Ten years ago, we did as we were told. If we didn’t like a dish, or a table, or a wine, and the waiter asked us if everything was alright, we’d say “Yes thank you!” in a meek voice.

Today we know what we want. We won’t stand for ignorant waiting staff, sloppy service and bad background music. In fact, we like to complain.

But complaining, like cooking, is an art. For the best results, mastery of discernment, timing and presentation is required. And, perhaps most importantly, the appropriate attitude.

See it less as complaining, more as explaining there’s a problem and giving the restaurant a chance to put things right.

Here, three leading industry insiders with the 10 most commonly encountered problems, as voted for by Olive Magazine readers, and asked them to give us a masterclass in how to handle them effectively.

The Panel
Charles Campion Author of Charles Champion’s London Restaurant Guide 2008 and critic on BBC2’s Eating with the Enemey. “Common sense is terribly important when complaining.”

Oliver Peyton Owner of seven restaurants around London and judge on BBC 2’s Great British Menu. “People need to let their opinions be heard at the time. Good restaurants appreciate fair feedback.”

Alex Polizzi, hotelier and presenter of Channel 5’s Hotel Inspectors. “I believe in that old-fashioned thing: that you eat out for the pleasure of being looked after.”

1) “A 12.5% service charge has been added to my bill but I’d rather pay what I think the service is worth.”

The recent trend for a dollop of service on the bill topped our list of complaints. It was also unanimously bashed by our expert panel. “I hate it,” says top hotelier Alex Polizzi. “I regularly ask for it to be taken off.” It’s her firm belief that tips should be reserved for service above the ordinary. “You don’t tip a shop girl for finding you the right size of pair of trousers, why should I tip a waiter just because they brought me a plate? I reward extremely good service: charming, well-informed, polite. Someone who adds to the experience.”

As a restauranteur, Oliver Peyton agrees. “You should only pay for the service you receive. I would say, ”Fine“. Absolutely no problem. How much would you like to pay?”

2) “My dish is way too salty / oily / small / hot / cold.”

An adverse reaction to the taste or texture of a dish is a common area for complaint but difficult territory for a restaurant to respond. “It’s very subjective,” says restauranteur Oliver Peyton. “I personally like a lot of salt. But Pru Leith - if there’s salt in the same room, she thinks the dish is too salty. By and large, one would automatically replace a salty dish or an oily one. But with other nuances of taste it’s quite hard. At the very least, I’d be happy to take it back to the kitchen and discuss it with chef.”

The key here though is to complain immediately in a firm and polite manner. “It’s no good getting through half the dish, then getting angry and sending it back,” he says. “Anybody who runs a restaurant wants you to leave happy. And they certainly don’t want you eating and drinking things that aren’t correct.”

Alex Polizzi is in agreement. “If one of my customer really doesn’t like the dish, I always say let me change it and give you something else.“

3) ”I’ve had to wait an hour for my table even though I made a reservation.“

“Only an hour?” says Oliver Peyton. “Hahahah. Many restaurants want you to be there, waiting. It’s part of the whole concept of keeping the restaurant full. Generally speaking a restaurants going to book a table for 2 hours, 2 hours fifteen. Plus, most customers want a good turn on their table and you can’t push them off. Expect to wait.”

The consensus seems to be that a wait up to half an hour should be accepted with grace. Anything over that and you can start a polite nudge towards recompense. “If it’s a mistake, most good restaurants will try and tidy it up for you and make you feel better with a free drink,” says Charles Campion. “But no guarantees.”

Ultimately though, if you’re waiting, the panel believe, it’s probably a good sign. “I always think: Well how badly do I want to go to this restaurant?,” says Charles. “If it’s a top place, a long wait is part of the experience. So no complaints.”

4) “My wine’s is being kept over the other side of the room. The waiter’s constant filling is distracting and an obvious ploy to get me to drink more.”

“Oh I hate that,” says Alex Polizzi. “I’m out to dinner to talk to my friends. I don’t like table interruptions. I like my wine being on a table where we can help ourselves. On the other hand, I have a lot of elderly guests who complain bitterly if they ever have to touch a wine bottle. So it’s hard to get right.”

For Charles Champion it boils down to a matter of style. “If you are at Le Gavroche where the silky service runs on oiled wheels, your glass always - by some magic - has the right amount of wine in it. However, if you’re having a jolly time at an informal dinner somewhere, and your wine bottle gets stranded five yards from you, just say: ‘Bring it over here and we’ll pour it ourselves.”

As ever, remain calm and confident, he advises. “If your wine’s getting topped up too much at the first occasion just say, ”Stop that now. Bring the wine over here and we’ll worry about when we need it.“

5) ”I don’t like this table. It’s too dark / noisy / bright / smelly.“

Everything seems perfect when you walk in. The atmosphere. The lighting. Then they plonk you down a rickety two seater, ringside of the toilet. Are you in a position to complain? Our panel thinks not.

”Generally you’ve seen the room and table before you sit,“ says Charles Campion. ”You need to get these things straight. Because after sitting, you’ve accepted them already. If you don’t like it, say ‘No thank you. I wish to sit over there.“

If the place is too busy to relocate you, you’re left with a stark choice: stay or leave. “If a restaurant is packed it’s quite likely that its quite good. So, either put up with it an enjoy the good food and go to a bad restaurant where you can be on your own.”

6) “I keep asking to tap water but the staff keep ‘forgetting’ to bring it.”

The tap water contraversy continues to rage, especially now “evil” bottled water is off the menu for eco-sensitive diners. Our panel is clear on the issue though.

“It is unforgiveable to refuse or forget tap water,” says Alex Rolizzi. “I would complain bitterly. I would make a big fuss over it.”

Charles Campion suggests staying firm and polite. “What should never happen when you ask for water is that someone leans over you and asks: still or sparkling? At this point you have to be grown up and assert your contract with the restaurant and say I should like a jug of tap water please. And stare them in the eye. Don’t be frightened.”

But what if they refuse or delay? “They shouldn’t. But if there’s any delay, you can call the manager over and say, ”Look I know it’s difficult for you but I want a jug of tap water now, please. Thank you.“

7) ”The music is too loud and definitely not to my taste.“

There are few things worse than being seated underneath a speaker blasting out chintzy lift music or, worse, tuneless world music that matches the theme of the restaurant. But can you really do anything about it?

For hotelier Alex Rolizzi, this kind of protest is a serious bugbear. ”I care enormously if someone in my restaurants doesn’t have a good time. But in general I’ve noticed many more people moan about things you can’t quite believe they’re moaning about. You know, someone doesn’t like the lighting or music in the restaurant. Honestly!“

”In an empty restaurant - early evening, first table, no buzz - obviously a bit of music will take the edge off,“ says Charles Campion. ”But remember there’s a dial somewhere behind the bar, and if you really don’t like it, call the manager over and ask him to turn it down.“

”But,“ he adds, ”if you want a place that was loud and lively, then you’ve got to accept that it’s going to be loud and lively.“

8 ”I asked for a well-done steak but this is totally blue.“

You’re on safe ground with this classic complaint. ”The first rule of complaining is to know what you want and ask for it,“ says Charles Campion. ”If you say I want this steak terribly, terribly blue. Wipe its bottom, cut off its horn and bring it here. And then it turns up overdone, then you have a proper contract between you and the restaurant. They broken it. You complain. Everyone knows where they stand.“

For restauranteur Oliver Peyton this is a no-brainer. “Yes, obviously we’d change it straightaway,” he “But I’d be thinking: why would you want your food well-done? Why cook all the flavour out of it? That’s what the staff will be thinking when you send it back to be well done. Why?”

9) “The waiter can’t answer any of my questions about this dish but it’s really important for me to know what I’m getting.”

Okay. Sometimes you really need toknow if the eggs are freedom farmed free range. Or if the asparagus is definitely Peruvian or just grown in a plastic tent down the road. Or perhaps you’ve even got a (sigh) vegan at the table. If the waiter responds to your question with a ‘Wha-?’, it can be grating.

“As soon as a waiter looks at you blankly, it’s time for action,” says Charles Campion. “Providing your question is reasonable, it is reasonable to expect him to answer it. If he cannot answer, he must know where the answer is to be found. So send him off to find someone who knows the answer. ‘Go and ask the chef, please’.

“Yes, if I no problem as long as the waiter is willing to find out and does it in a charming manner,” says Alex. “You do have a very high turnover of staff in this industry. I wish I could say that everyone’s trained as much as they shoud be. But they aren’t always. As long as they say something like “I don’t know but I’ll be back in a moment with that information” you should be happy.“

10) “The service is far too clingy.”

Is everything okay with your meal? Do you need anything else? Can I get you something else? Do you need anything else? Shall I hover around your table during the entire meal like a fly?

“Hah you should be pleased to get clingy service!” Oliver Peyton jokes. “It’s pretty rare these days. Turnaround is fast and staff are a lot more savvy about what diners want. Unless the restaurant is terribly quiet you tend to get ‘normal’ service.”

“Urg. I hate clingy service! I hate it,” says Alex Rolizzi. “Why do people have to ask 20 times during your meal if you’re having a good time? Is my plate empty? Yes? Well it probably means I’ve enjoyed it. I think once at the end of a meal is probably enough for anybody.”

Their recommendation? Be firm and state your needs. “We’re okay thanks. We’ll see you at the end of the meal.”

THE FIVE COMMANDMENTS

Good Timing Air your grievance immediately. Don’t sulk and then write a letter 3 weeks later.

Choose Your Target Take the waiter aside and ask to speak to the manager.

Delivery Remain as calm as possible, polite and reasonable. Icy politeness is the most effective response.

Don’t Expect A Free Meal The restaurant won’t tear up the bill unless your evening has been a complete disaster. Expect a free bottle of wine or comped main courses for a severe mistake. For a minor blip, coffee or deserts on the house.

Be Constructive A good restaurant really appreciates fair feedback. We’re all here to have a good time, right?

The Customer Is Not Always Right
The worst complaints our panellists have received.

Oliver Peyton: “Oh I’ve had a 3 page letter from a doctor in Finchley. He thought the coffee was amazing, but he thought we were cheating him financially and emotionally by not putting chocolate on it.”

Alex Polizzi: “Someone once complained to me that my waiter’s jackets were too clean . They could still smell the washing powder on them. I wrote back, saying I thought he was a complete loon. ”

Charles Campion: “When I was cooking, I had a customer who’d sit down down, plate of food, take the salt cellar and biff it all over the food, before tasting it. Incredible. So everyday time he came, I made things progressively saltier in the hope that one day he’d say ‘Bloody salty!’ so I could then say ‘Then you should taste it before you put salt on shouldn’t you?!” But he never did. It was a great disappointment.“

(A little spoof I rustled up. Enjoy it. Oh - and see if you can find the secret pages).

“Yep, thanks to recent, incredible developments in PageTurn(tm) technology, there’s now an exciting new way to browse the Internet on the move. By book! So dump that PDA grandpa. Drown your mouse. Dropkick your iPhone into a nearby pond.
Get The Internet Now In Handy Book Form! TODAY!”

Check the website out. There are some extra funnies there.

And if you like, order it from Amazon.co.uk.

I’ve been writing a weekly Podcast guide on RadioTimes.com for RSS obsessed audiofiles. Saves you trawling through the dross to find the gems. Here’s a Best Of to get you started.

Hey man - don’t want to face the world. Don’t blame ya. It’s a big scary world world out there. Full of responsibilities, difficult situations and death. And you simply don’t want to face it. If you’d rather have kid’s toys delivered direct to your door and spend your weekends playing with remote-controlled AV technology, you’ve come to the right place!

(This is one of my favourite spoofs in the book. It was written by Joel Morris and myself, for Seethru.co.uk, about 6 years ago, right at the height of my gadget obsession. It runs to 2 pages in the book.)

I’m writing a weekly column on the ‘Best Of YouTube’. Cherry-picked video clips with fun and some might even say, witty, commentary. Find it here. Be sure to track back through the archive. There’s some good stuff in there.

» Clips For Kids
» Best of The Simpsons
» The Best (And Worst) UFOs

The Guardian, April 2006

Though the man, who is now 37, stopped taking the drug seven years ago, he still suffers from severe physical and mental health side-effects, including extreme memory problems, paranoia, hallucinations and depression. He also suffers from painful muscle rigidity around his neck and jaw which often prevents him from opening his mouth. The doctors believe many of these symptoms may be permanent.

The man, known as Mr A in the report in the scientific journal Psychosomatics, started using ecstasy at 21. For the first two years his use was an average of five pills per weekend. Gradually this escalated until he was taking around three and a half pills a day. At the peak, the man was taking an estimated 25 pills every day for four years. After several severe collapses at parties, Mr A decided to stop taking ecstasy. For several months, he still felt he was under the influence of the drug, despite being bedridden.

Hallucinations

His condition deteriorated and he began to experience recurrent tunnel vision and other problems including hallucinations, paranoia and muscle rigidity. “He came to us after deciding that he couldn’t go on any more,” said Dr Christos Kouimtsidis, the consultant psychiatrist at St George’s Medical School in Tooting who treated him for five months. “He was having trouble functioning in everyday life.”

The doctors discovered that the man was suffering from severe short-term memory problems of a type usually only seen in lifetime alcoholics. But evaluating the full extent of his condition was difficult as his concentration and attention was so impaired he was unable to follow the simple tasks involved in the test.

“This was an exceptional case. His long- term memory was fine but he could not remember day to day things - the time, the day, what was in his supermarket trolley,” said Dr Kouimtsidis. “More worryingly, he did not seem aware himself that he had these memory problems.”

With no mental illness in his family and no prior psychiatric history, the doctors concluded that his unique condition was direct result of his intense ecstasy use.

“This is obviously an extreme case so we should not blow any observations out of proportion,” says Dr Kouimtsidis. “But if this is what is happening to very heavy users, it might be an indication that daily use of ecstasy over a long period of time can lead to irreversible memory problems and other cognitive deficits.”

For 10 years, MDMA has been suspected of causing these kinds of effects in heavy users. It is thought to be due to its disruption of the regulation of serotonin, a brain chemical believed to play a role in mood and memory. It remains unclear whether these effects are the result of permanent neurotoxic damage or just temporary reversible alterations in the brain.

A special two-part MDMA study in recent issues of the Journal of Psychopharmacology (available online at sagepub), suggests long-term side-effects may be temporary. The researchers from the University Of Louisiana could find no significant relationship between depression and recreational ecstasy use.

In the case of Mr A, a structural MRI brain scan failed to show any obvious damage or atrophy in his brain. However, these results, says Dr Kouimtsidis, are difficult to interpret. “A scan of this type is not sensitive enough,” he said.

Such limitations in brain scanning technology, along with ethical and legal barriers to giving MDMA to human test subjects, have limited direct observation of the drug’s effects in humans.

Instead, scientists have had to use recreational drug users as subjects in their studies. Conclusions from this are often flawed because few, if any, drugs users use ecstasy in isolation.

Cannabis user

Mr A was also a heavy cannabis user, and when he was encouraged to decrease his use, his paranoia and hallucinations disappeared and his anxiety abated. But his memory and concentration problems remained, leading the doctors to suspect that these may be permanent disabilities.

When he was admitted to a specialist brain injury unit and put on anti-psychotic medication, he did start to show some improvement. “Unfortunately, he discharged himself before we were able to complete the assessment,” says Dr Kouimtsidis. “We continued to support him. But he started to use cannabis again and he dropped out. We tried to re-engage him but we lost him about a year ago.”

The Guardian made several attempts to find the man without success.

Effects of ecstasy

MDMA is one of the most intensely studied recreational drugs in history. But despite thousands of research papers and studies, scientific evidence on the side-effects remains inconclusive.

Death by overdose

Undoubtedly, large amounts of ecstasy can lead to over-heating which in turn, in rare cases, can trigger fatal heat stroke. Many factors contribute: number and strength of pills taken, environment, alcohol-consumption, body weight - but women seem more at risk. The bulk of ecstasy-related deaths around the world have been young women.

Water-poisoning

Panicking users, fearing they are overdosing, drink too much water and provoke hyponaetraemia (water-poisoning). Leah Betts died after drinking 14 pints in just 90 minutes. The recommended amount of water to drink per hour is one pint.

Toxic reactions

Much of the reports of toxic reactions are muddled with overdose or water-poisoning deaths. There is no clear evidence that some people suffer allergic reactions to ecstasy. However, around 10% of Western users do lack a key liver enzyme CYP2D6 needed to break down MDMA. This may make them more sensitive to the effects and more prone to accidental overdose.

Depression

Many weekend users report a mid-week mood dip. This is suspected to be related MDMA’s effect on serotonin, but hard evidence is lacking. In heavy users, dips can turn to crashes and depression. However studies suggest this effect reverses after a 2-3 month abstinence.

Positive effects

Users still claim “long lasting improvements in self-awareness, self-esteem, openness and insight into personal problems”, reports the study from the University Of Louisiana. In the US, research continues into the use of MDMA-assisted psychotherapy to treat Post Traumatic Stress Disorder.

_______________________________________
Originally published in The Guardian, April 2006

The Independent, Jan 06

Albert Hofmann still remembers very clearly the moment when, on a spring afternoon, riding his bicycle, the whole world - and his life - changed.

“Everything in my field of vision wavered and was distorted as if seen in a curved mirror,” says the chemist, who celebrates his 100th birthday tomorrow. “I had the feeling that I could not move from the spot. I was cycling, cycling, but the time seemed to stand still.” It was 1943, and Hofmann was experiencing the world’s first LSD trip.

By the time the frightened 37-year-old research chemist reached home, he was terrified. The room spun. The walls rippled. His worried neighbour resembled a malevolent witch. He felt like he was dying.

After a few hours, the intensity of the experimental drug he’d dosed himself with fell and he was able to enjoy the “fantastic and impressive” effects. Next day, he felt wonderful: “A sensation of wellbeing and renewed life flowed through me. The world was as if newly created.”

It all began with a peculiar accident. The doctor, employed by the Swiss chemical firm Sandoz, was pursuing respectable but unremarkable research into ergot. This poisonous fungus that grows on rye had been used for centuries as a folk remedy to bring on childbirth and ease headaches. The doctor believed that ergot could be a storehouse of new medicines, and he set about synthesising new chemicals from it.

In 1938, Hofmann had synthesised the 25th chemical: lysergic acid diethylamide. It showed little effect in test animals, bar restlessness, and it was shelved.

Five years later, on a hunch - or a “peculiar presentiment”, as Hofmann puts it - he brewed up a fresh batch. In the process, he was overcome by dizziness. Sent home, he “sank into a not unpleasant intoxicated-like condition, characterised by an extremely stimulated imagination”.

The next day, Hofmann concluded that the sensations could only have been caused by accidental exposure to something in his lab, perhaps the LSD. To be sure, the cautious doctor gave himself an extremely conservative amount of the chemical - 250 millionths of a gram. It was, in fact, the equivalent of a megadose of the mind-agent, still one of the most powerful known to man.

Alarmed by the strength of the ensuing effects, he clambered on his bicycle and tried to make his way home. The rest is history.

Sandoz was keen to find a use for this new compound, and Hofmann thought it could have an important role to play in psychiatry. After animal tests showed it to be virtually non-toxic, it was made freely available to qualified clinical investigators. “Properties: causes hallucinations, depersonalisation, reliving of repressed memories and mild neurovegetative symptoms,” read the label on the bottle.

LSD’s effects did not come as much of a revelation to science. Such psyche-manifesting agents, or “psychedelics”, were already well known. Mescaline had been discovered in the late 1800s and made famous in 1954 as the subject of Aldous Huxley’s book The Doors of Perception. What was extraordinary about LSD was its power. It was about 10,000 times more powerful than mescaline, and a tiny amount was enough to trigger profound alterations in consciousness.

Through the late 1940s and most of the 1950s, LSD caused a revolution in psychiatry. Therapists and doctors used it to treat forms of mental illness, including neurosis, psychosis and depression. More than 40,000 people underwent psychedelic therapy. Respected figures considered it a wonder drug and gave their careers over to LSD research. Some believed it gave a glimpse into the way schizophrenics perceived the world. Others used it as a catalyst to accelerate traditional psychotherapy - and even took the drug themselves along with their patients.

By 1965, more than 2,000 papers had been published, many reporting extremely positive outcomes in treating anxiety, obsessive compulsive disorder and alcoholism. Hofmann’s vision of LSD as a “medicine for the soul” seemed to be coming to fruition.

But LSD began to leak out into élite society. Artists, painters, performers and musicians began to experiment with it in looser, less formal contexts. Anaïs Nin, Ken Kesey, Allen Ginsberg and Huxley all explored its creative potential.

Huxley believed such drugs gave normal people the gift of the spontaneous visionary experience usually reserved for mystics and saints. He would later request an injection of LSD on his deathbed.

In the United States, newspapers and magazines began to fill up with sensational reports of LSD experiments, miraculous effects, mystical rebirths and self-transformations. In 1959, the film star Cary Grant received the first of 60 LSD-assisted psychotherapy sessions, and concluded: “I have been born again.”

The public grew more and more curious about this “miracle drug”. Self-experimentation began to increase. In a society facing growing industrialisation and urbanisation, alienation and boredom, everyone wanted to be reborn.

Already, a counterculture had sprung up to oppose the wealth-driven homogeneity of capitalist America. LSD was rapidly adopted as the sacrament for this bohemian “hippie” movement. In the age of the moon landings and the exploration of space, here was a tool that allowed a similar, metaphorical journey, a short cut to enlightenment. By the mid-1960s, the drug was booming.

Hofmann remembers the time distinctly. “I had not expected that LSD, with its unfathomable, uncanny, profound effects, so unlike the character of a recreational drug, would ever find worldwide use as an inebriant. People had the mistaken opinion that it would be sufficient simply to take LSD in order to have such miraculous effects.”

Rampant use led inevitably to “bad trips” among recreational users, and Hofmann could only watch with a mixture of astonishment and dismay. “They did not use it in the right way, and they did not have the right conditions. So they were not adequately prepared for it,” he says. “It is such a delicate and deep experience, if used the right way.”

He was stricken by doubt and concern that misuse and fear of the drug would lead to it being taken out of the hands of responsible investigators and psychiatrists. Would LSD - the drug which, on that spring day in 1943, reconnected Hofmann with the “deeply euphoric” visionary encounters he’d experienced in nature as a boy - become a blessing for humanity, or a curse?

A curse, the authorities concluded. In 1966, the drug was outlawed around the world. Psychiatric treatment continued but was steadily throttled by red tape and LSD’s reputation as an “insanity drug”. By the 1970s, research had stopped altogether. Today, it languishes in near obscurity, banished to the fringes of science and society.

Hofmann saw his discovery slip from psychiatric miracle medicine, to psychedelic sacrament of the Sixties, to outlawed, feared street drug. Today, he is saddened but sanguine. “Wrong and inappropriate use has caused LSD to become my problem child,” he says. “The history of LSD to date amply demonstrates the catastrophic consequences that can ensue when its profound effect is misjudged and the substance is mistaken for a pleasure drug.”

Hofmann himself continued his career as a chemist, and developed several other medicines. All the time, a steady stream of people continued to visit the “father of LSD” in Basel during the 1970s and 1980s. Many were en route to India and the Far East in search of gurus and a context for the LSD-driven mystical experiences. Many stopped off in Zürich seeking his counsel - often trying to score some of Hofmann’s “secret stash”.

Hofmann considered it was his responsibility as inventor of the drug to meet as many of these people as possible. “I have tried to help, instructing and advising,” he says.

Only now, 40 years later, is there renewed interest in the therapeutic potential of LSD and other psychedelic drugs. The British Journal of Psychiatry last year called for a reappraisal of psychedelics “based upon scientific reasoning and not influenced by social or political pressures”.

An international symposium convenes on Friday in Basel to discuss LSD research. By today’s standards, much of the research from the 1950s is flawed. Clinical studies are slated to restart at Harvard this year, organised by the Multidisciplinary Association for Psychedelic Study (maps.org), this time looking at LSD as a treatment for cluster headaches.

Hofmann hopes research will continue, but he believes LSD should remain a controlled substance. “As long as people fail to truly understand psychedelics and continue to use them as pleasure drugs, and fail to appreciate the very deep psychic experience they may induce, then their medical use will be held back.”

Today, he lives with his wife in a house overlooking the countryside around Basel. He is head of a large family, including eight grandchildren and six great-grandchildren.

He took the drug many times, but now, he says, he has no use for LSD. He believes it is just another means to attain extraordinary states of consciousness. “Breathing techniques, yoga, fasting, dance, art” are, he thinks, equally good.

He takes pleasure in recalling his boyhood experiences in nature that he links with psychedelics. “LSD brings about a reduction of intellectual powers in favour of an emotional experiencing of the world. It can help to refill our consciousness with this feeling of wholeness and being one with nature.”

Some highlights of the work.

» Orange Talking Point
» Orange Paper Films
» Orange Email Me