Can you ban people from a shop or workplace for covering their face?

[scania 10]

No, I just keep quoting you. It's pretty funny to be honest. You said it, everyone can see you said, and everyone knows you're wrong.

 

Nope, I didn't. It was you.

At least that pretty clear. And everyone knows that.

 

Whilst you are ringing people up on Monday asking them who pays their gas and electricity bills, ask them to read the posts. See what they say.

It may just keep them on the phone long enough to get your commission.

 

I say this, as under your logic and mannerisms, you must be one of those annoying callers who ring just as normal decent folk are tucking into their tea, trying to watch Eggheads.

[Cyclone 10]

You did. I keep quoting you saying it. They're your words.

 

Trying again with the very poor effort at ad hom? You're going to have to work harder, I don't work in a call centre.

 

I can assure you that a shopkeeper can refuse to sell to anyone, for whatever reason he/she deems fit

Any shop can refuse to serve anyone.

No shop in the UK is obliged to serve anyone. If somebody did get refused for any reason, it would be a customer service issue, not a legal issue.

 

I'm starting to feel bad about this. It's like making fun of my four year old nephew, it's just not fair.

[scania 10]

You did. I keep quoting you saying it. They're your words.

 

Trying again with the very poor effort at ad hom? You're going to have to work harder, I don't work in a call centre.

 

 

 

I'm starting to feel bad about this. It's like making fun of my four year old nephew, it's just not fair.

 

Don't feel bad. I don't. I thought it was an excellent ad hom. I'm still laughing each time I read it. I'm sure your not a call centre worker, but just as annoying as one. But what would I know? A lowly trade counter guy like me?

 

You are funny though, in an irritable child with ADHD kinda way.

[mort 10]

The bickering ceases now or I will suspend accounts. If you have an issue with being adult then I suggest you refrain from posting.

[scania 10]

The bickering ceases now or I will suspend accounts. If you have an issue with being adult then I suggest you refrain from posting.

 

I apologise for my childish posts. The reasons for these is that I have been accused of racist comments that I never made. The comments that I did make have been taken out of context by a couple of posters, and after several attempts to rebuke this, my calls were falling on deaf ears. I have no wish to see myself or others banned for these reasons, but I do feel that using a racist angle against a poster is pretty low, especially in this current climate.

[Cyclone 10]

Nobody has accused you of being racist, you've been accused of not understanding the equalities act.

And your posts were not in the slightest taken out of context. You kept saying that people could be refused for any reason, despite protected characteristics and the equalities act 2010 being mentioned explicitly as reasons that a customer cannot be refused.

[scania 10]

Nobody has accused you of being racist, you've been accused of not understanding the equalities act.

And your posts were not in the slightest taken out of context. You kept saying that people could be refused for any reason, despite protected characteristics and the equalities act 2010 being mentioned explicitly as reasons that a customer cannot be refused.

 

Don't really want to keep going over old ground, but you are once again missing the point. You keep banging on about the Equalities Act, but let say for example, a deaf Chinese person went into a shop and was rude and abrupt to the staff, and ultimately refused service due to his actions. At a later date, they claim on the act because in their mind they weren't being obnoxious, although a staff member claimed they were.

Where does the Act fit in there? Does is fall in favour of the claimant or bolster the actions of the staff member?

In your mind it's black and white, but after twenty odd years in retail, I say different.

[Andy76 10]

Don't really want to keep going over old ground, but you are once again missing the point. You keep banging on about the Equalities Act, but let say for example, a deaf Chinese person went into a shop and was rude and abrupt to the staff, and ultimately refused service due to his actions. At a later date, they claim on the act because in their mind they weren't being obnoxious, although a staff member claimed they were.

Where does the Act fit in there? Does is fall in favour of the claimant or bolster the actions of the staff member?

In your mind it's black and white, but after twenty odd years in retail, I say different.

 

It would be down to the customer to prove that they were discriminated against because they were Chinese and/or deaf.

 

Its fine to refuse to serve a rude customer so provided the evidence points to the reason for refusal of service being rudeness and not race/disability then theres no case to answer under the act.

[Orzel 10]

Interesting link here

You can find this guy video on youtube.

[scania 10]

It would be down to the customer to prove that they were discriminated against because they were Chinese and/or deaf.

 

Its fine to refuse to serve a rude customer so provided the evidence points to the reason for refusal of service being rudeness and not race/disability then theres no case to answer under the act.

 

You are right. I did say earlier in the thread that the discrimination was in the eye of the beholder, which caused a few posters to spit their dummies out and cry towards the act. My reasons for arguing against the act were based on a shopkeeper or sales assistant's right to refuse to serve someone for any reason. Sadly the word "Any" was the catalyst for mayhem and rights rights and even more rights.

The funny thing was, I never even mentioned the customer may be in a minority, however that's how small minded some people are.

 

---------- Post added 30-11-2015 at 14:43 ----------

 

Interesting link here

You can find this guy video on youtube.

 

That wouldn't have happened here. The store owner would have been eaten alive by the British courts!

[Andy76 10]

You are right. I did say earlier in the thread that the discrimination was in the eye of the beholder, which caused a few posters to spit their dummies out and cry towards the act. My reasons for arguing against the act were based on a shopkeeper or sales assistant's right to refuse to serve someone for any reason. Sadly the word "Any" was the catalyst for mayhem and rights rights and even more rights.

The funny thing was, I never even mentioned the customer may be in a minority, however that's how small minded some people are.

 

The issue with the equalities act is that while businesses can refuse service for any (non protected) reason it has to be consistent.

 

So if I'm effing and jeffing at a barman because he's not poured my pint right and get hoofed out thats fine, but if the black guy next to me is doing the same and gets served then thats the basis of a case that the behaviour wasn't why i was removed but that fact i'm white.

[Cyclone 10]

Don't really want to keep going over old ground, but you are once again missing the point. You keep banging on about the Equalities Act, but let say for example, a deaf Chinese person went into a shop and was rude and abrupt to the staff, and ultimately refused service due to his actions. At a later date, they claim on the act because in their mind they weren't being obnoxious, although a staff member claimed they were.

Where does the Act fit in there? Does is fall in favour of the claimant or bolster the actions of the staff member?

In your mind it's black and white, but after twenty odd years in retail, I say different.

 

That's what's known as a strawman.

 

Nobody ever denied that you could refuse service to rude people, or for many other reasons.

 

You however claimed that you could deny service for any reason. Something we all know not to be true.

 

---------- Post added 30-11-2015 at 15:28 ----------

 

The funny thing was, I never even mentioned the customer may be in a minority, however that's how small minded some people are.

 

That was the topic being discussed at the time.

 

---------- Post added 30-11-2015 at 15:29 ----------

 

Certain forms of discrimination are not allowed, so in many of your examples yes you would be breaking the law.

 

This was post #61.

 

And here is your post #64

 

Any shop can refuse to serve anyone. All this discrimination stuff is in the eye of the beholden.

 

Perhaps you should have actually read the thread before posting.

 

---------- Post added 30-11-2015 at 15:31 ----------

 

I'm pretty sure you have the right to refuse service to anyone without giving any reason. So it doesn't matter if someone is gay, black, vegetarian, wearing a burqa, got a wooden leg, looks at you funny, or you just can't be arsed. You're not breaking any law by refusing to serve people.

 

And previously Sidla had made exactly the same claims. Although he quietly stopped posting after the equalities act was explained.

Edited November 30, 2015 by Cyclone