In a statement, chairman Tim Martin said the BBC article, published last week, gives ‘a misleading impression of Wetherspoon’s dogs policy and the reasons for it’.
JDW allows assistance dogs, but asks for proof of training documentation from a charity called Assistance Dogs UK (ADUK), which states that its ‘member organisations work to the highest internal standards of assistance and guide dog training’.
The BBC claimed that since the policy to ask for training documentation was introduced last year it has ‘spoken to a number of disabled people who said they have been challenged and refused service if they do not have ID’.
‘Reasonable adjustments’
Defending its policy, JDW said it has taken advice from senior counsel and understands that it should make ‘reasonable adjustments’ to accommodate those with disabilities, but must take into account, also, its responsibilities for the safety of employees and the public.
It added that in formulating policies, it said account has to be taken of a substantial increase in what the police call ‘dog incidents’ adding that the group itself has seen a big increase in dog incidents, even though only assistance dogs are allowed.
JDW claims 15 staff were bitten by dogs in 2025, compared to one in 2020.
In the BBC article, ADUK said it believed the policy was discriminatory, adding that its identification was not a legal requirement and not all assistance dog users will carry ID.
Not a legal requirement
Here too JDW pushed back, saying ADUK suggestion that, in effect, documentation should not be requested and that pub staff should judge a dog, after entry, by its behaviour is flawed.
Martin said: “This is a complex area for pubs and other organisations. The interests of those with disabilities need to be protected while, at the same time, employees and the public have to be protected from a substantial increase in dog incidents.
“The BBC article, unfortunately, did not explain Wetherspoon’s broader legal responsibility for the safety of its customers and staff, which we set out in detail for them, and which is the reason for our policy.
“ADUK is an organisation which itself demands high levels of training for assistance dogs, for which it issues documentary proof.
“Yet it is offering, in effect, legal advice to the public, which states that pub companies should not ask for documentation.
“Instead, according to ADUK, pub staff should be asked to make a judgement, after a dog is already in the pub, as to whether it is trained or not.
“It is inevitable, as a matter of common sense, that ADUK’s advice, if followed, will lead to an increase in dog incidents in pubs, and may already have done so, in the absence of sensible checks in advance of entry.
“In contrast, Wetherspoon’s policy clearly provides greater protection for employees and the public, and is consistent with established regulations in areas such as proof of age in pubs and blue badges for parking.”
