|
|
Restaurant
Star Ratings:
System
Not Fair Claim
|
Scores of
restaurants, pubs and take-aways in Norwich have been found breaching
food hygiene standards since the results of council spot-checks were
made available to the public a year ago.
It was
revealed that during the past 12 months standards at 69 kitchens
across the city were so poor that they received the lowest possible
rating following hygiene inspections.
However,
owners at those firms given a zero out of five rating by Norwich City
Council hit out at the checks, labelling them "unfair".
Last June, the
authority became one of the first in the country to publish the
results of its food hygiene inspections online. Since then, of the
426 kitchens inspected, 16 per cent received a zero rating and only
19 (four per cent) the maximum five stars.
The premises
given a zero rating include an old people's home, a critically
acclaimed restaurant and several Norwich branches of major national chains.
Problems
discovered include uncovered raw meat being stored above fresh food,
dirty uniforms being worn by staff, worn out equipment, poor cleaning
methods and out of date food.
In some, staff
were found to have been given little or no food hygiene training and
at many food recording regulations were not being adhered to.
However, the
checks, which are carried out unannounced every 18 months, have come
under fire for punishing firms over issues such as improper recording
methods, rather than poor hygiene, and not allowing them the chance
to clear their names. Although firms with breaches often receive
follow-up checks, the results of these are not published online.
Henry Watt,
the owner of the Mad Moose, which received a zero rating when the
tests were first publicised last summer, said: "We received a
zero rating because we had a new chef who did not know where all the
forms are. The inspectors have since returned and given us the all
clear. The problem is that the original rating stays on the website
for all to see.
"We have
two AA stars and you don't get that by being rubbish at your job or
unclean. I think that if they give out a zero rating you should be
given another chance and revisited in six months with the results of
that also published online."
The council
said it was "happy" with the general standard of hygiene in
the city's eateries. It also defended the inspections saying that its
methods are now being studied by the Food Standards Agency with a
view to being adopted nationally.
A score of 41
or over receives 0 stars
|
Stars |
Score |
|
Ali Tandoori |
2 |
|
|
Bengal Spice |
2 |
|
|
Bombay |
0 |
(150) |
|
City Spice |
0 |
(165) |
|
Curry To Go |
0 |
(135) |
|
Lucky Tandoori |
0 |
|
|
Nazma |
0 |
(155) |
|
Prince of India |
0 |
(155) |
|
Quality Indian |
3 |
(25) |
|
Raj Villa |
0 |
(155) |
|
Ripa Tandoori |
0 |
(155) |
|
Shah Zahan |
2 |
|
|
Saffron |
0 |
(155) |
|
Taj Mahal |
2 |
|
|
