Nearly one in fifty coffee shops is so dirty that they failed the inspection, MailOnline announced today.
Seven cafes, including three across central London, scored zero out of five – the lowest possible rank.
Such scores are given to companies that pose a risk to public health.
During visits, inspectors may find rotting food, rodent droppings and unsafe food storage.
Your browser does not support iframes.
More than 12,000 businesses in the UK sell coffee, according to watchdogs the Food Standards Agency (FSA). Coffee shops are not a separate category, so locations where coffee is sold are registered under different labels. MailOnline searched for ‘coffee’ and then searched for major brands to compile this list.
Major chains such as Costa and Starbucks are included in the database.
The vast majority have a rating of three or higher, which corresponds to a sufficient grade.
Companies that rank between zero and two are considered bankrupt because they need at least “some improvement.”
MailOnline has today named and shamed all 207 coffee shops that failed inspection in our interactive map, so you can see if your local coffee shop has failed to achieve a minimum standard.
One Costa branch in Aberdeen and another in Inverness were among the big names judged unhygienic, as were Starbucks branches at John Lennon Airport in Liverpool and one at Heathrow.
Another MailOnline map shows how pass rates vary across Britain.
The Food Standards Agency rates outlets that serve food or drink on a scale of 0-5. Companies that receive a rating of two or less must be improved immediately and may be prosecuted in the most serious cases. Photo posed by models
According to figures from the Food Standards Agency, there are more than 12,000 coffee shops in Great Britain
Every store inspected in areas including Cornwall, Amber Valley, Tonbridge Wells and Watford passed.
Birmingham, Britain’s largest local authority, had the highest number of failures: 23 out of 145, or 15.9 percent.
In England and Wales, 24 percent of coffee shops in Walsall do not have a satisfactory rating, compared to 23.8 percent in Charnwood and 23.53 in Rugby.
Twelve authorities had failure rates of between 20 and 24 per cent, including tourist hotspots such as East Devon, North Devon and South Hams.
Nearly 400 stores still need to be inspected.
A coffee shop awaiting inspection may not be unsafe, although the customer may not have the reassurance that local environmental officials have visited the business and investigated its food handling practices.
After each inspection, municipal officials issue a report that is collected nationally by the FSA.
Your browser does not support iframes.
The results available on the FSA website are updated daily as additional inspections are carried out.
Companies that fail can book a retest once they have resolved the issues in the initial report.
In the most serious cases, officers may close a business until improvements are made and may also recommend that a business be prosecuted for breaching food standards.
Earlier this month, the FSA revealed that some retailers, including major supermarkets, are displaying incorrect food standards ratings outside their branches.
However, concerns have been raised about the reduction in the number of inspections at food sites due to council budget cuts.
Over the past decade, the number of food standards inspectors employed by municipalities has fallen by 45 percent.
The FSA and Food Standards Scotland (FSS) warned that staff shortages and cuts ‘placing unsustainable pressure on existing local government teams and may increase the risk of important food safety issues being overlooked’.
The joint statement warned that many of those working for local government food safety teams are approaching retirement age.
Both the FSA and FSS warned: ‘Our concern is that this reduced ability to assess the authenticity, labeling and compliance of the allergens could compromise food standards in the future.
‘Without enough people with the right skills to carry out essential food checks, it will be more difficult to identify, monitor and respond to food safety risks, leaving consumers and businesses vulnerable.’
