My Sister Was Spending £1,000 a Month on Drink from Delivery Apps

My sister was spending 1 000 – Following the tragic death of Zoe Hughes, a 35-year-old mother from Lincoln, a campaign has emerged calling for stricter controls on alcohol sales via food delivery platforms. The movement is spearheaded by her sibling, Alex Hughes, who launched a petition urging a ban on such deliveries after witnessing the impact of addiction on her sister’s life. Zoe’s passing, attributed to injuries sustained during an unwitnessed fall while under the influence, has sparked debate about the role of delivery apps in enabling excessive alcohol consumption.

The Accidental Fall That Changed Everything

Zoe, described by her family as “full of life” and deeply committed to her children, reportedly spent between £1,000 and £1,500 monthly on alcohol through services like Deliveroo, Just Eat, and Uber Eats. Her brother, Alex Hughes, recounts how her drinking habits escalated after she moved to a more urban setting, where convenience and accessibility became major factors. “She used to walk to the shops for her drinks while living with my parents in rural Lincolnshire,” he explains. “But once she had her own space, it spiraled.” Before her death in 2023, Zoe was consuming five to seven bottles of wine, gin, or vodka daily, a pattern that became easier to maintain with the rise of on-demand alcohol delivery.

“It came as a bit of a shock to the family when we found out she had a drinking problem,” Alex says. “At first, she was living with my parents who are in a rural part of Lincolnshire, so she had to walk to the shops to get a drink. But when she moved into her own place in a more urban area it spiralled.”

The Role of Delivery Apps in Addiction

Delivery apps have been criticized for removing barriers to alcohol consumption, making it simpler for individuals to order without leaving their homes. Alex argues that the ease of access contributed to Zoe’s downfall, highlighting how “all she had to do was go on her phone, click a few buttons, and it would be delivered in as quick as 20 minutes.” This convenience, he believes, allowed Zoe to drink more frequently and in larger quantities, exacerbating her condition. The inquest into Zoe’s death concluded it was accidental, citing the coroner’s findings that the fall was “a consequence of injuries arising from an unwitnessed fall whilst under the influence of alcohol.”

Industry Defenses and Regulatory Calls

Despite the outcry, alcohol delivery companies maintain they operate within legal frameworks and prioritize responsible service. They claim age checks are conducted, and drivers are trained to refuse deliveries to those appearing intoxicated. “Retailers selling alcohol on our platform must adhere to the same licensing, marketing, and regulatory restrictions as in-store,” said a Deliveroo spokesperson. Similarly, Just Eat and Uber Eats emphasize their policies to block accounts or addresses when concerns about overconsumption arise.

However, the charity Alcohol Change UK, which supports the annual Dry January initiative, is pushing for additional safeguards. The organization urges the government to revise regulations to address the unique challenges posed by rapid delivery services. “We have the Licensing Act 2003, which regulates the sale and supply of alcohol, but it was created long ago and hasn’t kept up with the reality on the ground,” said Joe Marley, director of Alcohol Change UK. He points to the need for measures like capping daily orders or implementing time-based restrictions to curb impulsive drinking.

“There needs to be a cap so you can only order so much in a 24-hour period and also a time stop,” Alex says. “Zoe could order sometimes at six in the morning.”

Voices from the Recovery Community

Others in the recovery community echo Alex’s concerns. Hattie Underwood, a 35-year-old recovering alcoholic from London and advocate for Alcohol Change UK, describes how delivery apps eliminated psychological barriers. “When I was drinking, these platforms made it incredibly easy,” she shares. “I used to order alcohol to my door, even when I was in pain from a severe stomach ulcer. I’d set myself a time of 10am to start drinking, but I’d never wait that long.” Her experience underscores the addictive potential of instant access, a factor that has fueled calls for stricter oversight.

Similarly, Daniel Dobbs, a 39-year-old recovering alcoholic and coach with the Lincolnshire Recovery Partnership, highlights the “damage alcohol can do” to personal and family life. “That’s not something I ever want to go back to,” he says. “As long as it doesn’t take away somebody’s right to choose, I’m down for any kind of safeguarding measures that protect people who are already very vulnerable through addiction.” His comments align with the broader argument that while personal choice is important, external factors like delivery apps can amplify risk for those struggling with alcohol dependence.

Government Consideration and Policy Challenges

The government has acknowledged the issue, with officials reportedly reviewing how licensing rules apply to rapid alcohol delivery services. Yet, critics argue that current regulations are insufficient to address the growing accessibility of alcohol. “The Licensing Act 2003 already makes it an offence to sell alcohol to someone who is drunk,” Marley notes. “But it doesn’t account for the way delivery apps enable continuous access, especially during late hours.” He advocates for changes such as restricting delivery times or creating a system where users can voluntarily block access to alcohol services, akin to gambling registries.

While delivery companies defend their role, they admit challenges in enforcing strict controls. For example, Deliveroo’s policy includes suspending accounts when “legitimate welfare concerns” are raised, but the process relies on customer reports. Just Eat’s spokesperson highlighted “robust processes” to ensure legal and responsible delivery, including blocking addresses deemed high-risk. Uber Eats emphasized the necessity of age and sobriety checks, though critics argue these measures are not always effective in preventing overconsumption.

Pushing for Systemic Change

For Alex Hughes, the incident with Zoe is a catalyst for broader reform. He envisions a system where alcohol delivery is limited to specific times of day or quantities, reducing the likelihood of late-night orders. “It’s about making it harder for people to fall into the trap of convenience,” he says. His advocacy has drawn attention to the need for a centralized register, similar to those used in gambling, to identify and restrict access for those at risk. This approach, he believes, could help curb binge drinking and prevent similar tragedies.

As the debate continues, the intersection of technology and addiction is coming under scrutiny. While delivery apps have revolutionized convenience, their role in enabling excessive drinking has raised questions about accountability. The case of Zoe Hughes serves as a poignant reminder of how digital platforms can inadvertently influence behavior, highlighting the importance of balancing innovation with protective measures. Whether through caps on orders, time restrictions, or user registration systems, the push for reform aims to make alcohol more accessible without compromising public health.