A Campbell River restaurant, the SoCall Restaurant & Lounge, has been fined $7,000 after serving a minor, after contravening section 77 of the Liquor Control and Licensing Regulation Act.
The Liquor and Cannabis Regulation Branch says a series of inspections were conducted in Campbell River. Two inspectors used the services of a minor employed under the Minors as Agents Program to test whether businesses were compliant with the Liquor Control and Licensing Act, which prohibits the sale of alcohol to a minor.
One of the inspectors entered the restaurant shortly after 3:30 p.m. and was seated by a server. Shortly after, the minor agent, confirmed to be 18 through government ID, entered and was seated behind the inspector.
The minor ordered a Corona, which the server returned and placed in front of the minor. The minor left the premises, with the inspector remaining. The inspector spoke with the manager, informing them that a minor had been served a beer. The inspector then paid for the beer and obtained a receipt.
The date of the hearing was April 14, with a decision made on May 5.
The SoCal Restaurant & Lounge did not dispute the events and seeks to establish that it otherwise acted with due diligence, calling it an isolated event.
According to the licensee's representative, "the contravention was a momentary lapse, which had not occurred in her previous 25 years in the food service industry."
The branch had only one witness, the inspector, who testified she had conducted 450 inspections since joining in May 2024. In her testimony, the agent said she never heard the server ask the minor for identification. She also testified that when she told the server she wanted to talk to their manager, she overheard the server say they thought the minor was 19 years of age.
Linda Ramos, the owner of the SoCal Restaurant & Lounge, testified that despite the occurrence, it is not how he facility is operated, which closes after 9 p.m. because of the risk of patrons getting intoxicated, and that it serves mostly seniors and young families. Ramos also testified that they are strict when it comes to responsible alcohol service, once kicking out a women who allowed her 14-year-old son to sip her beer. The business, she says, has also received poor reviews online for asking for identification and refusing service when it is not shown.
Ramos also said she wasn't sure why the server was distracted, but mentioned the establishment was busy before the inspection. She also said the licensee's policy manual has been in force since 2018.
"It provides that staff will ask for ID from anyone who appears to be under 30 years of age. There is a front-of-house training quiz that sets out some of the markers for assessing age. The quiz is given to new staff when they start, even if they have prior experience. There is a reminder on the POS system which sets out the date when a patron turns 19. It is there as a reminder for the servers. First, staff should ask for ID from anyone who appears to be under 30 years of age. Next, they can use the POS system reminder when looking at the ID that is produced. There are daily pre-shift meetings for staff and weekly manager meetings," the report's summary on the policy manual reads.
The server also testified. She said she had worked there for six years as a server, sometimes worked as a manager and trained staff. She has been a staff supervisor for the past three years. She said the agent was seated by another server. She then spoke to the minor and got him a Corona. She said she feels sick about not asking for ID and has had no such issues before in her 25-year career. The server said she was never shy about asking for ID and was not distracted. She thought the minor agent was over 19 at the time.
According to the act, a first offence like serving a minor a beer can result in a fine of $7,000 to $11,000 or a seven to 11-day licence suspension.
The branch was satisfied with the staff's original training and policies on preventing the sale of liquor to minors. However, the branch was not happy with the facility's due diligence, such as a lack of incident logbooks, formal meetings (the facility does have pre-shift meetings, but they lack a formal agenda), and a lack of refresher training on policies.
"In view of the lack of evidence about follow-up training on the licensee’s policies or a means of conducting discussions among staff about service issues that may occur from time to time, I am not satisfied that the licensee has satisfied the second test of due diligence. For this reason, the defence of due diligence fails to apply," said the general manager's delegate, Paul Devine.
The $7,000 penalty is the minimum given.
About six or seven facilities in Campbell River were inspected that day, with two other establishments failing to ask a minor for ID. The locations were chosen at random.
