The Campaign for Pubs has taken issue with the Pubs Code adjudicator over pub tie rules on gaming machines.

gaming machine

The campaign has condemned Fiona Dickie’s interpretation of the Pubs Code to allow the regulated pubcos to continue to impose a tie on gaming machines. It says this flies in the face of the stated intention of the government and Parliament.

The letter slams Dickie’s decision to allow pubcos to continue to insist that any gaming machines, including fruit machines, are tied. This means that the pubco continues to take a significant cut of all takings.

The letter also criticises the fact that she announced this in a media article, rather than publishing it formally. The first that tenants and tenants’ groups heard of her interpretation is in this article in the Morning Advertiser.

One of the many controversial elements of the tied model operated by the large pub-owning companies is that they also tie tenants on gaming machines, as well as on drinks and other products. When introducing legislation, the government agreed to tackle the gaming machine issue in the Pubs Code, stating in 2014:

“The Pub Owning Business must offer the Tenant the option to be free of gaming machine purchasing obligations when agreeing or renewing a Tenancy, or when carrying out a Rent Review”.

This was intended to mean that there must be the option for the tenant to be either tied or free-of-tie on their gaming machines, says the campaign.

It adds: “Yet, extraordinarily, Fiona Dickie, who claims she wants to ‘uphold tenants’ rights’, has decided that the only option for tenants who want to have gaming machines is to be tied, a decision which flies in the face of the intention of government and Parliament.

“The baffling interpretation by Ms Dickie means that regulated pub companies can continue to insist on a tie if tenants wish to have gaming machines.”

In the Morning Advertiser article where she makes the announcement, she herself states: “The government said tenants would be allowed to have the choice to be tied or not for gaming machines.” Yet then she goes on to say that, in actual fact, pubcos can continue to insist on a tie for any gaming machines!

The gaming machine tie is covered in regulation 47 of the Pubs Code. While this regulation doesn’t directly state that a tied tenant can either be tied or free of tie on gaming machines, it does not state, as the PCA has chosen to interpret, that tied tenants can only have gaming machines if these are tied.

The Campaign for Pubs is also raising the PCA’s interpretation of the code with the Business, Energy, and Industrial Strategy Select Committee.

Gary Murphy, a director of the Campaign for Pubs, said: “Here we have another example where the Pubs Code adjudicator has not undertaken consultation with key players who represent tenants and, as a result, she has made an extraordinarily pubco-biased decision on the interpretation of the Pubs Code that would seem to be prima facie wrong.

“It is incredibly difficult for tenants to reverse PCA decisions like this because they simply do not have the resources to embark on a legal challenge and the PCA have proved previously to be very reluctant to engage constructively on different opinions. This behaviour is undermining the whole purpose of the Pubs Code and must stop, starting with reversing this dreadful decision.”