Leaf & Cane

Unfortunately, the experience surrounding the booking process and interactions with senior management have left us feeling deeply disappointed and concerned that we were treated with racial bias. From the outset, there were inconsistencies. The enquiry form advertised a £1,500 minimum bar spend, yet we were later told the minimum spend was £4,000. When questioned, we were informed the system “does not allow different values,” despite other venues advertising on the same site being able to vary their minimum spend depending on the day. We later discovered this amount had been inflated specifically in our case. Although we proceeded, this was our first red flag. In Hindsight at this point we should have declined and searched for another venue. The most concerning issues arose three days before the event. After almost two weeks of daily communication with the sales executive via text, phone, and email, during which guest numbers (maximum 120) were discussed repeatedly, I informed him by email who the celebration was for. His immediate reply stated that security was required and that we would need to pay for it. I won’t name the person but when googled the whole feed would be full of their achievements and pictures and videos of this person who Black Caribbean. When I challenged this sudden requirement, I was told it had been “forgotten” and that security was a legal requirement for parties over 100 guests. If this were genuinely a licensing condition, it should have and would have been made clear from the outset, particularly given the level and frequency of communication we had regarding guest numbers. Additionally, we were suddenly asked for a deposit, despite previously being told no deposit was required. At that stage three days before the event, cancellation was not a realistic option. The timing of the security requirement and deposit request, coming immediately after I disclosed the identity of the guest of honour (who is publicly recognisable as a Black individual), is extremely concerning and difficult to ignore. Further to this, I had visited the venue the week prior and observed over 100 guests present without any visible security staff. This reinforced our concern that we were being treated differently. On the day of the event, I arrived early with decorators, as had been agreed. The bar was locked. At reception, I explained multiple times that I had hired Leaf & Cane for a birthday celebration and required access for decorators. Despite clearly stating that I was a guest who had hired the venue, I was repeatedly asked whether I was “here for work.” I corrected this four times. I was never asked a neutral clarifying question such as “Are you a contractor?” Instead, the assumption was repeatedly made that I was there to work. As a Black woman, this interaction was deeply uncomfortable and felt dismissive and biased. Following the event, I raised our concerns with the sales executive and requested that the matter be escalated to the Sales Director. A meeting was arranged via MS Teams; however, the Director did not attend and did not communicate in advance. After I followed up, a second call was arranged. During that call, rather than seeking to understand our experience, the Director appeared focused on denying any possibility of racial bias. I was told I had “misunderstood,” and at one point she accused me of “using the race card.” I was clear that I was not calling anyone racist, but that the treatment we experienced reflected racial bias. There is a difference. Instead of acknowledging how these events may reasonably be perceived, I was met with defensiveness, raised voices, and repeated denial. The conversation became dismissive and unproductive. The purpose of escalating this matter was not to assign labels or accuse individuals of malice. It was to ensure that they understood how these actions were experienced and to encourage reflection and meaningful change. I do not believe there was deliberate intent to discriminate; however, the pattern of events, the sudden security requirement, the deposit request, the repeated assumption I was there to work, and the response from senior management together create a concerning picture. It is particularly troubling that this occurred within an organisation that claims to promote diversity and inclusion, yet responded with complete denial, inflammatory language and bordering hostility when concerns were raised.