This story, and my own experiences lead me to think that Tesco are being ridiculous when it comes to interpreting the law as regards underage alcohol sales.
In the linked story, a 39 year old mother is not allowed to buy a bottle of vodka because her 13 year old son is woth her. Twenty minutes later, her husband goes to buy the drink (which is for them, not the child) and is also refused.
I have had a similar experience when I was buying beer in Tescos and someone I was with was asked for ID. When they could not produce it, I was refused service. In this case, the person was 22.
I am fully in favour of proper enforcement of the law on underage sales, but this is ridiculous. If taken to a perfectly logical extreme, the couple in the linked story should not be allowed to buy alcohol for another 9 years because it might be for their children.
And yet the law is also confused. It is perfectly legal for parents to give alcohol to their children at home. Indeed, many argue it is perfectly sensible for parents to teach children about safe alcohol consumption in this way. So how to define the difference between buying alcohol for them and giving some to them? Is there a set proportion defined in law?
Whatever happens, Tesco need to get their act together if they don't want to lose more customers.