Hong Kong takeaways profit in licence loophole, report reveals
More than 60 city outlets are said to be operating as ‘restaurants in disguise’, saving them time, trouble and attracting more customers
A suspected loophole in the food licensing system may have allowed takeaways operate as “restaurants in disguise”without the required permission.
A report by FactWire, a Hong Kong news agency, said takeaways, especially those in malls, gave the impression they were licensed restaurants by putting out chairs and tables for customers.
Operators were not only saved the trouble of satisfyingthe strict requirements of a restaurant licence, but also making more money by attracting diners.
A seven-month investigation by the agency found more than 60 takeaways, operating under a “food factory licence”, had in fact been “like a restaurant” last year and not prosecuted. Most of them were in malls.
Among the placesmentioned in the report was the Starbucks outlet at Festival Walk in Kowloon Tong,
MegaBox in Kowloon Bay, PopCorn in Tseung Kwan O and HomeSquare in Sha Tin.
A spokesman for Starbucks said on Monday: “We are aware of the FactWire News Agency’s report and are investigating what it raises. While we are focused on creating a welcoming environment for our patrons, we have reminded all of our partners (employees) that public outdoor areas are open to anyone, not just customers.”
Food business regulations require all restaurants providing seats to acquire a general restaurant licence or a light refreshment restaurant licence.
Application procedures for a food factory licence are more or less the same but holders cannot set up seats for customers.
She urged the Food and Environmental Hygiene Department to step up checks.
Quoting “informed sources”, FactWire said one common excuse used to avoid prosecution was that staff would simply tell inspectors food was not served to customers who took items and ate outside on their own.
“Therefore, no regulation is violated,” sources were quoted by FactWire as saying.
“From the food safety point of view, if a diner finds that the food sold by an eatery is problematic, he or she can complain to the department, whether the eatery holds a takeaway licence of a restaurant licence,” Wong said.
Veteran restaurateur Simon Wong Ka-wo, president of the Hong Kong Federation of Restaurants and Related Trades, was far from happy with the report.
“It is unfair to say that a takeaway is abusing some legal loophole only by seeing that there are chairs or tables set up outside the shop area,” he said.
“The chairs or tables may be provided by the management of the mall as kind of service to visitors.”
Wong added: “There are more requirements to meet for applying for a restaurant licence. But one should not assume that an eatery operator would not follow the rules and try to operate a restaurant with a takeaway licence.”
Liberal Party lawmaker Tommy Cheung Yu-yan, who represents the catering sector in the legislature, sympathised with Wong.
“I see nothing illegal. Take the food courts in shopping malls as an example,” he said.
“Most of the eateries there hold only food factory licences. But diners buy food and then take a seat to eat.
“The seats are provided by the mall management.”
There are more than 7,200 eateries in the city operating with food factory licences.
A row erupted last year over the treatment of the Kung Wo Bean Curd Factory in Pei Ho Street, Sham Shui Po.
The small eatery, popular with the public for its soy milk products, was prosecuted three times in 2015 and 2016 by the department for setting up seats for customers and serving them.
The department was criticised by the public for taking such action against the premises.