Wed 23rd Aug 2017 - BBPA – PCA report is ‘one-sided, anecdotal and not evidence-based’ BBPA – PCA report is ‘one-sided, anecdotal and not evidence-based’: The British Beer & Pub Association (BBPA) has labelled the Pub Code Adjudicator’s (PCA) report into the fact-finding exercise into tenants’ experiences of accessing the Market Rent Only (MRO) option as “one-sided, anecdotal, and not evidence-based”. Adjudicator Paul Newby commissioned the exercise to verify the concerns expressed by tenants and their representatives. He said it has provided evidence of a number of issues that tenants say are creating barriers to them accessing rights under the Pubs Code. Newby said almost without exception that to varying degrees the pub-owning businesses were not acting within the spirit of the code. In response, BBPA chief executive Brigid Simmonds said: “We are extremely disappointed that this report has been published in this form, and we have made this clear to the PCA who seems to have sought views from only one side. The report is one-sided, anecdotal, not evidence-based and lacking in transparency, nor does it include any views from the pub companies on how the legislation is working. It has been published despite an ongoing request from the PCA for additional information from the six pub operators relating to the issues raised in this publication, which is not due to be received by him until the end of the week. The report ignores the fact that the legislation was put in place to correct a perceived imbalance in the relationship between pub company and tenant. As such, the number of new MRO agreements must not be seen as the only measure of success. Indeed, evidence shows the renegotiation of tied deals is delivering exactly what the consultation and the subsequent legislation intended. We are determined to make the pubs code work. As with all new legislation, there are always challenges in bedding it in, including raising awareness, interpreting the rules, managing differing expectations, and dealing with unintended consequences. For this reason, we had suggested that a transitional period was necessary, but this was not secured. Only the adjudicator can progress some of these issues through taking decisions on pending cases and publishing the guidance we all need to move forward. In specific cases, clarification may be needed through the courts. Publications such as this are a distraction from these vital tasks.” Newby said: “This is a comprehensive report and it has raised a number of significant questions about the operation of the Pubs Code in its first year and the impact on tenants of their pub-owning businesses’ actions. I am now asking the pub-owning businesses to provide me with further, detailed information about their particular processes and practices. This is also an opportunity for them to set out their positions. I will discuss these responses with the companies and I stand ready to take further regulatory action as necessary. The exercise has provided evidence on the impact of delays in the arbitration process on tenants’ costs. It has also demonstrated the effect of pub-owning businesses requiring new agreements for MRO tenancies has created a series of hurdles that, taken together, tenants consider to be insurmountable. I am committed to arbitrating every dispute impartially and with an open mind. However, I want to encourage positive negotiation on MRO options. The Pubs Code is new law and in many cases has been challenged robustly by both sides. I am determined this should be the year that the code comes into its own and I am making it plain to the pub-owning businesses that I expect them to abide by the spirit as well as the letter of the law.”