Bartender Summary:

1.      Bartender 1:  Caucasian female, short dark hair, tattoos on arms

2.      Bartender 2:  Caucasian male, short hair, glasses

The agent approached the bar top and was greeted by Bartender 1 within one minute.  Bartender 1 was not friendly, did not smile, and asked the agent and associate what we would like to drink in a very hurried manner.  The agent and associate ordered two drinks and Bartender 1 quickly fulfilled the drink order and then stated the amount owed by memory.  The agent provided Bartender 1 with a cash bill, and Bartender 1 moved to the cash register and was seen entering in the amount stated and then Bartender 1 returned back to the agent with the correct amount of change.  Each interaction with Bartender 1 went similarly, and each time she seemed less and less friendly. 

Each time, Bartender 1 did record the transactions into the cash register.  Two drinks were ordered through Bartender 2, and he was quiet but seemed friendlier than Bartender 1.  Bartender 2 handled the transactions similar to Bartender 1, in that he would deliver the drinks; verbally state the amount owed, and then register the cash provided into the cash register. 

The agent did observe a few questionable interactions with patrons that the bartenders apparently knew on a personal level. 

·        At 11:35pm the agent observed two male patrons at the bar top get served two beers by Bartender 1, and the agent did not see Bartender 1 collect any cash from these patrons.  Bartender 1 communicated with these patrons on a very familiar level and seemed to know them on a personal basis.  No transaction was made.

·        Another group of patrons, a larger group of six or more people, appeared to be well known by both bartenders.  The agent observed multiple instances in which this group of patrons was served drinks but the agent did not observe these drinks recorded into the cash register.  Moreover, the agent did notice rather large tips being provided to the bartenders from this group of patrons – just not register transactions. 

This same large group of patrons caused quite a spectacle within the establishment, as they were extremely intoxicated. 

At one point, a male patron from that group removed his shirt and proceeded to dance around the establishment, finally ending up rolling around shirtless on one of the pool tables.  This male patron continued to be served alcohol, and was seen posing for pictures with many of his friends. 

TITLE 4, CHAPTER 3

4-244. Unlawful acts

14. For a licensee or other person to serve, sell or furnish spirituous liquor to a disorderly or obviously intoxicated person, or for a licensee or employee of the licensee to allow or permit a disorderly or obviously intoxicated person to come into or remain on or about the premises, except that a licensee or an employee of the licensee may allow an obviously intoxicated person to remain on the premises for a period of time of not to exceed thirty minutes after the state of obvious intoxication is known or should be known to the licensee in order that a nonintoxicated person may transport the obviously intoxicated person from the premises. For purposes of this section, "obviously intoxicated" means inebriated to the extent that a person's physical faculties are substantially impaired and the impairment is shown by significantly uncoordinated physical action or significant physical dysfunction that would have been obvious to a reasonable person.

Bartender 2 was observed smoking cigarettes outside the front entrance on a few occasions, and he was not seen washing his hands after smoking at any time.    

Michael Zenner - CEO  
Eye Spy Spotter Services Inc.
eyespyspotter.com
bartheft.com  (blog)
Hospitality Checkpoint PLLC
PI Lic. 1597616
hospitalitycheckpoint.com
liquorassessment.com
PO BOX 995 Gilbert AZ 85299
Office: 480-777-7056
Toll Free: 800-880-0811

© Eye Spy Spotter Services Inc. 2010

Bartender Addendum:

Two small incidences happened during the agents visit to the Red Bar that may be worth mentioning. 

The outside bouncer came in to the bar complaining to Xxxxx about not feeling well.  I believe he said he had a sore throat.  Xxxxx whipped up a concoction for him in a small shot type of glass.  He was using simple ingredients in which did not make the agent suspicious, until the agent overheard Xxxxx telling the bouncer that there was some  alcohol in the drink.  Xxxxx did not ring this drink into the computer in any way, not even under a comp tab.  This is giving away alcohol, as well as the bouncer having alcohol on the job.

ADLLC VIOLATION

TITLE 4, CHAPTER 3
4-244. Unlawful acts
12. For a licensee, when engaged in waiting on or serving customers, to consume spirituous liquor or for a licensee or on-duty employee to be on or about the licensed premises while in an intoxicated or disorderly condition.

The second incident happened at 11:18pm.  A small group of people came up to the bar, and seemed to be familiar with the bartenders.  They placed an order with the bartender for three drinks.  Xxxxx did not accept cash, did not take a room key and did not take any form of payment.  Xxxxx went to the register and typed a few things in, however he was servicing multiple guests at this time, and could have been entering in the other orders.  The agent did not have a clear view of the screen to see what he specifically was inputting.  The patron next to the agent spilled a drink, breaking the glass, and needed to order a new one.  This drink the guest paid cash for; this order was put in to the POS where it is unclear if the other was ever actually entered.

The third incident happened at 11:25pm.  Two men approached the bar; they were familiar with the bartenders, and had a tab open using an AmXxxxxan Express Credit card.  They ordered one more round of drinks and then asked to close out the tab.  While Bartender 2 went to grab the credit card for the tab, and the receipt, Xxxxx took a minute and introduced himself to the guests.  Bartender 2 handed the gentleman his credit card and receipt, and said “Xxxxx, we’ll take care of this one for you; because we’re silly like that.”  Xxxxx said ok, and then grabbed a $10 bill and threw it on the table for tip.  Bartender 2 threw it back.  They settled on four one dollar bills.  The agent did not see either bartender call a manager over to comp a check. 

Michael Zenner - CEO  
         
Eye Spy Spotter Services Inc.
eyespyspotter.com
bartheft.com  (blog)
Hospitality Checkpoint PLLC
PI Lic. 1597616
hospitalitycheckpoint.com
liquorassessment.com
PO BOX 995 Gilbert AZ 85299
Office: 480-777-7056
Toll Free: 800-880-0811

© Eye Spy Spotter Services Inc. 2010

Bartender Summary:

Note:  Agent was told by a member of security that the establishment has seven bars.  During the two hour period, Agent was only able to visit five of the seven bars.  The following evaluations have been separated by bar.  Please note the general description of the bar as a reference.

Bar 1:  Xxxxxxxxxxxx of the pool tables

• Bartender A:  Xxxxx female, approximately 5’5” tall, thin build, long, straight, highlighted hair (Xxxxx on Xxxxx)

• Bartender B:  Xxxxx female, approximately 5’4” tall, stocky build, very curly Xxxxx hair

Name on Agent’s receipt reads “Xxxxx”

Agent and associates approached Bar 1 at 10:50PM.  The bar was observed to be very busy in an objective viewpoint.  Agent was requested to report speed/politeness of staff. Bartender A made eye contact with us within two minutes.  Bartender A elicited a drink order from the Agent over the din. Service was reported to be fast.  Bartender A did not make any connection with the Agent. Service is reported to be impolite.

Bartender A poured a solid 6-count highball.  Agent is not privy to the facilities standardized official pour count; therefore, will as a general rule, default to the national  standard highball contains about 1.5-ounces of liquor(4-count = 1.5 oz.). From this 4 count standard a 6-count highball is objectively flagged as an over pour. 

Bartender A served the drinks, sans beverage napkins (Agent cannot attest if this is a standard at this location or not, but reports it as such), and then asked Agent if they would like to start a tab or pay cash.  Agent handed over a credit card and asked Bartender A to go ahead and close it out.  Bartender A moved to the POS system. Agent noted Bartender A accounted for all drinks ordered accurately.

Bartender B also pours a 6-count highball. 

Bartender B was observed handling cash ethically, and counting change back accurately for guests.

Agent and associates sat at this bar for approximately 30 minutes observing operations.  At approximately 11PM, Bartender A was observed preparing three, pink-colored shots for customers at the end of the bar.  Bartender A personally consumed one of the alcohol shots. Agent did not observe manager approval. Bartender A failed to ring up the shots on the POS or account for the liquor order in any matter apparent to Agent.

At 11:15PM, Bartender A greeted two male patrons. It was objectively obvious to Agent that Bar A was acquainted with the patrons. The male patrons ordered 4 bottled beers, but Agent observed Bartender A charge for only two beers.  Agent audibly heard Bartender A state that the other two beers “are on me.” 

Bar 2:  Xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx of the pool tables, characterized by a Xxxxxxx xxxxxxxxxxxxx xxxxxxxxxxxxx

• Bartender C:  Xxxxx male, approximately 5’7” tall, with short, xxxx-xxxx hair under a ball cap; he has a goatee

• Bartender D:  Xxxxx female, approximately 5’8” tall, shoulder-length Xxxxx hair

Name on Agent’s receipt reads “Xxxxx”

Agent and associates took seats at Bar 2 at approximately 11:20PM.  This bar was observed to be very busy.  When we arrived, Bartender C was busy preparing approximately 15 shooters for a group of guests around the bar, while Bartender D took drink orders from the other guests around the bar. 

We waited approximately five minutes for service.

Bartender C waited on us as soon as he was available.  He was friendly and welcoming.  Agent would classify this as “polite” as instructed by management.

Drinks were prepared quickly and served without beverage napkins. 

Bartender C prepares highballs with a 6-count pour.  (4-count= 1.5 oz.) 

Bartender C offered to start a tab for us, but Agent instead presented a credit card and asked for the tab to be closed out.  Bartender C presented Agent with receipts. He did not have a pen when presenting bill. One was presented <1 minute later. 

Agent and associates sat at Bar 2 for approximately 50 minutes.  At approximately midnight, Agent observed as Bartender D prepared Rumplemintz shots for her bar guests.  Once prepared and served, Bartender D had two shots left over for herself and for another male employee behind the bar. The two consumed the shots and then continued working. Bartender A failed to ring up the shots on the POS or account for the liquor order in any matter apparent to Agent.

(Agent believed this man may have been a barback, but later he was observed answering a question for a bartender that seemed to be about the POS system.  Thus, he may have been the manager and therefore approved of the employee alcohol consumption.  He is a Xxxxx male, approximately 5’9” tall, with light Xxxxx hair under his ball cap.  His face was scruffy, but without full facial hair.) 

Bartender D also serves a solid 6-count highball.

Agent observed a plastic cup on the backbar filled with a dark Xxxxx liquid.  Agent did not see which bartender was drinking this drink and also cannot confirm that it was alcohol based.

Bar 3:  Second Floor, Left side when facing the rear of the building (larger than the bar on the right side)

• Bartender E:  Xxxxx male, approximately 5’7” tall; he has Xxxxx, wavy hair under a ball cap; his face was scruffy without the presence of full facial hair

Agent and associates approached Bar 3 at 12:15PM. Every stool at the bar was taken and there was a row of guests behind the bar stools waiting to be served.  Bartender E was working alone and was observed NOT to be “fast” as instructed to observe by management. 

On several occasions, Bartender E was observed to be objectively confused and stare at his liquor display for several minutes. 

Agent noted that Bartender E groups orders to ring in the POS. 

Agent waited for service at Bar 3 for 20 minutes without service or eye contact from Bartender E.  Due to time constraints and the number of bars still needing visits, Agent made a professional judgment call to move on without further observing Bartender E. 

Bar 4:  Second Level, Right side when facing the rear of the building

• Bartender F:  Xxxxx female, approximately 5’3” tall; she has long, thick, curly Xxxxx hair.

Name on Agent’s receipt reads “Xxxxx”

Bartender F proved to be skilled and efficient in service.  Agent navigated crowd to the bartop and received immediate eye contact and a friendly service from Bartender F.

Service was provided within 2 minutes.  Bartender F took our drink order at 12:40PM and fulfilled it promptly.  She moved to the POS and rang in the drink order.  She quoted a price, and Agent handed her a card with the instruction to close out the tab.  Bartender F closed out the card and handed Agent receipts to sign.

She pours a spot-on 5-count for highballs each and every time without deviation ever.

While seated at Bar 4, Agent observed Bartender F working with the man Agent had suspected was a barback.  This employee (a Xxxxx male, approximately 5’9” tall, with light Xxxxx hair under his ball cap) seemed to be answering a question for Bartender F about the POS system.  At this point, Agent was unsure of this man’s role in the establishment. 

Bar 5:  Smoking Bar, Top Floor

• Bartender G:  Xxxxx male, approximately 5’11” tall, clean shaven but scruffy, light Xxxxx hair under a ball cap

The smoking bar on the top floor was less busy than the other bars in the establishment.  Bartender G was neither fast nor slow. He was observed “polite” to some guests and obtuse to others.

Agent arrived at Bar 5 at approximately 1AM and sat for about 15 minutes.  At approximately 1:07, Agent observed Bartender G consume a shot of Dark Sambucca with a bar guest.  Agent did not observe manager approval. Bartender A failed to ring up the shots on the POS or account for the liquor order in any matter apparent to Agent.

Bartender G pours an inconsistent 5-count highball. Agent observed one rum and Coke observed was poured with a 7-count and served in a pint glass. 

Michael Zenner - CEO  
         
Eye Spy Spotter Services Inc.
eyespyspotter.com
bartheft.com  (blog)
Hospitality Checkpoint PLLC
PI Lic. 1597616
hospitalitycheckpoint.com
liquorassessment.com
PO BOX 995 Gilbert AZ 85299
Office: 480-777-7056
Toll Free: 800-880-0811

Bartender Summary:

• Bartender:  Xxxxx:  Xxxxx male; wavy, brown hair under baseball cap; short goatee; blue Polo

The agent sat at the bar and was greeted immediately by Xxxxx.  They placed a drink order (See food and beverage summary).  They were carded.  It was delivered on a bev nap.  They were offered a menu.  The bartender said, “My name is Xxxxx.  Let me know if you need anything.”  He went to the POS.

A new customer sat down around the same time as the agent, placed a draft order, was delivered it immediately, and Xxxxx went to the POS.

Xxxxx did a visual check on them about 6 minutes later.

A new customer that was obviously a regular or employee sat at the bar.  Xxxxx asked if they wanted a certain brand, poured a large draft, delivered it to them, and then went to the POS.  Xxxxx chatted with the customer a bit as he looked at the specials board.

At about 7:28PM, another regular sat at the bar soon after, and a large draft was also delivered to them.  Xxxxx did not go to the POS immediately.  He went to the other side of the bar, got cash to tab out another customer, and then went to the POS.

At about 7:30PM, one more regular joined the bar.  They were also delivered a large draft, and Xxxxx went to the POS. 

Xxxxx checked on the agent, and they placed an order (See food and beverage summary).  He went to the POS.  A side basket with silverware and napkins was delivered about a minute later. 

Xxxxx checked on the agent a couple of minutes after their food was delivered.  They made a request that was delivered immediately (See food and beverage summary). 

About 7 minutes later, Xxxxx asked, “How is everything?  Good?”  He checked on them again about 14 minutes later, offering another drink (See food and beverage summary).  He checked on them again about another 7 minutes after that. 

At about 7:54PM, Xxxxx delivered another draft to the first aforementioned regular, and did not go to the POS right away.  He took a food order from another customer, then went to the POS.

Another customer placed a food order.  Xxxxx went to the POS.  Their food was delivered about 15 minutes later.

At about 8:08PM, Xxxxx delivered a pint to the 2nd aforementioned regular, then went to the POS.  A few minutes later, Xxxxx asked the regular if they wanted something to eat, because the kitchen had made a mistake.

At about 8:21PM, the agent heard a server call out an order.  Xxxxx delivered a draft to her, then took cash to the POS.

The agent finished their plate.  Within 3 minutes, Xxxxx asked, “Can I get that out of your way?” and did, but did not take away the side basket.

A group of new customers sat at the bar and were carded.  Xxxxx poured a 3-count of a liquor for one of their cocktails, and delivered beer to the others, then went to the POS.  Another new customer sat down around the same time, was greeted as an obvious regular, delivered their drink, and Xxxxx went to the POS.

At about 8:27PM, a draft was delivered to the 3rd aforementioned regular, and Xxxxx did not go to the POS. 

The agent placed an order (See food and beverage summary), which was delivered right away. 

At about 8:46PM, Xxxxx delivered another draft to one of the regulars, and went to the POS.

When the agent requested their tab, payment was processed quickly, and the tab was correct.  Xxxxx said, “Thank you.  Have a good night.”

Michael Zenner - CEO  
         
Eye Spy Spotter Services Inc.
eyespyspotter.com
bartheft.com  (blog)
Hospitality Checkpoint PLLC
PI Lic. 1597616
hospitalitycheckpoint.com
liquorassessment.com
PO BOX 995 Gilbert AZ 85299
Office: 480-777-7056
Toll Free: 800-880-0811

Red Bar

1. Bartender 1: Xxxxx, Caucasian 5’6” tall, long blonde hair pulled back in to a side ponytail.  The bartender wore a black tank top and black pants

1. Bartender 2:  Xxxxx, Caucasian 5’11” tall, brown hair pulled back in to a ponytail.  He had long thick sideburns.  He wore a black t-shirt and black pants.  He was identified by customers as Xxxxx.

The agent approached the bar and was quickly greeted by Xxxxx.  Xxxxx was friendly smiled at the agent and asked if he would like to place an order.  The agent indicated that he needed a few moments to decide, and look at the menu. 

Xxxxx patiently waited while he served other guests, and leaned on the back counter between guests. 

When the agent did decide on a drink, Xxxxx asked if the agent had a liquor preference.  Once the drink order was complete, Xxxxx turned and placed the drink order in to the computer.  When the agent requested to start a tab, Xxxxx requested a credit card to start a tab.  Xxxxx placed the credit card in a small glass to the left of the left POS. 

The agent observed Xxxxx handing receipts to every customer who paid with cash.  The tip from the customer would go in a clear plastic cylinder that was on top of the left POS leaning on a small structural wall that separated the bar back in half.

Xxxxx seemed to be enjoying himself at work that evening.  He would make small talk with the guests as well as with Bartender 2.  A happy bartender always seems to make for happy guests.  There was a bit of casualness about the way the two bartenders interacted and joked with each other.

When the cocktail servers would place orders, a receipt would print out to the bartenders POS.  Instead of placing the chit with the drinks made, and handing both the receipt and the drink to the server, every chit was thrown away after the order was read.  The cocktail waitresses never received this piece of paper verifying their drink orders. This should be a required practice in case verification is ever needed.

A bar back was quite busy helping out the bartenders throughout the evening.  He would bring them clean glasses, and clear out the dirty used glasses.

Xxxxx as well as Bartender 2 cleared off the bar top immediately after the drinks were finished.

Once the agents drink would become half full, Xxxxx would ask if the agent needed an additional drink. 

Every drink ordered was put in to the POS system.  The check was presented correctly with no mistakes.  The final payment was accepted and processed in a timely manor.

Please see the Addendum for additional information that may put the agent’s identity at risk.

Addendum:

Two small incidences happened during the agents visit to the Red Bar that may be worth mentioning. 

The outside bouncer came in to the bar complaining to Xxxxx about not feeling well.  I believe he said he had a sore throat.  Xxxxx whipped up a concoction for him in a small shot type of glass.  He was using simple ingredients in which did not make the agent suspicious, until the agent overheard Xxxxx telling the bouncer that there was only a small amount of alcohol in the drink.  Xxxxx did not ring this drink into the computer in any way, not even under a comp tab.  This is giving away alcohol, as well as the bouncer having alcohol on the job.  At the very minimum this drink should have been rung in as a comp drink.

TITLE 4, CHAPTER 3

4-244. Unlawful acts

12. For a licensee, when engaged in waiting on or serving customers, to consume spirituous liquor or for a licensee or on-duty employee to be on or about the licensed premises while in an intoxicated or disorderly condition.

The second incident happened at 11:18pm.  A small group of people came up to the bar, and seemed to be familiar with the bartenders.  They placed an order with the bartender for three drinks.  Xxxxx did not accept cash, did not take a room key and did not take any form of payment.  Xxxxx went to the register and typed a few things in, however he was servicing multiple guests at this time, and could have been entering in the other orders.  The agent did not have a clear view of the screen to see what he specifically was inputting.  The patron next to the agent spilled a drink, breaking the glass, and needed to order a new one.  This drink the guest paid cash for; this order was put in to the POS where it is unclear if the other was ever actually entered.

The third incident happened at 11:25pm.  Two men approached the bar; they were familiar with the bartenders, and had a tab open using an American Express Credit card.  They ordered one more round of drinks and then asked to close out the tab.  While Bartender 2 went to grab the credit card for the tab, and the receipt, Xxxxx took a minute and introduced himself to the guests.  Bartender 2 handed the gentleman his credit card and receipt, and said “Eric, we’ll take care of this one for you; because we’re silly like that.”  Eric said ok, and then grabbed a $10 bill and threw it on the table for tip.  Bartender 2 threw it back.  They settled on four one dollar bills.  The agent did not see either bartender call a manager over to comp a check. 

Michael Zenner - CEO  
         
Eye Spy Spotter Services Inc.
eyespyspotter.com
bartheft.com  (blog)
Hospitality Checkpoint PLLC
PI Lic. 1597616
hospitalitycheckpoint.com
liquorassessment.com
PO BOX 995 Gilbert AZ 85299
Office: 480-777-7056
Toll Free: 800-880-0811

© Eye Spy Spotter Services Inc. 2010

Red Bar

1. Bartender 1: Xxxxx, Caucasian 5’6” tall, long blonde hair pulled back in to a side ponytail.  The bartender wore a black tank top and black pants

1. Bartender 2:  Xxxxx, Caucasian 5’11” tall, brown hair pulled back in to a ponytail.  He had long thick sideburns.  He wore a black t-shirt and black pants.  He was identified by customers as Xxxxx.

The agent approached the bar and was quickly greeted by Xxxxx.  Xxxxx was friendly smiled at the agent and asked if he would like to place an order.  The agent indicated that he needed a few moments to decide, and look at the menu. 

Xxxxx patiently waited while he served other guests, and leaned on the back counter between guests. 

When the agent did decide on a drink, Xxxxx asked if the agent had a liquor preference.  Once the drink order was complete, Xxxxx turned and placed the drink order in to the computer.  When the agent requested to start a tab, Xxxxx requested a credit card to start a tab.  Xxxxx placed the credit card in a small glass to the left of the left POS. 

The agent observed Xxxxx handing receipts to every customer who paid with cash.  The tip from the customer would go in a clear plastic cylinder that was on top of the left POS leaning on a small structural wall that separated the bar back in half.

Xxxxx seemed to be enjoying himself at work that evening.  He would make small talk with the guests as well as with Bartender 2.  A happy bartender always seems to make for happy guests.  There was a bit of casualness about the way the two bartenders interacted and joked with each other.

When the cocktail servers would place orders, a receipt would print out to the bartenders POS.  Instead of placing the chit with the drinks made, and handing both the receipt and the drink to the server, every chit was thrown away after the order was read.  The cocktail waitresses never received this piece of paper verifying their drink orders. This should be a required practice in case verification is ever needed.

A bar back was quite busy helping out the bartenders throughout the evening.  He would bring them clean glasses, and clear out the dirty used glasses.

Xxxxx as well as Bartender 2 cleared off the bar top immediately after the drinks were finished.

Once the agents drink would become half full, Xxxxx would ask if the agent needed an additional drink. 

Every drink ordered was put in to the POS system.  The check was presented correctly with no mistakes.  The final payment was accepted and processed in a timely manor.

Please see the Addendum for additional information that may put the agent’s identity at risk.

Addendum:

Two small incidences happened during the agents visit to the Red Bar that may be worth mentioning. 

The outside bouncer came in to the bar complaining to Xxxxx about not feeling well.  I believe he said he had a sore throat.  Xxxxx whipped up a concoction for him in a small shot type of glass.  He was using simple ingredients in which did not make the agent suspicious, until the agent overheard Xxxxx telling the bouncer that there was only a small amount of alcohol in the drink.  Xxxxx did not ring this drink into the computer in any way, not even under a comp tab.  This is giving away alcohol, as well as the bouncer having alcohol on the job.  At the very minimum this drink should have been rung in as a comp drink.

TITLE 4, CHAPTER 3

4-244. Unlawful acts

12. For a licensee, when engaged in waiting on or serving customers, to consume spirituous liquor or for a licensee or on-duty employee to be on or about the licensed premises while in an intoxicated or disorderly condition.

The second incident happened at 11:18pm.  A small group of people came up to the bar, and seemed to be familiar with the bartenders.  They placed an order with the bartender for three drinks.  Xxxxx did not accept cash, did not take a room key and did not take any form of payment.  Xxxxx went to the register and typed a few things in, however he was servicing multiple guests at this time, and could have been entering in the other orders.  The agent did not have a clear view of the screen to see what he specifically was inputting.  The patron next to the agent spilled a drink, breaking the glass, and needed to order a new one.  This drink the guest paid cash for; this order was put in to the POS where it is unclear if the other was ever actually entered.

The third incident happened at 11:25pm.  Two men approached the bar; they were familiar with the bartenders, and had a tab open using an American Express Credit card.  They ordered one more round of drinks and then asked to close out the tab.  While Bartender 2 went to grab the credit card for the tab, and the receipt, Xxxxx took a minute and introduced himself to the guests.  Bartender 2 handed the gentleman his credit card and receipt, and said “Eric, we’ll take care of this one for you; because we’re silly like that.”  Eric said ok, and then grabbed a $10 bill and threw it on the table for tip.  Bartender 2 threw it back.  They settled on four one dollar bills.  The agent did not see either bartender call a manager over to comp a check. 

Michael Zenner - CEO  
         
Eye Spy Spotter Services Inc.
eyespyspotter.com
bartheft.com  (blog)
Hospitality Checkpoint PLLC
PI Lic. 1597616
hospitalitycheckpoint.com
liquorassessment.com
PO BOX 995 Gilbert AZ 85299
Office: 480-777-7056
Toll Free: 800-880-0811

© Eye Spy Spotter Services Inc. 2010

Bartender Summary

Bartender 1:  Xxxx, 5’8”, Xxxxx, in his twenties, with a medium build and a Xxxxx buzz cut.  He introduced himself as Xxxxx.

Bartender 2:  Xxxxx, 5’2”, Xxxxx, in her twenties, with a petite build and Xxxxx hair.

Bartender 3:  Xxxxx, 5’4”, Xxxxx, in her twenties, with a slender build and long, Xxxxx hair worn in a ponytail.  Xxxxx referred to her as his sister.

The bartenders wore the xxxxx-and-xxxx, xxxxx uniform shirt and had a neat and groomed appearance.

The agent was seated several minutes before he was acknowledged by a bartender.  Although Xxxxx walked by him several times, he did not address him.

After several minutes, Xxxxx approached and placed a cocktail napkin and then a menu in front of the agent, but he did not speak.  He returned shortly and asked if the agent cared for something to drink.

Xxxxx relayed the agent’s order to Bartender 3, who prepared the drink after several minutes.  Xxxxx delivered the drink and asked if the agent cared for something to eat.  He did not mention any specials or make any recommendations.  He also did not ask whether the agent had been to the establishment before.

While the agent was deciding on food, Bartender 2 approached and asked if he had any questions about the menu.  She was friendly and smiled.

Xxxxx returned in appropriate time to take the order.  He did not offer up-sell options or additional courses—in fact, he down-sold the agent’s order.  Please refer to the Food and Beverage Summary for details.

Xxxxx placed a printed tab in a glass in front of the agent immediately after taking his food order.  He provided napkins and silverware quickly thereafter, and delivered chips and salsa within minutes.

All items arrived very quickly after they were ordered, and Xxxxx checked back after each course as appropriate.

Bartender 3 appeared to handle most of the service bar volume, which she did attentively and according to protocols.  All bartenders delivered consistent 1 ¼-ounce pours for single-liquor drinks—slightly less than the establishment standard.

The bartenders kept printed tabs in front of guests and updated them immediately after preparing rounds.

Although the bartenders appeared to account for all drinks prepared for bar guests, the agent observed three issues of integrity:

At 7:11pm, Bartender 2 prepared two mixed drinks atop the shelves and coolers, and in the Agent’s opinion, making an obvious effort to try to be out-of-sight.  She walked the drinks over to a high-top table in front of the bar at which was seated Xxxxx patrons.  Bartender 2 conversed briefly with two of the patrons, who demonstrated their thanks, making it obvious to the Agent through the mannerisms that Bartender 2 had provided the drinks gratis.  When Bartender 2 returned behind the bar, she did not ring in the drinks.

At 7:12pm, Bartender 3 opened the drawer using “No Sale.”  She took cash out of the register, then walked to the end of the service bar, where she first appeared to try to enclose the cash in her hands, then to place it in the bar rail.  In a matter of seconds, she picked up the money again and walked to the other side of the bar.  Her hands were then out of the agent’s view, but the agent believes Bartender 3 was either putting the money in a purse or a pocket, or otherwise hiding it.

The bartenders allowed the cash register drawer to remain open for as long as five minutes.  The agent did not observe any theft as a specific result of this, but the practice is often indicative of an effort to avoid having to ring in items.

On their down-time, the bartenders exerted effort towards keeping the area behind the bar clean, but they were not quick to clear the bar top, as empty glasses and bottles remained after guests departed.  The bartenders appeared focused on end-of-night cleaning, as they asked one another what had already been done.

The bartenders handled fruit with their bare hands.

Xxxxx proved friendly and made an effort to chat with guests.  He also extended a handshake and introductions.  Bartender 2 also appeared pleasant and periodically checked on the agent; Bartender 3 did not circulate the bar top.

When the agent was finished eating, Xxxxx offered him a box and removed his plates to the kitchen, returning with the remaining food already packaged. 

Xxxxx did not offer the agent dessert or coffee.

Xxxxx informed guests that he was departing before leaving the bar. The agent ordered another item after Xxxxx departed, and Bartender 2 provided fresh linen and silverware.  The item arrived within five minutes, and Bartender 2 checked on the agent shortly.

Bartender 2 asked if she could offer the agent anything else.  She did not specifically ask about dessert or coffee.  The agent liked the professional and polite verbiage Bartender 2 used.

Bartender 2 promptly processed the agent’s payment after he presented it; the itemized receipt in front of him had been maintained throughout the visit and was correct.

Bartender 2 returned the itemization with the agent’s credit card receipts.  She did not ask for identification for his card, as it instructs.

Bartender 2 smiled and thanked the agent after processing his payment.

Both Bartenders 2 and 3 called to the agent with thanks and goodnight as he departed.

Michael Zenner - CEO  
         
Eye Spy Spotter Services Inc.
eyespyspotter.com
bartheft.com  (blog)
Hospitality Checkpoint PLLC
PI Lic. 1597616
hospitalitycheckpoint.com
liquorassessment.com
PO BOX 995 Gilbert AZ 85299
Office: 480-777-7056
Toll Free: 800-880-0811

© Eye Spy Spotter Services Inc. 2010

Hello Bar Owners & EYE SPY Clients - This is EXACTLY why we stress in our Eye Spy Reports about liquor liability in regards to over service. Bar Owners, regular Eye Spy evaluations that report on your staff in regards to over service can really help you if you happen to unfortunately find your self in a dram shop (liquor liability) lawsuit. Regular reports AND follow up with DOCUMENTED action can help indemnify you in a lawsuit as it shows that you are making an effort with the standard of care in regards to liquor service.

LIQUOR LIABILITY:

$40 MILLION awarded in teen's death

Boy on bike killed by drunken driver

By Kim Smith Arizona Daily Star | Posted: Saturday, February 13, 2010 12:00 am

A Pima County jury awarded the parents of a Tucson boy killed by a drunk driver $40 million Friday. City taxpayers will be responsible for a third of that, with the driver and Chuy's restaurant sharing responsibility for the rest.

Jose Rincon Jr., 14, and a friend were riding their bicycles east on East Broadway near Harrison Road around 7:20 p.m. Jan. 12, 2008, when Glenda Rumsey struck both teens with her car. Rincon died.

Although the city was found to be only one-third responsible, its more than $13 million share is the largest individual judgment ever against the city, dwarfing the $1.75 million paid to the family of Deshun Chance Glover, who was electrocuted at the Hi Corbett Field complex in Reid Park in July 2008.

Rumsey, whose blood-alcohol level was 0.249 two hours after the crash, was sentenced to 14 years in prison last year. Chuy's, which is where she had been drinking, has already settled with the family for an undisclosed amount.

A lawyer for the family argued successfully that the city was partially at fault because of the poor design of the road.

City Attorney Mike Rankin said the city will appeal. He said he was surprised both by the amount and by the city's being found 33 percent responsible.

"This is shocking," Rankin said, adding he was stunned at the amount and "the notion the city would be equally responsible as a drunk driver that was three times the legal limit."

Jose and Adriana Rincon burst into tears when the verdict was read.

After having been through both a criminal and a civil trial, nothing has changed, Adriana Rincon said. "It doesn't bring him back. Tomorrow I still have to find a way to cope."

Jose Rincon said the lawsuit was never about money.

"The main reason we're here is for vindication and to carry the ball the whole 10 yards on (Jose Jr.'s) behalf," he said.

The three-way finding of blame validated their belief there was a "perfect storm" of variables that came together and took their son's life, Jose Rincon said.

"In my heart of hearts it started with Glenda Rumsey, but that doesn't excuse irresponsible business practices nor cavalier decision-making on the implementation of well-thought-out and carefully designed building plans," he said.

Last week, the Rincons' attorney, Ronald Mercaldo, told jurors a city engineer abandoned plans to add 5 feet of asphalt to the roadway during an improvement project, creating a large offset in the lanes on either side of Vozack Lane, just east of Harrison. As a result, Rumsey ended up in the bike lane when her lane ended and she tried to merge.

Rumsey's attorney, Stefano Corradini, agreed his client and Chuy's were largely responsible for the crash, but he, too, blamed the city because of the road design. He would not comment after the verdict.

Attorney Richard Davis, who defended the city, told jurors that engineers did nothing wrong. He blamed Rumsey, saying roads can't be designed to be drunken-driver-proof.

The jury deliberated less than three hours.

Mercaldo said he was grateful to the jury but noted the judgment will never compensate the Rincons for their loss.

Jose, a straight-A student at St. Michael's Parish Day School, died hours after he took entrance exams for Salpointe Catholic High School.

The middle of the Rincons' three children, Jose Jr. was known to be kind and an exceptional musician and talented athlete.

Judge Kenneth Lee presided over the trial.

Michael Zenner - CEO  
         
Eye Spy Spotter Services Inc.
eyespyspotter.com
bartheft.com  (blog)
Hospitality Checkpoint PLLC
PI Lic. 1597616
hospitalitycheckpoint.com
liquorassessment.com
PO BOX 995 Gilbert AZ 85299
Office: 480-777-7056
Toll Free: 800-880-0811

A long time client of ours was propositioned to become a partial owner of another establishment. He wanted my staff to go in and check how the operation was being run so that he could get a third party judgment view of the restaurant. The spotter’s report (truncated as many parts needed to be removed for privacy reasons) was rather stunning at how horribly this establishment is being run.

Bartender Summary

• Bartender: Xxxxx female with long curly blond hair. She wore a black shirt with blue jeans. She was audibly identified as Xxxxx by servers.

The agent was seated at the bar and greeted by the bartender approx 2 minutes later. The bartender was friendly, but not overtly courteous or positive. She did not smile often, and she did not interact with patrons in a friendly or positive way.

The bartender’s pours were consistently accurate. She poured a steady 4 count (4 count = 1 ½ oz) for cocktails and seemed to use correct recipes.

All of the drinks she served included correct garnishments, and straws. She was not consistent with using cocktail napkins at the bar. She would place drinks directly onto the bar top.

Bar tabs were kept on paper tickets that the bartender would stick onto the metal freezer with a magnet. The bartender would mark tabs on the refrigerator. The agent did not see any supplemental accountability measures in place to ensure that the drinks were being marked on the tab. In other words, the agent feels that there is no way to know if the bartender was, in fact, was ringing in all the drinks served.

The agent also found that the bartender was accepting many server call outs. Servers were generally be at a table near the kitchen area and call out to the bartender to get a drink for them. The bartender would give the drink to them over the bar and take no money from the server in exchange for the drink. The agent also found this very troubling since there is no way to know if the server was charging for the drinks or not.

The bartender would frequently leave from behind the bar for extended periods of time. The bartender would disappear leaving the servers and patrons at the bar to literally fend for themselves. The agent observed servers go behind the bar on numerous occasions getting bottled beer. The agent did not see any server pour their own cocktail, but did help themselves to bottled beer. Needless to say, this is very troubling and opens the door wide open to potential abuses by servers.

Finally, the agent found the bartender eating a meal while on duty behind the bar. She stood in the middle of the bar area next to a table that held a plate with some pasta on it. She stood eating and then would serve drinks while she ate without washing her hands. This is an Arizona Health Code Violation. The agent found it unprofessional for an employee to be eating while on duty, especially while at their post.      

Wait Staff Summary

• Server: Xxxxx female with long brown hair and a slender physique. She identified herself as Xxxxx.

The agent was seated and almost immediately approached by the server. Xxxxx carried herself with a positive demeanor and was friendly when talking with patrons. She asked for a drink order and wrote it on a pad. She then went over to the poker tables and took numerous orders from the poker players as well. She then went to the kitchen area and started to sort her orders on her tray. She used separate papers to write the orders on, so by the end of her round she had a stack of papers to go through. She took a few minutes to sort herself out, and then started to input the kitchen orders and (surprisingly) went behind the bar to start getting her own beers. She served the poker players drinks, but did not establish a form of payment. She did not collect cash or credit cards while she served drinks. The agent does not know which system she was using to ensure the right drinks were put on the right tabs, especially for the poker players.

Unlike many of the poker player’s drinks, the agent’s drink order took a very long time. The agent’s drink order was taken at 7:35, but were not delivered until 7:50. The agent believes a 15 minute wait time is far too much for a simple drink order.

Xxxxx seemed knowledgeable about the items on the menu. She did not offer appetizers or make any suggestions to the agent. She made several returns to the agent to ask if the agent was ready to order food, but did not think it important to ask to start with an appetizer or to make a suggestion to help facilitate the decision.

Xxxxx doubled as the server for tables and the poker room. The agent believes that Xxxxx found it difficult to handle the work load. She seemed constantly flustered and rushed. She frequently forgot drink orders, and took a very long time to bring drinks and food to be brought out to the table.

She even forgot silverware from time to time. The agent overheard one patron very upset that he was served a steak without silverware to eat it with. Then when he requested silverware, he wasn’t brought knife to cut the steak with.

The agent believes having more than one server to service the poker area would have been prudent. There was another server on hand, but she seemed to only focus on a section of tables. There was definitely a need for more help in the poker area for more efficient service.

The dining area was always in need of some pick ups. There were a lot of empty bottles, and used glassware all over the poker area that needed to be retrieved. The floors also needed to be spot swept and clean up from time to time. Trash built up on the ground, especially under the tables, during the evaluation period.

The agent’s food order took 20 minutes to be brought out to the table. When it was finally brought out, there was no side items brought along with it. The agent requested side items, and received them several minutes later.

The food presentation needed work as well. The presentation looked boring, and mostly thrown together.

When the agent was ready to cash out the tab, Xxxxx asked the agent for a credit card without giving an itemized tab or a total first. The agent received a credit card transaction receipt but no itemized receipt. Agent finds this very disconcerting and a loop-hole for theft opportunity.

Management Summary

The manager on duty was Xxxxx, the owner of the establishment. He was observed to be imbibing beverages at the bar. He was very visibly intoxicated. At one point, the agent observed him pushing kamakazi shots to the poker players. He was also talking to patrons quite often and being very friendly.

The manger did approach the agent at one point and ask how the experience was going. He was friendly and nice.

He did seem somewhat helpful to staff, however it would have been a big help to bus tables and pick up the trash in the poker area.     

Michael Zenner - CEO  
         
Eye Spy Spotter Services Inc.
eyespyspotter.com
bartheft.com  (blog)
Hospitality Checkpoint PLLC
PI Lic. 1597616
hospitalitycheckpoint.com
liquorassessment.com
PO BOX 995 Gilbert AZ 85299
Office: 480-777-7056
Toll Free: 800-880-0811

© Eye Spy Spotter Services Inc. 2010