Named and shamed: Worcester's bad-hygiene food spots

Worcester News: Named and shamed: Worcester's bad-hygiene food spots Named and shamed: Worcester's bad-hygiene food spots

THE best and worst restaurants, cafes, takeaways and pubs for hygiene across Worcester can be revealed.

Assessors have spent the last two years rating more than 400 eating establishments across the city – and say they will keep the pressure on to drive up standards.

While the majority of places have been awarded the gold star mark of five out of five, nine premises have a rating of just one, which is one step away from a zero and possible court action.

Bosses say they are determined to keep the public safe and have warned poor performers they will not shy away from prosecutions if standards decline to below acceptable levels.

Data from 419 eateries, which also includes hotels, schools, shops and supermarkets which serve food, show 92 per cent earned four or five stars, which means good or very good.

The premises graded one star, meaning major improvement was necessary were:

  • The Cavalier Tavern in St George’s Lane
  • Chicks at The Cross
  • Mobile unit Hot Potato in Astwood Road
  • Saint John’s Chippy
  • Spice Bazaar in Wyld’s Lane
  • Sun Wah in Orchard Street
  • Thai Crystal in Sidbury
  • The Sandwich Shop in St John’s
  • Worcester Halal Meat in Lowesmoor

Since its inspection Spice Bazaar has changed ownership and is now called Watan Supermarket.

Helen Cameron, senior environmental health officer for food safety in Worcester, appeared at a meeting of the licensing committee to discuss the findings.

She said: “We’ve got plenty of sanctions available, which includes prosecution – if we found a really bad business we would visit them every day if necessary to drive up standards.

“But generally standards are very high, and we’ve found the vast majority are achieving four or five. Nationally, Worcester city comes out very well.”

Some premises are already taking action to improve. Thai Crystal, which is now called Thai Time, asked for a follow-up inspection, which will take place in the coming weeks.

Ms Cameron said it was expected to have made considerable improvements. She also said Saint John’s Chippy, which was graded in May, was examined again last month and is expected to be handed a higher rating imminently.

  • If you are one of the restaurants mentioned and disagree with the ratings, contact the newsdesk on 01904 742244 or e-mail news@worcesternews.co.uk
  • How did your nearest eatery do? To see the results, visit ratings.food.gov.uk

FACTFILE

  • The new Food Rating Hygiene Scheme launched in 2011 and replaces the old scores on the doors system
  • Government inspectors working in conjunction with the city council turn up unannounced at a food premise and inspect it for cleanliness
  • They examine everything from cleaning of surfaces to food preparation areas, storage space, building condition and cooking regimes
  • The results are published on the internet and each premise gets a certificate showing a rating of one to five, although they do not have to display it
  • Zero means “urgent improvement” is required, one “major improvement”, two means “improvement is necessary”, three is “satisfactory”, while four or five is “good” or “very good”
  • Those graded zero receive an immediate repeat visit in the days following the first inspection, and are told what they need to do to achieve one star
  • Any establishment can be closed temporarily if they are deemed an “immediate risk to public health” and prosecuted
  • Premises have 14 days to appeal against any grade and can also request a follow-up inspection, regardless of how many stars they have
  • Worcestershire Regulatory Services say virtually all eating establishments in Worcester have now had at least one visit since the new scheme launched

click2find

About cookies

We want you to enjoy your visit to our website. That's why we use cookies to enhance your experience. By staying on our website you agree to our use of cookies. Find out more about the cookies we use.

I agree