• ℹ️ Heads up...

    This is a popular topic that is fast moving Guest - before posting, please ensure that you check out the first post in the topic for a quick reminder of guidelines, and importantly a summary of the known facts and information so far. Thanks.

Chessington World of Adventures Resort

I wouldn’t read too much into it.

I would assume any council would respond like that for any 0 score until they were sure the company had remedied the issue. They would only likely bring legal proceedings if after a re inspection it’s just as bad. But until they know that they need to keep the report private just in case.
 
I once worked at a restaurant which followed all the guidelines and went out its way with cleaning and food hygiene routines. Yet it received a one star rating because the laziness of the head chef meant its paperwork was not being completed correctly or at all in some cases, so there was no record of any cleaning or fridge temperature checks for example. They then had a set time to remedy this until a return health inspection. They later received a 5 star rating after doing so.
 
An interesting post from Chessington showing how the trains go for winter maintenance on Mandrill Mayhem, is it usual procedure for one train coasters not to have a maintenance shed? I know for example the troublesome trucks train gets removed yearly and so do family boomerangs. I just thought with a coaster this size, having a maintenance shed would be advantageous.


From: https://www.instagram.com/p/C3YEYQURFRy/?igsh=MW92N3dhcHE4NjV4Mg==
 
You don’t get a 0 just for paperwork or lack of it, it can be a contributing factor but it won’t be the only reason for such a low score and we know it’s not the only reason in this case as they scored a ‘major improvement necessary’ on both food handling and management of food safety which is pretty bad. If the photos from hotel last year are anything to go by I doubt the Smokehouse is in a better state. You’d have thought they’d have learnt after those photos went public last year. It’s a terrible look for them.

What I find interesting is I’m sure Alton Towers were inspected last year and got all 4’s and 5’s for their Aramark food outlets. Something is going seriously wrong down at Chessington for them to keep getting these low hygiene ratings. The kitchens seem poorly managed.

They should be inspected again in a few weeks with the expectation that they fix up. Probably why they won’t release the full report. Worst case scenario they’ve been given a Hygeine Emergency Prohibition Notice which has to be court ordered and could also be a reason for keeping the report under wraps for now. But surely things can’t be that bad. Surely.
 
BigShadowtinytree said:
You don’t get a 0 just for paperwork or lack of it, it can be a contributing factor but it won’t be the only reason for such a low score and we know it’s not the only reason in this case as they scored a ‘major improvement necessary’ on both food handling and management of food safety which is pretty bad. If the photos from hotel last year are anything to go by I doubt the Smokehouse is in a better state. You’d have thought they’d have learnt after those photos went public last year. It’s a terrible look for them.

What I find interesting is I’m sure Alton Towers were inspected last year and got all 4’s and 5’s for their Aramark food outlets. Something is going seriously wrong down at Chessington for them to keep getting these low hygiene ratings. The kitchens seem poorly managed.

They should be inspected again in a few weeks with the expectation that they fix up. Probably why they won’t release the full report. Worst case scenario they’ve been given a Hygeine Emergency Prohibition Notice which has to be court ordered and could also be a reason for keeping the report under wraps for now. But surely things can’t be that bad. Surely.
Click to expand...
I was just a trainee at the time so I have obviously been misinformed. But I do know the lack of paperwork ranged from cleaning procedure all the way through to food storage checklists, but now looking into it deeper after your post, you are right. There must have been more management were concealing. But as far as chessington/Aramark go, this needs sorting. Companies like this have blanket procedure at majority of their outlets. If this can go wrong at one it can easily happen elsewhere.
 
Connor98 said:
I was just a trainee at the time so I have obviously been misinformed. But I do know the lack of paperwork ranged from cleaning procedure all the way through to food storage checklists, but now looking into it deeper after your post, you are right. There must have been more management were concealing. But as far as chessington/Aramark go, this needs sorting. Companies like this have blanket procedure at majority of their outlets. If this can go wrong at one it can easily happen elsewhere.
Click to expand...
I don’t think you’ve been completely misinformed, maybe slightly. My post wasn’t directed at anyone in particular so sorry if it came off that way. I just wanted to explain why it’s not just paperwork that causes a 0 rating as it’s something that comes up every time an establishment gets a low hygeine rating and there’s almost always more to it than just poor record keeping from what I’ve seen.

I mean record keeping is pretty important in a kitchen, I’m not trying to play it down. It acts as proof that certain food hygeine and health and safety procedures are being followed. If these records aren’t filled in, then as far as the inspector is concerned they have no way of telling if these things are being done. And a lot of these procedures are required by law. It’s not like they can hang around for a few days to see that these things are being done daily, so they need to see some sort of physical evidence. Any chef/manager not keeping on top of this is just shooting themselves in the foot and not doing their job properly.

Sorry I’ve waffled on, what I’m getting at is record keeping is important, it does need to be done and kitchens will get a lower score if it’s not done to the correct standard, but it doesn’t impact the score as much as we are sometimes led to believe. It’s harder imo to get a 0 than it is to get a 5. In a disturbed kind of way I’m impressed they’ve managed it.
 
BigShadowtinytree said:
I don’t think you’ve been completely misinformed and my post wasn’t directed at anyone in particular so sorry if it came off that way. I just wanted to explain why it’s not just paperwork that causes a 0 rating as it’s something that comes up every time an establishment gets a low hygeine rating and there’s almost always more to it than just poor record keeping from what I’ve seen.

I mean record keeping is pretty important in a kitchen, I’m not trying to play it down. It acts as proof that certain food hygeine and health and safety procedures are being followed. If these records aren’t filled in, then as far as the inspector is concerned they have no way of telling if these things are being done. And a lot of these procedures are required by law. It’s not like they can hang around for a few days to see that these things are being done daily, so they need to see some sort of physical evidence. Any chef/manager not keeping on top of this is just shooting themselves in the foot and not doing their job properly.

Sorry I’ve waffled on, what I’m getting at is paperwork is important, it does need to be done and kitchens will get a lower score if it’s not done to the correct standard, but it doesn’t impact the score as much as we are sometimes led to believe. It’s harder imo to get a 0 than it is to get a 5.
Click to expand...
No problem at all. You made some very interesting points, thank you 😁
 
From the rating:
  • Food Hygiene and Safety: Major improvement necessary
  • Structural Compliance: Improvement necessary
  • Confidence in Management: Major improvement necessary
And taken from this guide, if I'm reading it correctly that suggests 20 for Food Hygiene and Safety, 15 for Structural Compliance and 20 for Confidence in Management for a total score of 55 (lower numbers are better). There's examples of what this means in the guide for each category on page 4 and 5.
 
The_bup said:
However you spin it, it is horrible. For a park I thought was getting cleaner, and more presentable, I’m shocked.

Those beautiful new resin floors LIED to me….
Click to expand...
I do feel for the park management as they didn’t choose Aramark. As far as I know It was a Merlin decision and now they just have to deal with it. But hopefully they are at least saved from eating it too.
 
Connor98 said:
I do feel for the park management as they didn’t choose Aramark. As far as I know It was a Merlin decision and now they just have to deal with it. But hopefully they are at least saved from eating it too.
Click to expand...
How long has Aramark been here? Surely them being here for a season couldn’t of shook things up that bad, I mean Jesus what was I eating at school the whole time, knowing I had Aramark. And for a premium at the parks too!
 
Last edited:
AT86 said:
Aramark have been at Chessington for the 2022 and 2023 seasons so far.
Click to expand...
Yeah okay 2 years seems like enough time for them to invite all the local wildlife into their kitchens
 
Last edited:
  • Like
Reactions: Tom
A shame that the FOIAs are being rejected at this stage, but the exemption sounds reasonable. It is very unlikely the the local authority are instigating legal proceedings simply off the back of a 0, but there's very chance that other enforcement actions have been taken and non-compliance with these could lead to further action including prosecution.

You can see the The Royal Borough of Kingston enforcement policy here.
 
This is crazy. It surprises me though that it only affects the one outlet... why is this one so bad when the others are better especially if all operated by the same company.

You'd assume that the rationale for Merlin to work with them would be improve standards!!
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Top