TSI HAS ITS SAY

TSI HAS ITS SAY Click each image for more content A selection of the institutes contributions to government policy debate The Community and Ancillary Sellers Notice Consolidation of animal feed legislation in England Tackling unsolicited direct marketing calls and text messages The Community and Ancillary Sellers Notice Home Office, December 2014 TSI recognises that a Community and Ancillary Sellers Notice (CAN) could be of benet to small businesses. However, it feels there should be clear limits on the quantity and frequency of the supply of alcohol, to ensure it is genuinely ancillary to the business, and to retain a clear distinction between CAN businesses and other licensed premises. For the purpose of CANs, TSI felt that a small accommodation provider should be dened as one with between ve and 10 bed spaces. However, there was less agreement about what constituted a community group. One respondent wanted a dened list that included only those registered with the Ofce of the Regulator of Community Interest Companies; another felt it should be any group that has local membership and operates on a not-for-prot basis. There was also disagreement about whether self-catering holiday homes, camping and caravanning sites, and youth hostels should be able to use a CAN. One respondent felt that the notices should only be available to B&Bs, as self-catering guests could take their own alcohol into the accommodation; another felt that all three types of accommodation provider should be able to apply for a CAN, so long as they had no more than ve bed spaces. If the alcohol sold by ancillary sellers and community groups under a CAN is non-pre-packed, trading standards believes the limit on how much can be sold should be up to three units per guest in a 24-hour period. If it is pre-packed, the limits should reect the current quantities on the market wine/sparkling wine/champagne, 187ml or 200ml bottle; lager/beer, ve per cent and above 330ml can or bottle, up to four per cent 440ml; spirits, 5cl bottle. TSI recommends that, under their CAN, community groups should be allowed to provide alcohol on a maximum of 12 occasions a year. For more details, and to contribute to consultations such as these, DOORSTEP CRIME UPDATE visit www.tradingstandards.gov.uk Melissa Dring, TSIs Lead officers: Gerald Taylor, Clair Dathan and Deana Perchard director of policy, gives an update on TSIs Cold Calling Zones policy, including the results of the institutes doorstep crime survey, which was published in the December edition of TS Today on page 34. Tap to listen Credits Published You might also like Images: Christian Draghici / stoonn / Tuesday 27 January, 2015 Consultations January 2015 Shutterstock To share this page, click on in the toolbar Consolidation of animal feed legislation in England for composition, marketing and use, and for hygiene, sampling etc and enforcement Food Standards Agency, December 2014 TSI welcomes the consolidation of the existing animal feed regulations into two statutory instruments. The order and structure of the new documents seems logical, although in the consultation document the numbering of the regulations in the Animal Feed (Hygiene, Sampling etc and Enforcement) (England) Regulations is not complete. It is logical to have all the powers of ofcers in one place. However, as drafted, the regulations within the Animal Feed (Hygiene, Sampling etc and Enforcement) (England) Regulations on time limits, service of notices, offences by corporate bodies and so on, and defences only appear to relate to offences under these regulations, and not the Animal Feed (Composition, Marketing and Use) (England) Regulations. The latter legislation has no equivalent provisions within it, although the pre-consolidation regulations did. This would appear to be a drafting oversight. TSI regrets that the opportunity has not been taken to clarify ofcers powers in respect of feed business establishments that act as traders without holding feed products on their premises. Currently, ofcers have powers of entry and associated authority to require relevant documentation to be produced only in premises where feed is held. Certain businesses, such as importers and hauliers, will hold documentation that might be of importance in an enquiry for example, to establish traceability of a product but never hold feed on the premises. TSI believes it is important that ofcers can require such businesses to produce documentation and records. Lead officers: Julie Benson For more details, and to contribute to consultations such as these, visit www.tradingstandards.gov.uk TSI considers so-called nuisance calls to be a conduit for serious and organised crime, negligent business activity, and aggressive trading practices to target vulnerable consumers. Some of those who are most distressed or damaged by receiving nuisance calls are elderly or inrm, and they may lack the capacity to provide evidence, or be reluctant to be further distressed. Therefore, the lowering of the legal threshold to remove the need to prove substantial damage or substantial distress is necessary. Furthermore, removing the threshold altogether would enable the Information Commissioners Ofce (ICO) to address the problem of nuisance calls more robustly, considering more instances where the regulations have been breached. Legitimate and UK-based companies can be regulated, and TSI would like to see the introduction of the fee for fault principle. This would mean the costs of investigating complaints could be recouped from the business perpetrating the breach although this would require the resourcing of an increased ICO workload. TSI does not see the lowering of the legal threshold for annoyance, inconvenience and anxiety as incompatible with the removal of the criteria for substantial damage or substantial distress both could, and should, be done. A study by Citizens Advice Scotland in May 2014 stated that half of the bogus-selling complaints it received were about nuisance phone calls. An award-winning initiative by Angus Council to protect older and vulnerable consumers showed the disproportionate impact on them of such calls. The frequency of unsolicited calls for the test group, all in sheltered houses or very vulnerable, illustrates this well (see graphic). All consumers are not the same and a level of protection needs to be in place that works for the growing number of vulnerable consumers due to longevity and conditions such as dementia not merely the man on the Clapham omnibus. Lead officers: Katherine Preston, Maggie Finnie and Nigel Strick For more details, and to contribute to consultations such as these, visit www.tradingstandards.gov.uk