Category: Law

Chaos comes to National Cycle Network signs

In an apparent admission that cycle route signs showing distances in miles are not meaningful to cyclists, the Department for Transport is proposing to allow authorities the option of using signs that show journey times in hrs and mins instead of distances in miles and fractions of miles.

Continue reading “Chaos comes to National Cycle Network signs”

Dual unit weighing scales can be harmful to health – official

In a damning report on the state of medical weighing equipment and procedures in hospitals across the country, LACORS, the Local Authorities Coordinators of Regulatory Services, has highlighted the dangers of using weighing equipment that can display units other than the standard metric units which are used for calculating medication and radiotherapy dosages, diagnosing illnesses and monitoring treatment.

Continue reading “Dual unit weighing scales can be harmful to health – official”

Twother or twaddle?

One area where metric units have been banned in the UK is draught beer and cider. This is despite the fact that bottled or canned beer and cider is mainly available in round metric quantities. Compared with most countries the restriction of draught beer measures to pints, half pints and third of a pint is very narrow. Recently it was reported that the National Weights and Measures Laboratory has included a proposal for a two thirds of a pint beer measure – the twother – to be introduced. Continue reading “Twother or twaddle?”

Imaginative media spin on a non-event?

Supporters of consumer protection have been alarmed at reports suggesting that the Government is to tell local councils not to enforce aspects of weights and measures law.  Can this really be true?

Various newspapers and broadcasters have reported alleged comments by Secretary of State John Denham that he intends to “introduce new guidelines within months that would prevent local authorities from taking traders to court” (for offences connected with using illegal scales, and weighing and pricing in illegal measures). See for example BBC report http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/uk/7677438.stm.

In fact this report makes little sense. Mr Denham cannot change a law that has been passed by the UK Parliament, nor can he require Trading Standards Authorities (TSAs) not to enforce it. Indeed the existing guidance to TSAs, which is issued by the Local Authorities Co-ordinators of Regulatory Services (LACORS) in consultation with the Mr Denham’s Department (which can be downloaded from http://www.lacors.gov.uk/lacors/ContentDetails.aspx?id=17089), already recommends that enforcement action should be “proportionate”. See for example, paragraph 3.1:

“3.1 Local Authorities must continue to demonstrate their commitment to consistent, proportionate action to ensure that those remaining traders who continue to trade in imperial units through ignorance of the law or misleading media coverage, do convert to selling in metric units, and to ensure that cohesive action is taken over any remaining high profile traders who refuse as a point of principle to comply.”

The debate, of course, is about what constitutes “proportionate” action, and the LACORS guidance makes it clear that prosecution should be a seldom used last resort. It is difficult to see how any new advice (whether from LACORS or the Government itself) could go any further in discouraging prosecution without actually telling them not to enforce the law.

With regard to the legality of non-enforcement, the LACORS guidance continues:

“3.6 Authorities are advised to have regard to the provisions of Counsel’s Opinion in relation to the duty to enforce. The relevant points provide that Local Authorities may not decline to perform their statutory duties under the Act, thus, whilst they enjoy discretion whether or not to prosecute in an individual case, that discretion may not be used to justify a general policy of non-prosecution and must be exercised reasonably. The Code for Crown Prosecutors advises that prosecutors must not be affected by improper or undue pressure from any source and Counsel advises that the exercise of the discretion not to prosecute, principally in order to avoid potential political difficulties, might well amount to “improper” or “undue” pressure.”

So local Councils may not have a policy of non-enforcement, and the Secretary of State cannot legally encourage Councils not to enforce the law.

Perhaps the most charitable interpretation is that Mr Denham was caught off guard and made some ill thought-out, populist remarks, leaving his civil servants to try to limit the damage.

UKMA will be writing to Mr Denham seeking clarification of his alleged comments and inviting him to confirm that he does not condone law-breaking or failure to enforce the law.

LACORS confirms imperial units illegal for office floorspace – Government advice misleading

LACORS (the Local Authority Co-ordinators of Regulatory Services) has confirmed its earlier advice that, where office floorspace is let per unit of floorspace, that unit must be metric. In doing so, it implicitly says that previous Government advice on this matter is wrong and/or misleading.

MetricViews has previously reported that LACORS originally gave this advice to an individual local authority as long ago as 2004. However, some trading standards officers in other local authorities were reluctant to follow this advice without full authentication from LACORS. [LACORS is funded and supported by all the local authority associations in the UK].
UKMA has now received a letter from LACORS on headed notepaper confirming the previous advice. Using this letter it will now be possible to challenge estate agents who advertise office rents “per sq ft” rather than per m2. The full text of this letter can be read here.

Previous Government advice (dating from 1995 but still available at this link) has been that “the majority of commercial transactions in goods, land and services are not regulated by the Weights and Measures Act 1985. These transactions are therefore not subject to any express sanction under provisions in UK legislation that regulate the use of units of measurement”. While this statement is literally true, it is misleading since it omits the important fact that where a transaction in goods, land and services is by reference to quantity, the measurement units used must be metric. This is explained more fully by LACORS.
The key passage of the LACORS letter reads as follows:

“If a transaction relating to land or floor space is a transaction by reference to quantity, such that the units of measurement are in use for trade (as opposed to a transaction by specification) it is LACORS view that the transaction is regulated by the Weights and Measures Act 1985.

As stated in our Guidance issued in August 2004:-

‘The relevant section of the Weights & Measures Act 1985 reads as follows:

“Section 8. Units of measurement, weights and measures lawful for use for trade.

(1) No person shall-
(a) use for trade any unit of measurement which is not included in Parts I to V of Schedule 1 to this Act…”

It can be clearly seen from Schedule 1 that imperial units including the foot, square foot etc may NOT be used for trade, since they do not appear in Parts I to V of that Schedule.

The definition of ‘use for trade’ is found in Section 7:

“7. Meaning of ‘use for trade’.

(1) In this Act ‘use for trade’ means, subject to subsection (3) below, use in Great Britain in connection with, or with a view to, a transaction falling within subsection (2) below where-
(a) the transaction is by reference to quantity or is a transaction for the purposes of which there is made or implied a statement of the quantity of goods to which the transaction relates, and
(b) the use is for the purpose of the determination or statement of that quantity.

(2) A transaction falls within this subsection if it is a transaction for-
(a) the transferring or rendering of money or money’s worth in consideration of money or money’s worth, or
(b) the making of a payment in respect of any toll or duty.

A unit of measurement may, therefore, be deemed to be in ‘use for trade’ if it is used in connection with a transaction involving the rendering of money, where the transaction is by reference to quantity.

Since 7(1)(a) can be split into two separate clauses (that is to say ‘the transaction is by reference to quantity’ or ‘is a transaction for the purposes of which there is made or implied a statement of the quantity of goods to which the transaction relates’). In the former case, there is no requirement for the transaction to involve a quantity of ‘goods’.

LACORS interpretation of the legislation is that transactions where units of measurement are used for trade, including the sale, rental and leasing of property, floor space, land, ete. are covered by this legislation. Therefore, any reference to quantity whether voluntary or otherwise, must be made in metric units.’

In summary of the above, LACORS considers that any ‘transaction by reference to quantity’ , as opposed to a transaction by reference to a description, falls within the scope of the Weights & Measures Act 1985 Part 7(1)(a), and there is no requirement for the transaction to be for ‘goods’.

…….

It is LACORS view that a transaction for the provision of a service could be a transaction by reference to quantity and therefore could fall within the scope of the Weights & Measures Act 1985 Part 7(1)(a). Your example of carpet fitting by ‘price per square metre’ would appear to be an example of this type of transaction.”

This advice seems definitive and authoritative, and effectively settles the argument over whether letting office space per sq ft is legal. Local authorities should therefore be enforcing these rules, and where TSOs are reluctant to act, they should be referred to the LACORS advice in this article and at the above link.

UK pays the cost of failure to implement the Vienna Convention

The Department for Transport (DfT) continues to ignore the clear advantages of the adoption of the international norms for road signage, namely the use of metric units, while potentially preventable accidents occur on our roads.

Continue reading “UK pays the cost of failure to implement the Vienna Convention”