Very interested question?

[Mustang]

Lady Walks Into a Bar... And Gets Her Hair Done: Salons Push Later Hours With DJs, More Drinks; A Visit From the Feds

SUMMARY: To gain an edge on the competition, some beauty salons and spas areserving alcohol. The result is a more relaxed atmosphere and a reported
increase in revenues. But because alcohol laws are particularly restrictive,
some of these businesses are encountering challenges with licensing and
liability, and insurance coverage.

The complications come from all angles. Liquor licenses must be obtained for
even one-time special events. The businesses must also change insurance
policies to protect themselves from liability involved when inebriated
customers drive. Also they must be vigilant about serving alcohol to only
those of legal age.

Not all business owners and customers think this is a good idea. Some feel the
additional social atmosphere is loud and distracting. Others have concerns
about people hanging out and drinking too much.

QUESTIONS:
1.) Why are beauty salons and spas choosing to serve alcohol? How common is
this movement?

2.) What are the revenues involved and what are the required expenses?

3.) What are the legal issues involved? From a legal perspective, what must
management consider when serving alcohol? What extra tasks must management
perform?

4.) What are the differences, both legal and otherwise, between opening a bar
in a business and serving alcohol on a complimentary basis?

[taiarain]

1.) Why are beauty salons and spas choosing to serve alcohol? How common is
this movement?

Alcohol can relax the customers and encourage them to spend more. I don't know how common it is.

2.) What are the revenues involved and what are the required expenses?

Additional expenses would be increased insurance costs, liquor costs, training and additional licensing. Additional revenues would come from mark-ups on the liquor and additional services purchased from the clientele.

3.) What are the legal issues involved? From a legal perspective, what must
management consider when serving alcohol? What extra tasks must management
perform?

That's pretty much covered by the answer to #2.

[matt13]

If you offer the alcohol, you are liable if they are in an accident on the way home. If you serve more than a certain amount of people, you must have a person with an OLCC card serve it. You must be aware, that someone with one drink, can be charged with impaired driving. It depends on the weight, size, tolerance, etc. I have heard of people being charged with a DUI, not going over the limit, for the state, because thier driving was effected none the less. You must also have a license to serve the alcohol, period.

[Solicitors Mortgages]

Interesting concept, I would be more apt to choose a business if they just offered endless coffe or tea. (with biscuits of course)
Not the type where you feel uncomfortable helping yourself, but where they just keep bringing it to you.

regards
James.

[taiarain]

Originally Posted by matt13

If you offer the alcohol, you are liable if they are in an accident on the way home.

Where is this at? If this were true, would it not mean that every bar where someone has a drink is liable for accidents afterward?

[_Chris]

Bars are liable for intoxicated people leaving and then getting in an accident or dying. Both the server and the actual business would be in huge trouble. If you drink too much they are supposed to call a cab for you to make sure you arrive home safely.

[lakedaemon]

Definitely true in the UK, though it is hard to prove. That's why not many pubs are prosecuted but most respectable places that serve alcohol will not serve someone who is obviously "Drunk", because they are liable for some of the effects of what happens when patrons leave their establishments. The particluar problem in this case is attributing the amount of blame a bar might have on serving alcohol, especially as most people who binge drink will visit many places during a night out.

[taiarain]

Thanks, lake. I'm in the US and attempts to legislate responsibility for the actions of patrons usually fail, though many drinking establishments do impose limits on patrons to avoid being the target of a successful test case.

[lakedaemon]

The difficulties involved with apportioning blame on drinking establishments is compounded by the blame to the drinker. Yes, there should be a duty of an establishment to make sure patrons drink safely within their establishments but the actions of patrons once they leave are still their own.

For example, if a man goes to the pub and drinks heavily and then goes home and drunkenly beats up his wife, I don't think anyone would blame the drinking establishment for that. The blame of his state and his mind are his own.

Unfortunately, alcohol only exacerbates what is already there. If a person is naturally violent then drinking is only going to make it more likely that that person is going to be violent.