In message , at
20:41:09 on Thu, 22 Mar 2012, Arthur Figgis
remarked:
All the toilets are 30p (beneath the pub and at the southern end of the
mezzanine), and I don't understand how the Prezzo bar complies with the
law in this respect. The pub has its own free toilets on both floors.

What law?

There are lots stations with catering and only paid-for bogs, and
others with catering and no bogs at all. I looked this up with regard
to a then-new coffee place on West Croydon station, and it seemed that
it is myth that toilets have to be provided where there is food and
drink on sale, however local authorities can choose to require them.

I'm fairly sure there's a law that says you must provide free toilets if
you serve alcohol - and this has been floated as the reason why St
Pancras toilets are free (the champagne bar etc).

However I'm happy to revert to a legal newsgroup to discuss if this is
an urban legend.
--
Roland Perry

On Thu, 22 Mar 2012 21:15:06 +0000, Roland Perry
wrote:

In message , at
20:41:09 on Thu, 22 Mar 2012, Arthur Figgis
remarked:
All the toilets are 30p (beneath the pub and at the southern end of the
mezzanine), and I don't understand how the Prezzo bar complies with the
law in this respect. The pub has its own free toilets on both floors.

What law?

There are lots stations with catering and only paid-for bogs, and
others with catering and no bogs at all. I looked this up with regard
to a then-new coffee place on West Croydon station, and it seemed that
it is myth that toilets have to be provided where there is food and
drink on sale, however local authorities can choose to require them.

I'm fairly sure there's a law that says you must provide free toilets if
you serve alcohol - and this has been floated as the reason why St
Pancras toilets are free (the champagne bar etc).

Maybe a standard planning requirement rather than something actually
written into statute ? e.g. :-
"The City Council has adopted a standard for the provision of sanitary
accommodation in places to which the public resort which are either:
(i) New premises, or
(ii) premises undergoing conversion or alteration. "
[http://www.canterbury.gov.uk/authori....pdfCanterbury
City Council - Provision of toilets in commercial premises open to the
public]

While the provision of toilets for staff has a legal reference, those
for the public do not.
However I'm happy to revert to a legal newsgroup to discuss if this is
an urban legend.

"Charles Ellson" wrote

Maybe a standard planning requirement

or a standard licensing requirement which could be added if the licensee
wanted a change in the licence, e.g. to allow for longer opening hours. The
Licensing Act applies if the premises serve alcohol or 'late night
refreshments' after, IIRC, 11 pm, even if they don't sell alcohol.

Peter

In article ,
(Peter Masson) wrote:

"Charles Ellson" wrote

Maybe a standard planning requirement

or a standard licensing requirement which could be added if the
licensee wanted a change in the licence, e.g. to allow for longer
opening hours. The Licensing Act applies if the premises serve
alcohol or 'late night refreshments' after, IIRC, 11 pm, even if they
don't sell alcohol.

You are correct. A licence is required for late night refreshments after
23:00.

--
Colin Rosenstiel

Once upon a time, Peter Masson wrote:
"Charles Ellson" wrote

Maybe a standard planning requirement

or a standard licensing requirement which could be added if the
licensee wanted a change in the licence, e.g. to allow for longer
opening hours. The Licensing Act applies if the premises serve alcohol
or 'late night refreshments' after, IIRC, 11 pm, even if they don't
sell alcohol.

Plus only a complete lunatic (or a particularly twisted sadist) would
design anywhere that sold alcohol for consumption on the premises
without toilets - the consequences for the surrounding area would be
horrific.

TBH I don't see why people object to pay bogs, it's not as if 30p is
exactly going to break anyone's bank and paid-for loos tend to be vastly
cleaner and better maintained, and rather less likely to be occupied by
undesirables, than free ones. Free loos within paid areas (as in
trackside or in pubs, beyond the barriers in cinemas, etc) make sense.
But public ones are just nicer when there's a fee - gives the owners
both a revenue stream and an incentive to keep things civilised.

--
- The Iron Jelloid

On Fri, 23 Mar 2012 02:35:40 +0000, The Iron Jelloid
wrote:

Once upon a time, Peter Masson wrote:
"Charles Ellson" wrote

Maybe a standard planning requirement

or a standard licensing requirement which could be added if the
licensee wanted a change in the licence, e.g. to allow for longer
opening hours. The Licensing Act applies if the premises serve alcohol
or 'late night refreshments' after, IIRC, 11 pm, even if they don't
sell alcohol.

ICBW but I don't think licensing authorities have as much freedom to
impose non-statutary requirements as they used to.

Plus only a complete lunatic (or a particularly twisted sadist) would
design anywhere that sold alcohol for consumption on the premises
without toilets - the consequences for the surrounding area would be
horrific.

Such consequences being among standard matters used to object to a
licence even when there are sufficient bogs.

TBH I don't see why people object to pay bogs, it's not as if 30p is
exactly going to break anyone's bank and paid-for loos tend to be vastly
cleaner and better maintained, and rather less likely to be occupied by
undesirables, than free ones. Free loos within paid areas (as in
trackside or in pubs, beyond the barriers in cinemas, etc) make sense.
But public ones are just nicer when there's a fee - gives the owners
both a revenue stream and an incentive to keep things civilised.

In message , at 02:35:40 on Fri,
23 Mar 2012, The Iron Jelloid
remarked:
TBH I don't see why people object to pay bogs, it's not as if 30p is
exactly going to break anyone's bank

It's whether you have the 30p on you or not (ie no use if all you have
is a 50p). Although the loos at Kings Cross have change machines
outside, so that's OK until they break.

One of the two turnstyles had broken already. "Sorry for the
inconvenience" a sign on it quipped.
--
Roland Perry

On Fri, 23 Mar 2012 07:29:40 +0000, Roland Perry wrote:
In message , at 02:35:40 on Fri,
23 Mar 2012, The Iron Jelloid
remarked:
TBH I don't see why people object to pay bogs, it's not as if 30p is
exactly going to break anyone's bank

It's whether you have the 30p on you or not (ie no use if all you have
is a 50p). Although the loos at Kings Cross have change machines
outside, so that's OK until they break.

It's a bit of a shame you can't use your Oyster card.

In message , at 12:04:01 on
Fri, 23 Mar 2012, David Walters remarked:
TBH I don't see why people object to pay bogs, it's not as if 30p is
exactly going to break anyone's bank

It's whether you have the 30p on you or not (ie no use if all you have
is a 50p). Although the loos at Kings Cross have change machines
outside, so that's OK until they break.

It's a bit of a shame you can't use your Oyster card.

Because of banking regulations that would probably only be allowed if
the toilets were operated by TfL. However, they could accept "Paywave"
credit cards.

In the future, it might be worth trying to get the law
changed/clarified, to see if stored credit on ITSO cards (eg issued by
FCC or EC) could be used, as buying from Network Rail rather than the
ToCs is almost the same thing. And that would leave the way open for
"free facilities" for season ticket holders and so on.
--
Roland Perry

"Roland Perry" schreef

: It's whether you have the 30p on you or not (ie no use if all you have
: is a 50p). Although the loos at Kings Cross have change machines
: outside, so that's OK until they break.
:
: One of the two turnstyles had broken already. "Sorry for the
: inconvenience" a sign on it quipped.

Have the yellow "Warning - Slippery Floor" cones appeared yet ?

Colin Youngs
Brussels