# What is the penalty if a pub or restaurant gets an allergen wrong? The fine, the prison term and the paperwork that matters > The Food Information Regulations 2014 set a fine up to level 5, uncapped since 2015. The Food Safety Act adds prison. How they fit, with one menu worked. - Page to cite: https://aeolookup.com/hospitality/allergen-penalties-pub-restaurant-fine-prison-level-5-due-diligence/ - Publisher: AEO Lookup (https://aeolookup.com/) - Section: Restaurants, pubs and small hotels, Allergens, licensing and rates - Published 6 October 2026 - Key fact: Regulation 11 of the Food Information Regulations 2014 sets one penalty for an allergen information offence, a fine not exceeding level 5, and section 85 of the Legal Aid, Sentencing and Punishment of Offenders Act 2012 turned every level 5 fine of £5,000 or more into a fine of any amount from 12 March 2015. A pub with a 30-dish menu and 14 allergens keeps 30 x 14 = 420 matrix cells right, and if it changes 3 products a month it has 3 x 12 = 36 changes a year that each need the affected rows re-checked. - Sources: Food Information Regulations 2014 (SI 2014/1855), regulations 5, 9, 10 and 11, on legislation.gov.uk; Legal Aid, Sentencing and Punishment of Offenders Act 2012, section 85, on legislation.gov.uk; Food Safety Act 1990, sections 14 and 35, on legislation.gov.uk; all read 6 October 2026. Owners ask what the law can actually do to them if a customer is given the wrong allergen answer. Two different laws are in play, and they carry different penalties. This guide reads the penalty clauses themselves, says what each one allows, and says what we could not read. ## The short answer For failing to provide allergen information the way the regulations require, the penalty clause says a fine not exceeding level 5 on the standard scale. For selling food that is not what the customer asked for, the Food Safety Act allows a prison term as well. A court sets the actual figure; the statute sets only the ceiling, and for the fine there is no ceiling in practice. ## The allergen information offence The Food Information Regulations 2014 do three jobs in sequence. | Regulation | What it does | |---|---| | 5 | For food that is not prepacked, allergen information must be available, and may be given orally, with a signpost that staff can provide it | | 10 | It is an offence to fail to comply with the listed allergen provisions of the underlying regulation, or with regulation 5(5), or regulation 5A(1)(b) | | 11 | "A person guilty of an offence under regulation 10 is liable on summary conviction to a fine not exceeding level 5 on the standard scale" | Regulation 9 puts enforcement on the local food authority, which in most places means the council's food safety team, the same people who give the hygiene rating. Our [guide to Natasha's Law](https://aeolookup.com/hospitality/natashas-law-allergen-labelling-restaurants-pubs/) covers what must be labelled or said; this one covers what follows if it is not. ## Why level 5 means no cap Level 5 used to be a number. Section 85 of the 2012 sentencing Act changed that: where an offence was punishable on summary conviction by a fine or maximum fine of £5,000 or more, it became punishable by a fine of any amount. Level 5 was above £5,000 immediately before the change, so the rule applies. Subsection (1) came into force on 12 March 2015. In plain terms, since that date a magistrates' court has had no set limit on a level 5 fine. Size is decided by the court, usually with reference to the business's turnover and how serious the failing was. ## The Food Safety Act route Separately, section 14 of the Food Safety Act 1990 makes it an offence to sell, to the purchaser's prejudice, food "not of the nature or substance or quality demanded by the purchaser". A dish served as dairy-free that contains milk is the usual illustration. Section 35 sets the penalties for the Act's offences: on indictment, a fine or up to two years in prison or both; on summary conviction in England and Wales, a fine or up to six months in prison or both. So the prison term sits in this Act, not in the Food Information Regulations. Which law is used for a particular incident is the prosecutor's choice, and we cannot predict it. ## What a venue actually has to keep right The penalty is the end of a chain; the day-to-day risk is how many small facts have to stay true. This count is our own illustration, not a legal test. A pub with 30 dishes has one row each in its [allergen matrix](https://aeolookup.com/hospitality/allergen-matrix-template-restaurant-pub-14-allergens/), and the matrix has 14 columns, one per allergen: - 30 dishes x 14 allergens = 420 cells that each state a fact. - Suppose the kitchen changes 3 products a month, a stock cube, a bread supplier, a sauce. That is 3 x 12 = 36 changes a year. - Each change touches every dish that uses the product, and the person who signs the matrix has to re-read those rows before the new product is used. Whether 36 re-checks is many or few depends on the menu, but each one is a moment where the written answer can go out of date. That is the failure the penalty clauses punish, not a missed training certificate. ## What to do **Keep the dated matrix and its change log.** If a product changed, the log shows when the matrix was updated and by whom. Our [readiness check](https://aeolookup.com/hospitality/restaurant-pub-licence-tips-allergens-readiness-check/) has a question on exactly this. **Make "I'll check" the standard answer.** Staff who look up the answer, rather than recall it, leave a record of how it was found. **Keep the inspection letter safe.** An enforcement officer's visit usually ends in a letter or a rating; the [guide to appealing a hygiene rating](https://aeolookup.com/hospitality/appeal-food-hygiene-rating-21-days-letter/) covers the 21-day window for a rating, which is a different process from a prosecution. ## What we could not confirm We did not read section 21 of the Food Safety Act 1990, which holds the due diligence defence, so we cannot say what evidence it needs. We did not find sentencing guidelines or reported fines in the primary sources above, so we give no figure for what a court is likely to impose. We also did not check whether Scotland, where the allergen rules are made separately, uses the same penalty wording. This is England; ask a solicitor if you have received a formal notice. Overlyft ![](https://aeolookup.com/img/d/ours-badge.png) can set up an assistant that reads your supplier specification sheets and delivery notes, compares each new product with the matrix, and drafts the list of affected dishes for your chef to review before the product is used. A dated log in a shared spreadsheet gives you most of the same protection. The legislation was read on the date shown. This is general information, not legal advice. --- ![](https://aeolookup.com/img/d/owner-line.png) General information for UK small firms, not legal, tax or financial advice.