have said my piece which is all factually correct and taken from the Government websites and seems to me that the company fell foul of a grumpy inspector on that day.
The reason you get the thumbs down is because people dont agree with you and not some conspiracy as you say, you also have been saying this is being investigated by the BN but you have been saying that for a long time now and nothing has happened with regard to this because it is not happening, if it was the BN would be on it like yesterday. Perhaps the BN could come out and tell us if your assumptions are correct shall we.
Funnily enough the people who don't agree with me say NOTHING and yet the people who agree with me are saying something.

What is uit, teh silent majority?

Also isn't it weird how there are far more thumbs down than those who actually comment - isn't that stifling debate.

The fact is I post FACTS and not hear'say or rumours or unsubstaniated reports. ANd its eems that teh"Minoroty" don't like facts and as such, and due to them bneing weak willed give thumkbs down and get their cohorts to give the thumbs down through the social media campaigns which I have discovered, even by YOU and your so-called UKIPers.

The strange fact is that other people actually repeat what I say, or I repeat other people but they don't get the thumbs down, and in fact they get the thumbs up!!!! I have even used a friends sign-in and expressed the same thoughts and wording as my usual screen names (BWFC71 & TRO) and guess what - actually getting thumbs up and not thumbs down.

Therefore you tell me if that is not a camapign against me only!!!!
I see you still having your friends in UKIP to downgrade EVERYTHING I say - how much of a sheep are you? At least I do not rely on underhand tactics like that - I fight for what is right and believe in myself rather than getting backup because I am too week willed to do my own battles, like you!!!!!

But once again, you have failed to naswer yet another question posed to you -why is that. Does Farage or Nuttall not have a stock answer to give?

Whay is it that other people are coming out defending me whilst none of these so-called 28-399 thumb downers are saying NOTHING - saying nothing actually says quite a lot about these people!!!!
Do you think were all stupid ? everybody knows you have multiple usernames and Bwfc71 and maplins Holiday camp are one and the same user as well as TheRighteousOne and Big Ern.
I'm just waiting for Eric Draven showing up then we'll have the full set ...or will we ?
FFS I have to names: one for work PC as I cannot login via Facebook 9and that is TRO) and this one which is my Facebook login.

I have no need for any other usernames!!!

Why should I , I am brave enough to stand up to you pathetic individuals anytime without backup from others via social media- to downthumbs everything I say!!!

If I could log in with the one name, then I would.

It is NOT my fault that other people support my viewpoints - in fact my viewpoints are very intellectual and factually correct - so much so that often I have to post the various websites as to where I get the information from because people like you, very thick, only want to believe old wives tales and urban myths and anything else that can not be substantiated!!!!

For the same reason I could say that you are also Thomas222, Boltonchap, and a few others because you all write the same style and think the same!!!

But, unlike you, I am not thick and believe that you are all individuals with the same wronged reasonings and thoughts and same pathetic excuse for intellect with nothing to back you up!

Now, go back to your way of life, under the stone, being very ignorant of the truth and facts and lets see how much more of a NAZI you can become - remember people fought for this country to be as free as possible, and here you, and your cohorts, are destroying that freedom!
I would respectfully suggest you appear to be acting the Nazi in this thread
[quote][p][bold]BWFC71[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]George X[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]The Righteous One[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]The Righteous One[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]thomas222[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]BWFC71[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]longballs r us[/bold] wrote: I know a lot of people may not like BWFC71 but it seems to me that no matter what he says he always gets a lot of thumbs down. Back to the story and in my opinion food hygiene should be of the utmost importance in any food establishment. Maybe the business was unlucky that on the day they were not upto the usual high standards, and got caught out. I am sure they will have rectified it and back to it's best.[/p][/quote]No worries longballs It just shows people don't like the truth being written down because they'd rather believe urban myth and old wives tales than actual fact! Plus I also believe, as I am anti-UKIP, that it is a group of UKIPers doing their usual NAZI propaganda to stop the truth from coming out. But I will carry on, no matter what, and also know that the editors know what is happening ad are looking into the matter. As for the story, I have said my piece which is all factually correct and taken from the Government websites and seems to me that the company fell foul of a grumpy inspector on that day.[/p][/quote]The reason you get the thumbs down is because people dont agree with you and not some conspiracy as you say, you also have been saying this is being investigated by the BN but you have been saying that for a long time now and nothing has happened with regard to this because it is not happening, if it was the BN would be on it like yesterday. Perhaps the BN could come out and tell us if your assumptions are correct shall we.[/p][/quote]Funnily enough the people who don't agree with me say NOTHING and yet the people who agree with me are saying something. What is uit, teh silent majority? Also isn't it weird how there are far more thumbs down than those who actually comment - isn't that stifling debate. The fact is I post FACTS and not hear'say or rumours or unsubstaniated reports. ANd its eems that teh"Minoroty" don't like facts and as such, and due to them bneing weak willed give thumkbs down and get their cohorts to give the thumbs down through the social media campaigns which I have discovered, even by YOU and your so-called UKIPers. The strange fact is that other people actually repeat what I say, or I repeat other people but they don't get the thumbs down, and in fact they get the thumbs up!!!! I have even used a friends sign-in and expressed the same thoughts and wording as my usual screen names (BWFC71 & TRO) and guess what - actually getting thumbs up and not thumbs down. Therefore you tell me if that is not a camapign against me only!!!![/p][/quote]I see you still having your friends in UKIP to downgrade EVERYTHING I say - how much of a sheep are you? At least I do not rely on underhand tactics like that - I fight for what is right and believe in myself rather than getting backup because I am too week willed to do my own battles, like you!!!!! But once again, you have failed to naswer yet another question posed to you -why is that. Does Farage or Nuttall not have a stock answer to give? Whay is it that other people are coming out defending me whilst none of these so-called 28-399 thumb downers are saying NOTHING - saying nothing actually says quite a lot about these people!!!![/p][/quote]Do you think were all stupid ? everybody knows you have multiple usernames and Bwfc71 and maplins Holiday camp are one and the same user as well as TheRighteousOne and Big Ern. I'm just waiting for Eric Draven showing up then we'll have the full set ...or will we ?[/p][/quote]FFS I have to names: one for work PC as I cannot login via Facebook 9and that is TRO) and this one which is my Facebook login. I have no need for any other usernames!!! Why should I , I am brave enough to stand up to you pathetic individuals anytime without backup from others via social media- to downthumbs everything I say!!! If I could log in with the one name, then I would. It is NOT my fault that other people support my viewpoints - in fact my viewpoints are very intellectual and factually correct - so much so that often I have to post the various websites as to where I get the information from because people like you, very thick, only want to believe old wives tales and urban myths and anything else that can not be substantiated!!!! For the same reason I could say that you are also Thomas222, Boltonchap, and a few others because you all write the same style and think the same!!! But, unlike you, I am not thick and believe that you are all individuals with the same wronged reasonings and thoughts and same pathetic excuse for intellect with nothing to back you up! Now, go back to your way of life, under the stone, being very ignorant of the truth and facts and lets see how much more of a NAZI you can become - remember people fought for this country to be as free as possible, and here you, and your cohorts, are destroying that freedom![/p][/quote]I would respectfully suggest you appear to be acting the Nazi in this thread w1ggan
  • Score: 5

12:40pm Fri 21 Feb 14

The Righteous One says...

w1ggan wrote:
BWFC71 wrote:
George X wrote:
The Righteous One wrote:
The Righteous One wrote:
thomas222 wrote:
BWFC71 wrote:
longballs r us wrote: I know a lot of people may not like BWFC71 but it seems to me that no matter what he says he always gets a lot of thumbs down. Back to the story and in my opinion food hygiene should be of the utmost importance in any food establishment. Maybe the business was unlucky that on the day they were not upto the usual high standards, and got caught out. I am sure they will have rectified it and back to it's best.
No worries longballs It just shows people don't like the truth being written down because they'd rather believe urban myth and old wives tales than actual fact! Plus I also believe, as I am anti-UKIP, that it is a group of UKIPers doing their usual NAZI propaganda to stop the truth from coming out. But I will carry on, no matter what, and also know that the editors know what is happening ad are looking into the matter. As for the story, I have said my piece which is all factually correct and taken from the Government websites and seems to me that the company fell foul of a grumpy inspector on that day.
The reason you get the thumbs down is because people dont agree with you and not some conspiracy as you say, you also have been saying this is being investigated by the BN but you have been saying that for a long time now and nothing has happened with regard to this because it is not happening, if it was the BN would be on it like yesterday. Perhaps the BN could come out and tell us if your assumptions are correct shall we.
Funnily enough the people who don't agree with me say NOTHING and yet the people who agree with me are saying something.

What is uit, teh silent majority?

Also isn't it weird how there are far more thumbs down than those who actually comment - isn't that stifling debate.

The fact is I post FACTS and not hear'say or rumours or unsubstaniated reports. ANd its eems that teh"Minoroty" don't like facts and as such, and due to them bneing weak willed give thumkbs down and get their cohorts to give the thumbs down through the social media campaigns which I have discovered, even by YOU and your so-called UKIPers.

The strange fact is that other people actually repeat what I say, or I repeat other people but they don't get the thumbs down, and in fact they get the thumbs up!!!! I have even used a friends sign-in and expressed the same thoughts and wording as my usual screen names (BWFC71 & TRO) and guess what - actually getting thumbs up and not thumbs down.

Therefore you tell me if that is not a camapign against me only!!!!
I see you still having your friends in UKIP to downgrade EVERYTHING I say - how much of a sheep are you? At least I do not rely on underhand tactics like that - I fight for what is right and believe in myself rather than getting backup because I am too week willed to do my own battles, like you!!!!!

But once again, you have failed to naswer yet another question posed to you -why is that. Does Farage or Nuttall not have a stock answer to give?

Whay is it that other people are coming out defending me whilst none of these so-called 28-399 thumb downers are saying NOTHING - saying nothing actually says quite a lot about these people!!!!
Do you think were all stupid ? everybody knows you have multiple usernames and Bwfc71 and maplins Holiday camp are one and the same user as well as TheRighteousOne and Big Ern.
I'm just waiting for Eric Draven showing up then we'll have the full set ...or will we ?
FFS I have to names: one for work PC as I cannot login via Facebook 9and that is TRO) and this one which is my Facebook login.

I have no need for any other usernames!!!

Why should I , I am brave enough to stand up to you pathetic individuals anytime without backup from others via social media- to downthumbs everything I say!!!

If I could log in with the one name, then I would.

It is NOT my fault that other people support my viewpoints - in fact my viewpoints are very intellectual and factually correct - so much so that often I have to post the various websites as to where I get the information from because people like you, very thick, only want to believe old wives tales and urban myths and anything else that can not be substantiated!!!!

For the same reason I could say that you are also Thomas222, Boltonchap, and a few others because you all write the same style and think the same!!!

But, unlike you, I am not thick and believe that you are all individuals with the same wronged reasonings and thoughts and same pathetic excuse for intellect with nothing to back you up!

Now, go back to your way of life, under the stone, being very ignorant of the truth and facts and lets see how much more of a NAZI you can become - remember people fought for this country to be as free as possible, and here you, and your cohorts, are destroying that freedom!
I would respectfully suggest you appear to be acting the Nazi in this thread
Definitely not me but those who go against democracy and right of opinion - just because my opinion is the most sensible and appropriate, with regards to ALL facts available makes it the most pertinent rather than many of the subjective comments made on teh htread and to try to disparage my voice with teh thumbs dowen and name calling my the majority on here (which in fact is the minority in real life) then it shows how undemocratic these people are by not allowing true, and published, facts to be shown or expressed - that is how the Nazi's and the rest of te Axis powers led during the 1930's and 1940's!
[quote][p][bold]w1ggan[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]BWFC71[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]George X[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]The Righteous One[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]The Righteous One[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]thomas222[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]BWFC71[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]longballs r us[/bold] wrote: I know a lot of people may not like BWFC71 but it seems to me that no matter what he says he always gets a lot of thumbs down. Back to the story and in my opinion food hygiene should be of the utmost importance in any food establishment. Maybe the business was unlucky that on the day they were not upto the usual high standards, and got caught out. I am sure they will have rectified it and back to it's best.[/p][/quote]No worries longballs It just shows people don't like the truth being written down because they'd rather believe urban myth and old wives tales than actual fact! Plus I also believe, as I am anti-UKIP, that it is a group of UKIPers doing their usual NAZI propaganda to stop the truth from coming out. But I will carry on, no matter what, and also know that the editors know what is happening ad are looking into the matter. As for the story, I have said my piece which is all factually correct and taken from the Government websites and seems to me that the company fell foul of a grumpy inspector on that day.[/p][/quote]The reason you get the thumbs down is because people dont agree with you and not some conspiracy as you say, you also have been saying this is being investigated by the BN but you have been saying that for a long time now and nothing has happened with regard to this because it is not happening, if it was the BN would be on it like yesterday. Perhaps the BN could come out and tell us if your assumptions are correct shall we.[/p][/quote]Funnily enough the people who don't agree with me say NOTHING and yet the people who agree with me are saying something. What is uit, teh silent majority? Also isn't it weird how there are far more thumbs down than those who actually comment - isn't that stifling debate. The fact is I post FACTS and not hear'say or rumours or unsubstaniated reports. ANd its eems that teh"Minoroty" don't like facts and as such, and due to them bneing weak willed give thumkbs down and get their cohorts to give the thumbs down through the social media campaigns which I have discovered, even by YOU and your so-called UKIPers. The strange fact is that other people actually repeat what I say, or I repeat other people but they don't get the thumbs down, and in fact they get the thumbs up!!!! I have even used a friends sign-in and expressed the same thoughts and wording as my usual screen names (BWFC71 & TRO) and guess what - actually getting thumbs up and not thumbs down. Therefore you tell me if that is not a camapign against me only!!!![/p][/quote]I see you still having your friends in UKIP to downgrade EVERYTHING I say - how much of a sheep are you? At least I do not rely on underhand tactics like that - I fight for what is right and believe in myself rather than getting backup because I am too week willed to do my own battles, like you!!!!! But once again, you have failed to naswer yet another question posed to you -why is that. Does Farage or Nuttall not have a stock answer to give? Whay is it that other people are coming out defending me whilst none of these so-called 28-399 thumb downers are saying NOTHING - saying nothing actually says quite a lot about these people!!!![/p][/quote]Do you think were all stupid ? everybody knows you have multiple usernames and Bwfc71 and maplins Holiday camp are one and the same user as well as TheRighteousOne and Big Ern. I'm just waiting for Eric Draven showing up then we'll have the full set ...or will we ?[/p][/quote]FFS I have to names: one for work PC as I cannot login via Facebook 9and that is TRO) and this one which is my Facebook login. I have no need for any other usernames!!! Why should I , I am brave enough to stand up to you pathetic individuals anytime without backup from others via social media- to downthumbs everything I say!!! If I could log in with the one name, then I would. It is NOT my fault that other people support my viewpoints - in fact my viewpoints are very intellectual and factually correct - so much so that often I have to post the various websites as to where I get the information from because people like you, very thick, only want to believe old wives tales and urban myths and anything else that can not be substantiated!!!! For the same reason I could say that you are also Thomas222, Boltonchap, and a few others because you all write the same style and think the same!!! But, unlike you, I am not thick and believe that you are all individuals with the same wronged reasonings and thoughts and same pathetic excuse for intellect with nothing to back you up! Now, go back to your way of life, under the stone, being very ignorant of the truth and facts and lets see how much more of a NAZI you can become - remember people fought for this country to be as free as possible, and here you, and your cohorts, are destroying that freedom![/p][/quote]I would respectfully suggest you appear to be acting the Nazi in this thread[/p][/quote]Definitely not me but those who go against democracy and right of opinion - just because my opinion is the most sensible and appropriate, with regards to ALL facts available makes it the most pertinent rather than many of the subjective comments made on teh htread and to try to disparage my voice with teh thumbs dowen and name calling my the majority on here (which in fact is the minority in real life) then it shows how undemocratic these people are by not allowing true, and published, facts to be shown or expressed - that is how the Nazi's and the rest of te Axis powers led during the 1930's and 1940's! The Righteous One
  • Score: -45

Comments are closed on this article.

Send us your news, pictures and videos

Most read stories

Local Info

Enter your postcode, town or place name

About cookies

We want you to enjoy your visit to our website. That's why we use cookies to enhance your experience. By staying on our website you agree to our use of cookies. Find out more about the cookies we use.

I agree