Some 85 supermarkets have failed their most recent food hygiene safety inspections, an investigation by The Grocer has revealed.
Six supermarkets received the lowest possible score of zero, meaning urgent improvement is required, including branches of Morrisons, Tesco and Iceland.
Nineteen stores were rated as 1, meaning major improvement is necessary, and 57 were rated as 2, meaning some improvement is necessary. Three supermarkets in Scotland, which has a simple ‘pass’ or ‘improvement required’ regime, were told improvement was required.
Thirty-one Morrisons stores across its large supermarket and Morrisons Daily formats, including franchise operators, were rated 2 or lower. Tesco, including three One Stop franchisees, notched up up 15 sub-satisfactory inspection results, Co-op Group 10 and Iceland 9.
The findings raise new fears over Food Standards Agency plans to use supermarkets’ own food safety data as part of their regulatory oversight.
In September last year, the FSA unveiled proposals for National Level Regulation, which would involve retailers submitting data to a central body. A trial was conducted earlier last year to test whether analysing business’ own data together with “a small number of verification checks” would provide an “accurate picture of retailers’ food safety management systems and processes”, rather than “relying” on premises checks conducted by local authorities. The FSA said the trial had “provided assurance” that the data it received from retailers was accurate.
The proposals for central oversight were intended to free stretched local authorities to focus their dwindling resources on smaller operators.
After a frosty reception from food safety campaigners and environmental health experts, the FSA slowed down its plans and has broadened its consultation. It has met with a wider range of stakeholder groups and is expected to provide a further update at its next board meeting in September.
Marking their own homework
Tim Lang, emeritus professor of food policy at City, University of London, said: “The findings are a warning not just to companies but to government and the public. Woe betide those who weaken standards in the name of removing burdens on business. Food is and always will be a trust relationship. The public must be protected by iron-clad audits.”
Food safety lawyer Jon Payne told The Grocer: “Where a shop scores a 0 or 1, it raises serious concerns about the ability to operate a food business. Sometimes problems can occur in any business and the sign of a good business is that they meet the challenge and put things right. If they do so, then there is an opportunity to be re-rated.
“A premises has to be quite bad in order to warrant a ‘0’ rating and with the proposals for some degree of self-regulation for certain sectors, it brings into question whether food hygiene standards will be put at risk. In my view, there should be no argument about whether a business with repeated ‘0’ or ‘1’ rated stores should be eligible for self-regulation. Clearly they should not. Self-regulation has a place where consistently high standards can be shown throughout the business, but not otherwise. Even with self-regulation, there needs to be oversight and the role of local authorities in working to ensure food safety is vital.”
Erik Millstone, professor of science policy at the University of Sussex, said: “What the FSA has in mind is that the large food companies would essentially mark their own homework, but in exchange for that privilege the FSA expects them to share their data with the FSA. This proposal is very seriously problematic.
“The FSA is asking companies to share their data with the FSA, presumably in exchange for undertakings of confidentiality, which would not deliver proper transparency. I’ve never come across a single case where a firm has volunteered information that its actions had fallen below the required standards.
“I have great concerns with the suggestion that the FSA could rely on industry’s own data, because that presupposes that those data are entirely reliable and we have several reasons for thinking that that’s not always the case.
“Big companies want to get it right to protect their reputations, and they have the resources to conduct their own health and hygiene inspections. But if you leave any organisation to inspect itself and rely solely on the information it provides, the risks will increase.
“If I was in the FSA, I’d be very reluctant to rely on those data unless there were also statutory provisions making it unlawful to withhold data or provide misleading data, and that specified substantial penalties for so doing.
“What we need are adequately funded and adequately staffed professional local authority officers able to inspect and enforce regulations on food companies large or small, so that consumers are properly protected.”
Ian Andrews, head of environmental health at the Chartered Institute of Environmental Health (CIEH) said: “The safety and integrity of our food supply chain are paramount to protecting public health and we maintain concerns that without careful consideration, these reforms could weaken the very systems we rely on to ensure food quality and safety.
“However, we have been encouraged by the FSA’s willingness to engage on these concerns and have played an active part in the steering group set up by the FSA to consult on the next steps for these proposals which were presented to the FSA board in June 2025.”
In response to The Grocer’s findings, the CIEH renewed its calls for mandatory display of food hygiene scores at premises in England, which it said had driven up safety standards in Wales and Northern Ireland. “We hope that, as local government potentially undergoes structural changes in different parts of England, that greater resources will be invested in environmental health teams so that those traders who pose a risk to the public, regardless of size, can receive the right level of advice and inspection in a proportionate manner,” Andrews added.
The FSA stressed that almost all supermarkets passed food hygiene inspections.
Nathan Barnhouse, deputy director of regulatory compliance at the FSA, said: “People have a right to expect that the food they buy is safe. It is the responsibility of food businesses to make sure the food they sell meets that expectation. Almost all (99%) supermarket establishments have an FHRS rating of 3 (‘generally satisfactory’) or above, and 86% have the top rating of ’5’, across England, Wales, and Northern Ireland. Local authorities inspect food retailers and work with them to improve if they fall short of legal standards. This includes taking enforcement action if necessary.
“Although standards are already very high, we’ve been exploring ideas with our partners in local authorities to complement the current system of independent regulation, using data and insights from retailers’ own processes. This work is ongoing.”
Supermarket responses
A Morrisons spokeswoman said: “The food safety within our supermarkets, convenience and franchise operated stores is really important to us. We have taken immediate action to address and resolve all issues raised – some of which have very specific and isolated issues. We are awaiting re-rating inspections in a number of stores.”
A Tesco spokesman said: “We set ourselves the highest store standards and take hygiene extremely seriously, with comprehensive cleaning and food safety processes in place across all of our stores. The majority of our stores have a hygiene rating of 5, the highest rating, and we take robust action to address any recommendations made during store inspections.”
An Iceland spokeswoman said: “Iceland takes safety, hygiene and standards with the utmost seriousness, and is committed to maintaining a safe and clean environment. We are currently working with the local authorities in areas where our stores received less than three stars on their food hygiene ratings to request re-inspection in the belief that we have addressed any issues that may have affected these stores rating. As a business, across our store portfolio we aim for the highest standards and we achieve excellent overall compliance with the relevant Food Safety Regulations, with 98.6% of our stores holding five or four-star food hygiene ratings.”
A Co-op spokeswoman said: “We expect the highest standards and 99.5% of our stores hold a food hygiene rating of 3 or above, and we work quickly to address and resolve any issues to ensure our high standards are maintained.”
A spokesman for Asda said: “We take the hygiene of our stores extremely seriously. Asda carries out regular hygiene evaluations, undertaken by environmental health professionals, with plans put in place as necessary to address any issues identified. Out of circa 1,200 Asda stores, only 0.58% are included in this report, with each of those having undergone the necessary improvements and awaiting visits for re-ratings.”
Three Sainsbury’s stores received a score of 2. A spokesman said “Food safety is our highest priority and around 95% of our stores hold a five-star Food Hygiene Rating. On the rare occasion a store does not meet our usual high standards, we will take immediate action to put things right.”
An Aldi spokeswoman said: “Our stores operate to the highest standards and more than 99% have been rated 5-stars by Food Standards Agency assessments. On the rare occasions where standards fall short, we act quickly to address and resolve any issues.”
Southern Co-op received two ratings of 2. A spokeswoman said: “We take food hygiene inspections and their findings very seriously. While the ratings of two sites were below the standard we set for ourselves, we accepted the feedback and have been committed to addressing the identified issues immediately. The health and safety of our customers is, and will remain, our highest priority.”
Mid-Counties Co-op and Chelmsford Star Co-op were approached for comment.
No comments yet