Swan at Fradley 1 star hygiene rating

[mrsmelly]

2 hours ago, MtB said:

 

I find myself wondering if it's like the BSS, where some of it is a matter of opinion.

Yep, just like a cars MOT. When is rust a failure  for instance ?????? How long is a piece of string?????? How clean, is clean or not clean etc etc

3 hours ago, Machpoint005 said:

 

.

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

Most food outlets around here do display their ratings.

 

 

 

But they dont have to.

Edited April 6, 2022 by mrsmelly

[Nightwatch]

8 hours ago, mrsmelly said:

What was that polish we used called that we used on the flats floors? You know the vinyl tiles? with the buffing machines?

ME7 also rings a bell. And I mentioned and smellchuck corrected me Glift (stripper) and Gleam (polish/seal) the Shiney bit.

[ditchcrawler]

I use to get my Indian Takeaway from here and still do 28/05/2019 Maya Tamworth Ltd t/a Ratna Bangladeshi Indian Takeaway Market Place Polesworth Warwickshire – Warwickshire County Council

[Ianws]

Ratings are based on general food hygiene, fabric of the building/environment and management systems to control food safety. The overall rating is based on a matrix of the three individual ratings. Officers usually, but not always, offer recommendations to improve, even when 5 stars are given, but I've usually found the advice to be supportive rather than blaming. Having said that all my projects have had 5 stars so far so I've not been at the sharp end of any criticism

 

Allergens are a big issue these days and any establishment not having robust systems in place to keep on top of what's in their dishes is likely to get scored badly. 

[Ianws]

12 hours ago, mrsmelly said:

Not in England.

In England you don't have to display your rating but if no rating is displayed that tells it's own story. You always receive a window sticker you can put on display, or choose not to.

 

The food hygiene rating is, however, no indication of the quality of the food itself. A five star rated establishment could be inspected as preparing food safely but it could still taste like muck. 

[David Mack]

2 minutes ago, Ianws said:

A five star rated establishment could be inspected as preparing food safely but it could still taste like muck. 

And vice versa 

[Alan de Enfield]

4 minutes ago, Ianws said:

In England you don't have to display your rating but if no rating is displayed that tells it's own story. You always receive a window sticker you can put on display, or choose not to.

 

The food hygiene rating is, however, no indication of the quality of the food itself. A five star rated establishment could be inspected as preparing food safely but it could still taste like muck. 

 

Exactly the same as the ISO 9000 quality standards.

 

It simply shows that you make a product of 'consistent standards' - they may be totally scrap / crap but you will manufacture them all the same.

It is a measure of the 'process system' not a product quality system.

[Ianws]

Agree entirely @David Mack The rating is also a snapshot taken on the day of the inspection. It does give some confidence in the systems in place to ensure food safety but it does not guarantee everything is being followed the day you eat there. It's up to you to make a call on where you want to eat based on ratings, quality of food, feedback from friends, personal observations etc. 

Edited April 6, 2022 by Ianws
Replying to David's message but it wasnt quoted

[Ianws]

6 minutes ago, Alan de Enfield said:

 

Exactly the same as the ISO 9000 quality standards.

 

It simply shows that you make a product of 'consistent standards' - they may be totally scrap / crap but you will manufacture them all the same.

It is a measure of the 'process system' not a product quality system.

There is an element of quality, in that the standard systems have to be of a standard to ensure food is safely handled at all points from receipt of ingredients to serving. That's all though. Quality of ingredients or final product is irrelevant, as long as it is safe and not wrongly described. 

[Alan de Enfield]

1 minute ago, Ianws said:

There is an element of quality, in that the standard systems have to be of a standard to ensure food is safely handled at all points from receipt of ingredients to serving. That's all though. Quality of ingredients or final product is irrelevant, as long as it is safe and not wrongly described. 

 

We even had to get a temperature certificate from the lorry driver stating the freezer lorry internal temperature, we had to keep it on the 'log' just in case it was ever asked for.

Everything fresh or frozen had to be dated, all the chopping boards colour coded for different foods and kept seperately, and so on and so on .............it was not a difficult thing to comply with, just additional work load.

[MtB]

Would you fail your food hygiene inspection if they found your anchor and mooring stakes in the fridge?

[Alan de Enfield]

Just now, MtB said:

Would you fail your food hygiene inspection if they found your anchor and mooring stakes in the fridge?

 

No, because I would have done what you do - take them out before inspection.

[MtB]

I don't need an anchor, and my maureen steaks are in the coal box! 

 

[Ianws]

9 minutes ago, Alan de Enfield said:

 

We even had to get a temperature certificate from the lorry driver stating the freezer lorry internal temperature, we had to keep it on the 'log' just in case it was ever asked for.

Everything fresh or frozen had to be dated, all the chopping boards colour coded for different foods and kept seperately, and so on and so on .............it was not a difficult thing to comply with, just additional work load.

Yes, recognise that. That detail gets you a good rating. It does make sense although appears a lot if work. How would you know your sausages hadn't already got a massive load of bacteria on route to you if you couldn't trust the delivery systems were sound. 

Edited April 6, 2022 by Ianws

[Cheshire cat]

36 minutes ago, Ianws said:

There is an element of quality, in that the standard systems have to be of a standard to ensure food is safely handled at all points from receipt of ingredients to serving. That's all though. Quality of ingredients or final product is irrelevant, as long as it is safe and not wrongly described. 

That's true in many cases. An example would be CAMRA who produce a good beer guide. The guide is produced on the basis of the quality of the beer, how well the beer is kept. Not on whether it is likely to be to your taste.

[Tonka]

9 hours ago, Ianws said:

There is an element of quality, in that the standard systems have to be of a standard to ensure food is safely handled at all points from receipt of ingredients to serving. That's all though. Quality of ingredients or final product is irrelevant, as long as it is safe and not wrongly described. 

Would this be the same standard that allows different education boards yo set different standards for a GCSE

[tree monkey]

13 hours ago, mrsmelly said:

Yep, just like a cars MOT. When is rust a failure  for instance ??????

When the jack causes the cill to collapse?

 

The above was followed by a short chat confirming the car was going to be scrapped in 3or 4 months anyway, passed with flying colours

 

The car was scrapped as discussed 

[IanM]

It looks like reporting the 1 star inspections is the latest local paper trend at the moment.

 

I quite often check the websites of the local papers of places where I used to live and in the last few weeks every one has ran a "story" on a 1 star inspection in their local area.

[MtB]

13 minutes ago, tree monkey said:

When the jack causes the cill to collapse?

 

The above was followed by a short chat confirming the car was going to be scrapped in 3or 4 months anyway, passed with flying colours

 

The car was scrapped as discussed 

 

Brake pipe corrosion is a good example. I had a car fail on brake pipe corrosion but another MoT place passed it. Back in the day as a teenager it was commonplace for us to just take an MoT failed car to a different testing station rather than fix the supposed faults and get either a pass, or a completely different lists of fail points which might be easier to fix. On Minis, A40s Morris 1000s etc it was common to get fails for marginal stuff like body corrosion, wear in steering box or rack, corroded brake pipes etc and different examiner who take a different view. Anything which both MoT stations picked up was generally did need fixing.

 

Back in those days most MoT test stations used their inspections to feed work to their workshops, so it often felt like a fail was more likely if they were short of work than if they were busy. 

[mrsmelly]

10 hours ago, MtB said:

Would you fail your food hygiene inspection if they found your anchor and mooring stakes in the fridge?

Only if it was a Gas fridge.

[Tonka]

3 minutes ago, MtB said:

 

Brake pipe corrosion is a good example. I had a car fail on brake pipe corrosion but another MoT place passed it. Back in the day as a teenager it was commonplace for us to just take an MoT failed car to a different testing station rather than fix the supposed faults and get either a pass, or a completely different lists of fail points which might be easier to fix. On Minis, A40s Morris 1000s etc it was common to get fails for marginal stuff like body corrosion, wear in steering box or rack, corroded brake pipes etc and different examiner who take a different view. Anything which both MoT stations picked up was generally did need fixing.

 

Back in those days most MoT test stations used their inspections to feed work to their workshops, so it often felt like a fail was more likely if they were short of work than if they were busy. 

Used to know a garage where the Mot tester used a micrometer when checking the car

[Cheshire cat]

A friend had a brake pipe fail on his Saab last week. It really should have been picked up at the MOT. He drove it home slowly to discover there were a few tell tale stains on the drive where he parks it up. All good again now. 

[tree monkey]

27 minutes ago, MtB said:

 

Brake pipe corrosion is a good example. I had a car fail on brake pipe corrosion but another MoT place passed it. Back in the day as a teenager it was commonplace for us to just take an MoT failed car to a different testing station rather than fix the supposed faults and get either a pass, or a completely different lists of fail points which might be easier to fix. On Minis, A40s Morris 1000s etc it was common to get fails for marginal stuff like body corrosion, wear in steering box or rack, corroded brake pipes etc and different examiner who take a different view. Anything which both MoT stations picked up was generally did need fixing.

 

Back in those days most MoT test stations used their inspections to feed work to their workshops, so it often felt like a fail was more likely if they were short of work than if they were busy. 

To be fair this was an mot fail, the rust was fairly substantial but the chap knew me and also knew the car was due to be scrapped, I just needed a few more months of motoring out of it.

As to the rest of what you said, yes seen that and done the "get another opinion" thing

[Tim Lewis]

25 minutes ago, Tonka said:

Used to know a garage where the Mot tester used a micrometer when checking the car

By coincidence I am presently in MOT test station waiting for my car to be done, on the wall:

 

 

[David Mack]

If boat surveyors used the finger and thumb test to see if the hull gives way, then all those folks with 3.9mm thick hulls would have nothing to worry about!